LOC (Lords of Creation) rule building [Archive] - Page 2

Man on Fire

2013-05-18, 07:46 AM

Seriously? I can't just throw out a suggestion without rewriting the whole system for you? Is it impossible to imagine that you would have more AP available if something like my suggestion were maple enter without having to write out everything?

If you say your suggestion requires entire ystem to work, then yes.
And what I may imagine may be different from what you really had in mind, that's why I'm asking you to show what you mean. Don't assume we will all imagine the same fairies you do.

Alright, harken back to the link I provided to the original ruleset. Take that, drop the combat rules, increase weekly AP across the board by 2, and add my suggestion for cumulative upkeep with two free weeks instead of one.

I also played that system. And here I'll show you how it would work with your changes:
First turn:
I'm starting as a half god, I get 10 starting points and 4 points per turn.
I spend 3 points on new form so I get 1 additional point each turn.
I spend remainign 7 points on creating new race (2 points), creating country (2 points) and 3 on teaching them various kinds of thigs that will set them apart from other races.
Turn 2:
I have 5 points. No, I have 4 points because I need to spend 1 on keeping civilisation from decline.
I spend remainign 4 points on leading the my people to war and buying myself an aspect.
Turn 3:
I spend two points on keeping civiliation from collapsing.
I could buy a domain, but I need to save my civilisation from retaliation of their neighbors and their god
Turn 4:
I spend 3 points on savign my civilisation from collapsing.
Right now I cannot buy my civilisation new hero or give them any significant advantages, I need to spend those two points left on helping them with the war thing and because I don't have as many point as other god, I'm losing. Or I could buy a domain for two point, which I do.
Turn 5:
I have to spent 4 points on my civilisation and cannot do anything I wanted with my race, because what I want to give them costs too much. I don't have enough points to acend.
Turn 6:
I spend 5 points on my civilsiation and then sit and do nothing entire turn.
Turn 7:
My civilisation collapses. In 700 years then accomplished absolutely nothing becaue I didn't had enough points to give them anything. I had large plans I wasn't able to fufill and other gods laugh at me for letting it happen. I throw my hands and quit the game.

And to compare: Roman civilisation existed from 509 BC to 476 AD. Which is 985 years, over 900 years. And they managed to accomplish a lot, while my civiliation did nothing. Byzantine Empire lasted for 1123 years and they were power to be rockon with. My civilisation couldn't go beyond a very small country that had one war. Ottoman Empire lasted 624 years, and in this time managed to expand up to 2,007,731 sqare miles, survive insane amount of wars, get into stagnation and dissolve, while my civilisation never expanded, had one war and then stagnated, without having any impact on the plto whatsoever.

That should work nicely, and I know for a fact from experience playing that ruleset that it is possible to get 20ish AP/week in that system after a month or two without really trying too hard

If you pay one, very specific way. I personally hate when system forces me to play differently from how I want to play. When other player forced everybody to spend points in certain way with an artifact in my game

Since Upkeep is, as I stated, an explicit AP action, it does count towards gaining DR and eventually acquiring more AP.

Whocares? My civilisation has been destroyed because I couldn't do anything for them, not even for fun, climatic, story-adding reasons, just because I wasn't lucky to start a a lesser diety. It's a horrible and pointless mess. Why should I care about the game anymore, if out of my first 7 weeks only the first two were actually fun and I had to spend one week DOING NOTHING, which is the thing we should stay away from as far as possible.

Betrayer

2013-05-18, 08:16 AM

BTW, Man on Fire, why did you make it that allowing your country to stagnate makes it easier to extend its decline? Just interested in what the reasoning behind the decision is.

Man on Fire

2013-05-18, 08:28 AM

BTW, Man on Fire, why did you make it that allowing your country to stagnate makes it easier to extend its decline? Just interested in what the reasoning behind the decision is.

Reasonign here was thet if country expands without control, it will grow too large and therefore decline faster. I wanted a reason for player to want to extend the stagnation, time in which they can stop with big stuff and go actually develop ruling system that could manage empire they already estabilished. Through I have to say, originally I had similiar limitation on Stagnation as on Expansion - if Stagnation lasts 10 turns, country automatically goes into Decline - in mind, but I decided it's not necessary. Maybe I should bring it back?

Betrayer

2013-05-18, 09:04 AM

No, I think the ramping costs of maintaining them will drive people to go to stagnation soon enough.

Agent_0042

2013-05-18, 09:28 AM

As someone who's enamored with the concept, but never played in a game that didn't fall apart or that I didn't enter into late, I thought I'd chime in. As with Rizban and some other people, I view LoC as a setting generator first, and a god game second. I'm going to list some of the problems that I've encountered, or that people have brought up on the thread, and how I'd address them. Most of these interrelate, and I'm not worried about specific numbers at this point.

Problem: Latecomers are at a significant disadvantage, both due to the amount of material they have to process and to the fact that they're throwing around significantly less AP than the movers and shakers.
This isn't a rules function, but having someone (probably the GM/mods - if they're active it's little trouble, if not then the game is dying anyway) compile a history as the game progresses is immensely helpful and makes joining an existing game less intimidating. It shouldn't even be a post-by-post summary - "God A and God B fought, before God C raised a demon army to piss in their cheerios; he did a darn good job of it, forcing A and B to unite" is adequate. Sparknotes, people.
Adding upkeep to existing creations helps narrow the contribution difference - Elder Gods with numerous creations they're responsible for can do roughly the same amount of "new stuff" each round as newcomers.
The starting AP boost is helpful, but what if that amount increased as the game progressed? Actually, what if the weekly AP also increased over time, as the world became larger?

Problem: Players would rather make and use their own creations than interact with other player's work, even if it basically means reinventing the wheel.
It should actually be cheaper to do "stuff" to/with creations that aren't yours than it is to your own. I know it's counter-intuitive as all hell, but if this is a behavior we want to incent, then the rules need to directly reflect that. I'm imagining a straight-up AP cost reduction, but it doesn't have to be major - one or two points cheaper to create terrain on another god's plane, a point less to use/adapt an existing magic system than to make your own, a point less to raise a hero from another race, and so on. It just needs to be notable enough to counteract the tendency to play in one's own sandbox. If you have trouble justifying it, think of it as a divine slingshot maneuver (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slingshot_maneuver).

Problem: Players become extremely invested in "their" creations, and resist others mucking about with them IC and OoC. As a result, AP is spent to maintain the Status Quo.
If you're going to pay to "protect" something, we might as well formalize it. Upkeep needs to be a thing, though I'm against complex/increasing upkeep because that's more to track than necessary. Upkeep occurs automatically at the start of each round until you renounce that affiliation. It also counts as AP expenditure for domain purposes, assuming those are kept.
Upkeep does not imply that the creation is "yours" - people can still do stuff to it (even at a reduced cost, as previously suggested). So what does it do?
Fluffwise, things generally work better if a deity is actively invested in it. Civilizations flourish, ideas spread, and the afterlife keeps working without a hitch.
It signifies to other players that you have a vested interest in the realm/concept/species. If you have a plan for said creation, it serves as a notification that they shouldn't mess with it too much. It also helps to actually communicate, of course.
It prevents the creation from being outright destroyed, as well as some resistance to "bad stuff" (see the next problem).
It's an easy way to qualify for a domain.
Probably something else. Who knows?

Okay, so you're tired of paying upkeep, and you renounce a creation. What happens?

Any future actions you do with a creation are at a reduced cost, because it's "not yours". Yay!
Another god can take it under his/her/its/their wing, and begin paying upkeep on it the next round.
Divine actions keep it alive and going - if someone's using it, it's probably not going to die.
If nothing happens with it for a couple of rounds, it begins to fade into the background. Races lose their former glory; societies and organizations dissolve; concepts eventually cease to work or be widespread. Without explicit action, though, nothing is destroyed - anything can be picked back up if someone wants to start paying upkeep for it.

Problem: While destructive actions are important, due to the aforementioned investment players are loathe to let this happen. "Conflict" gods, in particular, cause a ton of OoC discourse.

Make it clear from the start of the game that no one has exclusive ownership over anything within the game. Point misinformed players to the definition of "collaboration".
If no one is invested in (read: paying upkeep for) for a creation, you can do whatever you want with it. All is well.
If a player is invested in a creation, and you have the consent of the player, you can do whatever you want with it. All is well.
If a player is invested in a creation, and you don't have the consent of the player, all might not be well. Here are the breaks:
You cannot destroy outright an invested creation. Sorry No, I'm not.
You can do pretty much any "bad stuff" up to that - with a catch. You must give the player a number of "Outs", things that can mitigate/avert/lessen/sidestep the bad stuff. If there's variable curse costs, the number of Outs should be in proportion to the curse. If there's fixed curse costs, just set that to "three", or have the GM decide based on the magnitude. Note that no matter what they do, the bad stuff still happens and has an impact - an Out is just a chance for the player to salvage or make something of the situation.
Alternatively, that player can receive [some fixed amount/half/all] of the AP spent on the curse to take actions to achieve one of the valid outcomes for an Out. Spending AP to just say "No." is not a valid out. Doing nothing is a valid Out, and is also technically consent, in which case you receive free AP for your troubles.

Problem: Pantheons/alliances are... problematic.
Pull out the AP increases from forming a pantheon. This is nothing but trouble. Also drop the AP costs for creating/joining a pantheon, as well as the "admin" rights.
What pantheons allow you to do is jointly pay AP costs and upkeep for creations. If you're tired of paying 5 points/round (or whatever) for maintaining Arcana as a concept, you find another god to help shoulder your burden. If no one else wants to contribute, then they probably aren't that interested in Arcana anyway, which likely means it's just you playing in your sandbox.
As an aside, a player having shards/fledgling deities under his/her control should probably not be a thing. If it's not generating it's own AP, then it's just another facet of your deity and it's all fluff anyway. If it is, then it's a deity in its own right and should probably have another player to it. In any event, I feel it needs to be a GM thing and not a generally-allowed ability, to discourage AP shenanigans.

Thoughts?

mystic1110

2013-05-18, 09:44 AM

Wow - a lot of interesting suggestions when I went to bed !! Thanks for all the input.

I'm going to write up some new rules today and post for evaluation : since after all we need something to base our arguments on rather than arguing in the void.

Till then keep the suggestions coming!

Oh and one more thing - keep it civil!! :smallsmile:

Preaplanes

2013-05-18, 10:46 AM

Post Before my Feedback Here

As someone who's enamored with the concept, but never played in a game that didn't fall apart or that I didn't enter into late, I thought I'd chime in. As with Rizban and some other people, I view LoC as a setting generator first, and a god game second. I'm going to list some of the problems that I've encountered, or that people have brought up on the thread, and how I'd address them. Most of these interrelate, and I'm not worried about specific numbers at this point. Well, let's get started, shall we?

Problem: Latecomers are at a significant disadvantage, both due to the amount of material they have to process and to the fact that they're throwing around significantly less AP than the movers and shakers. Welcome to the vast majority of games. Those who have been doing it a while tend to have an advantage. Ever head of a “Christmas n00b”? Even in video games where things are usually mechanically equal, things are never practically equal. But I digress, let's see what you're suggesting.

This isn't a rules function, but having someone (probably the GM/mods - if they're active it's little trouble, if not then the game is dying anyway) compile a history as the game progresses is immensely helpful and makes joining an existing game less intimidating. It shouldn't even be a post-by-post summary - "God A and God B fought, before God C raised a demon army to piss in their cheerios; he did a darn good job of it, forcing A and B to unite" is adequate. Sparknotes, people. I'd agree with this.

Adding upkeep to existing creations helps narrow the contribution difference - Elder Gods with numerous creations they're responsible for can do roughly the same amount of "new stuff" each round as newcomers. So... what exactly is the point of being an Elder God if your stuff is easier to mess with and you can't even do anything more than some newbie Fledgling?

The starting AP boost is helpful, but what if that amount increased as the game progressed? Actually, what if the weekly AP also increased over time, as the world became larger? Depending on how much you're talking about, it could easily become that there's no such thing as a Fledgling anymore making working one's way up a bit too easy; an Intermediate is half an Elder after all, and it's far faster to make two Intermediates by a poor version of the system.

Problem: Players would rather make and use their own creations than interact with other player's work, even if it basically means reinventing the wheel. In TBS, concepts are alchemized. You can't add a concept another god controls, though we try to make sure that there are lots of little specializations for the concepts we'd associate any decent civilization to have (literacy, mining, watercraft, animal domestication, education, etc)

It should actually be cheaper to do "stuff" to/with creations that aren't yours than it is to your own. I know it's counter-intuitive as all hell, but if this is a behavior we want to incent, then the rules need to directly reflect that. I'm imagining a straight-up AP cost reduction, but it doesn't have to be major - one or two points cheaper to create terrain on another god's plane, a point less to use/adapt an existing magic system than to make your own, a point less to raise a hero from another race, and so on. It just needs to be notable enough to counteract the tendency to play in one's own sandbox. If you have trouble justifying it, think of it as a divine slingshot maneuver (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slingshot_maneuver). Problem is you might have impish Fledglings unafraid of the bigger deities and civilizations. It's all fun and games until you miss your slingshot and it's Jupiter that takes a Shoemaker Levy 9 to the face, and then Shoemaker Levy just walks away from it. Doing stuff with, fine, (to a certain point then it BECOMES a shared thing. In TBS, the god Flux has done more with Chronamus' gnomes than he has, particularly by abusing the hell out of a “one or two” AP reduction to Concepts. And he actually PAID for his reduction with a monument.) But doing stuff to? Madness. If you're trying for a world-builder, that gives the gods of destruction WAY too much leverage.

Problem: Players become extremely invested in "their" creations, and resist others mucking about with them IC and OoC. As a result, AP is spent to maintain the Status Quo. And if somebody's trying to turn somebody else's Santa's Workshop into Warhammer 40k... or vice verse... see the problem with reducing the status quo? Working concepts are too easy to bastardize if somebody with a different vision for your creation decides they want to make some changes against your will.

If you're going to pay to "protect" something, we might as well formalize it. Upkeep needs to be a thing, though I'm against complex/increasing upkeep because that's more to track than necessary. Upkeep occurs automatically at the start of each round until you renounce that affiliation. It also counts as AP expenditure for domain purposes, assuming those are kept. Fair enough, though with advanced civilizations with their own miniature pantheon working on them, how exactly do you calculate who gets stuck with the bill at the end of the meal?

Upkeep does not imply that the creation is "yours" - people can still do stuff to it (even at a reduced cost, as previously suggested). So what does it do?

Fluffwise, things generally work better if a deity is actively invested in it. Civilizations flourish, ideas spread, and the afterlife keeps working without a hitch. Until some god mucks with it at reduced cost to play the God of Trolling (and not in the quirky Garl Glittergold way). Yes yes, I know, unrelated to the bullet point, won't happen again.

It signifies to other players that you have a vested interest in the realm/concept/species. If you have a plan for said creation, it serves as a notification that they shouldn't mess with it too much. It also helps to actually communicate, of course. Typically “I made X” gives people a good indication that X is yours and that you should only mess with X in a way that would be fun for all involved.

It prevents the creation from being outright destroyed, as well as some resistance to "bad stuff" (see the next problem). That's always a good thing. We've all had that one Chaotic Evil/Chaotic Neutral/Neutral Evil player muck up our campaigns (by PvPing and generally being an ass) far more than Belkar, and anything to prevent that.

It's an easy way to qualify for a domain. So's just about everything if you theme a week or two's actions ahead of time, but yes, it is... but just the Protection domain or one of the Race domains. Kinda lose their specialness if everybody's doing it, doesn't it? Very cookie-cutter.

Probably something else. Who knows? What, I'm supposed to? You wrote the suggestion, come up with something (or don't).

Okay, so you're tired of paying upkeep, and you renounce a creation. What happens? Click here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZvCI-gNK_y4).

Any future actions you do with a creation are at a reduced cost, because it's "not yours". Yay! You just said in point 1 bullet 1 that paying AP didn't imply that it was mine. A little clarity, please.

Another god can take it under his/her/its wing, and begin paying upkeep on it the next round. Sounds logical, captain.

Divine actions keep it alive and going - if someone's using it, it's probably not going to die. Again: Santa's Workshop, Warhammer 40k. This kind of thing should probably be discussed in OOC to prevent hard feelings.

If nothing happens with it for a couple of rounds, it begins to fade into the background. Races lose their former glory; societies and organizations dissolve; concepts eventually cease to work or be widespread. Without explicit action, though, nothing is destroyed - anything can be picked back up if someone wants to start paying upkeep for it. This happens naturally to forgotten players' stuff, or stuff players have forgotten, in every game I've ever played. No need to mention it.

Problem: While destructive actions are important, due to the aforementioned investment players are loathe to let this happen. "Conflict" gods, in particular, cause a ton of OoC discourse. Ah, here we go, I agree with this setup.

Make it clear from the start of the game that no one has exclusive ownership over anything within the game. Point misinformed players to the definition of "collaboration". Also “griefing” while they have their dictionaries open.

If no one is invested in (read: paying upkeep for) for a creation, you can do whatever you want with it. All is well. Until an irate god (or player, as the case may be) comes to smack down yours for messing with his stuff.

If a player is invested in a creation, and you have the consent of the player, you can do whatever you want with it. All is well. Within reason. Again: Santa's Workshop, Warhammer 40k. Assume you have permission so long as you stick with the general theme.

If a player is invested in a creation, and you don't have the consent of the player, all might not be well. Here are the breaks:

You cannot destroy outright an invested creation. Sorry No, I'm not. Neither am I.

You can do pretty much any "bad stuff" up to that - with a catch. You must give the player a number of "Outs", things that can mitigate/avert/lessen/sidestep the bad stuff. If there's variable curse costs, the number of Outs should be in proportion to the curse. If there's fixed curse costs, just set that to "three", or have the GM decide based on the magnitude. Note that no matter what they do, the bad stuff still happens and has an impact - an Out is just a chance for the player to salvage or make something of the situation. Sounds like a good idea to me. Not entirely sure about the numbers, but that's somewhat arbitrary and tweakable anyway.

Alternatively, that player can receive [some fixed amount/half/all] of the AP spent on the curse to take actions to achieve one of the valid outcomes for an Out. Spending AP to just say "No." is not a valid out. Doing nothing is a valid Out, and is also technically consent, in which case you receive free AP for your troubles. You know, I would think I'd find some problem with this... I don't. Smashers are happy, you're happy, some conflict happens and nobody (but some NPCs) got hurt. Assuming the effects of the smashing don't cost the target more AP than they cost you, I'm perfectly fine with this brand of cursing, though I'd prefer if people talked about any major ones beforehand.

Well, them's the breaks. *rimshot* OHGODDON'THITME.

Problem: Pantheons/alliances are... problematic. Agreed, but at the same time we should encourage cooperation. Add some hefty RP requirements and they're solid IMO.

Pull out the AP increases from forming a pantheon. This is nothing but trouble. Also drop the AP costs for creating/joining a pantheon, as well as the "admin" rights. So drop the things entirely? That's pretty much all they are.

What pantheons allow you to do is jointly pay AP costs and upkeep for creations. If you're tired of paying 5 points/round (or whatever) for maintaining Arcana as a concept, you find another god to help shoulder your burden. If no one else wants to contribute, then they probably aren't that interested in Arcana anyway, which likely means it's just you playing in your sandbox. That's what Alliances are for.

As an aside, a player having shards/fledgling deities under his/her control should probably not be a thing. If it's not generating it's own AP, then it's just another facet of your deity and it's all fluff anyway. If it is, then it's a deity in its own right and should probably have another player to it. In any event, I feel it needs to be a GM thing and not a generally-allowed ability, to discourage AP shenanigans. While I agree with the Shard thing (not that it's an actual supported action by the TBS rule set), I think Legends should be important, as first of all they're EXPENSIVE, and they require the most RPing out of any action. And yes, they do generate AP. Won't pay for themselves for a VERY long time, but they do. If you spend that long playing a character, and burn that much AP on it (a total of 12 by TBS standards), I'd be very against you losing control of that character. Think of Legends as characters with “Divine Rank 0”, to put it in D&D terms.Thoughts? Yes, I've got a few, see above.

Man on Fire

2013-05-18, 11:01 AM

[LIST] This isn't a rules function, but having someone (probably the GM/mods - if they're active it's little trouble, if not then the game is dying anyway) compile a history as the game progresses is immensely helpful and makes joining an existing game less intimidating. It shouldn't even be a post-by-post summary - "God A and God B fought, before God C raised a demon army to piss in their cheerios; he did a darn good job of it, forcing A and B to unite" is adequate. Sparknotes, people.

and also each player should have OoC post which they edit to aid their description and describe shortly all their creations.

Adding upkeep to existing creations helps narrow the contribution difference - Elder Gods with numerous creations they're responsible for can do roughly the same amount of "new stuff" each round as newcomers.

Only if we agree that upkeep starts after some time, otherwise it's the same problem I have with Rizban's idea and it would hurt newcomes more than old guard. 5 free turns to develop every creation is what I'm saying.

The starting AP boost is helpful, but what if that amount increased as the game progressed? Actually, what if the weekly AP also increased over time, as the world became larger?

Maybe you get additional APs every 2 turns on the amount of major thigs you already created? And it scales down with the levels, because as you get more powerful you're bound to have more cool stuff already? Haf-God gets 5 AP for every "Big Thing" they created, Lesser Diety gets 4, Diety gets 3, Greater Diety gets 2 and Lord of Creation gets 1?

If nothing happens with it for a couple of rounds, it begins to fade into the background. Races lose their former glory; societies and organizations dissolve; concepts eventually cease to work or be widespread. Without explicit action, though, nothing is destroyed - anything can be picked back up if someone wants to start paying upkeep for it.

Or we can just assume they're lest alone and don't have impact from that point until somebody keeps them up again.

Also, question - what happens if somebody rejects paying upkeep and then picks it up again?

Make it clear from the start of the game that no one has exclusive ownership over anything within the game. Point misinformed players to the definition of "collaboration".

This.

You can do pretty much any "bad stuff" up to that - with a catch. You must give the player a number of "Outs", things that can mitigate/avert/lessen/sidestep the bad stuff. If there's variable curse costs, the number of Outs should be in proportion to the curse. If there's fixed curse costs, just set that to "three", or have the GM decide based on the magnitude. Note that no matter what they do, the bad stuff still happens and has an impact - an Out is just a chance for the player to salvage or make something of the situation.
Alternatively, that player can receive [some fixed amount/half/all] of the AP spent on the curse to take actions to achieve one of the valid outcomes for an Out. Spending AP to just say "No." is not a valid out. Doing nothing is a valid Out, and is also technically consent, in which case you receive free AP for your troubles.

I say one or another - either allow player a number of ways out of the problem or give him some points for his inaction.

As an aside, a player having shards/fledgling deities under his/her control should probably not be a thing. If it's not generating it's own AP, then it's just another facet of your deity and it's all fluff anyway. If it is, then it's a deity in its own right and should probably have another player to it. In any event, I feel it needs to be a GM thing and not a generally-allowed ability, to discourage AP shenanigans.

That I dislike. Especially that in our game one player asked GM to roleplay lesser diety he created and GM hated the experience with passion. Not only that but in our game some of the best interactions came from the fact players could have their primary diety and that secondary diety they also controled. We had fun reading one player's interactions between god of nature and his evil son, god of slaughter. Heck, my best contribution was evil god of blood, who wouldn't be interesting if he wasn't constantly living in the shadow of his mother, my primary diety, godess of war. And his last hit wouldn't be so fun if we didn't have player with god of time and hsi daughter, godess of air, around. The problem appears only if that secondary diety serves only as free AP source, but that's a matter of metagaming, not rules. Maybe we shoudl set guideline for this and discourage playing bonus diety only as more points to spend?

Within reason. Again: Santa's Workshop, Warhammer 40k. Assume you have permission so long as you stick with the general theme.

I already suggested things that would be good solutions to "Santa's Workshop-Warhammer 40k" problem

A) Have all the players decide the theme of the world before hand. If you agree on making Fairy tale world (like, say Narnia or Orphan's Tales) you do it, if agreed want to make High Fatasy (like Middle Earth, Fionavar or Belgaraid) you do high fantasy, you agreed on Warhammer 40k you do Warhammer 40k
B) Have each god assigned a theme they stick to. If that's the case if Asan (theme: Fairy tale) has Haruhi Suzumia (theme: Humoristic) and Nyarlatothep (theme:Cosmic Horror) both asking premision to play with his stuff, he knows what to expect. And nobody can blame Haruhi if she will turn it into a madhouse because that's her theme.

mystic1110

2013-05-18, 11:34 AM

An Idea I had while I was rewriting some of the rules.... what do you guys think of this

Societies

When you make a race - in the beginning they live spread out - in a loose tribal system as the default. Use the create Society action to begin to form social connections and a collective history. Once you are ready to have your race progress into groups of more than a village of a hundred use the Form nation action to collect your race into a country or even an empire. Once you have a nation set up you may create guilds, religious groups or secret societies within with the form organization action.

Now all empires and civilizations have their golden ages, and their falls. During Rollover you must reuse the the Form Nation action, or your nation dissolves. Because your nation falls DOES not mean that your organizations fall - the remnants of your assassin guild, religion, etc stick around and form the history of the world - and build the roots for the next time your society is ready to advance to the level of a nation.

1 AP Form Society
2 AP Create Nation
2 AP Form Organization

rweird

2013-05-18, 11:48 AM

Interesting idea, I still don't understand why it is harder to form an organization than a society though.

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-18, 12:21 PM

First of all, I don't think you need to give a whole new system just to make suggestions about what one might look like, although broad strokes are always nice, so thanks for those. :smallsmile:

OK, so I think we're splitting into a couple of camps here, depending on what we want from our games, and then we're splitting up over how best to achieve it.

The main camps are as follows (as far as I can tell):
1. All mortal creations should rise, stagnate and fall over a period of time, to create history.
2. LoC is about creating interesting things, and it isn't fair if these are removed after large amounts of AP are spent on them.

Then camp one splits into:
1a) The rise and fall of mortal creations is crucial of itself for the story of the game to progress, and the game mechanics should cause the fall by itself, if that is what it takes.
1b) The rise and fall of mortal creations should be facilitated by gods and other mortals, because that makes the story more interesting - we should try and facilitate other players causing the fall in the rules, even if this means less consistency of falling.

Does everyone feel they fall into one of those?

I reckon I'm about a 1b.

I'm a 1b to the core.

As someone who's enamored with the concept, but never played in a game that didn't fall apart or that I didn't enter into late, I thought I'd chime in. As with Rizban and some other people, I view LoC as a setting generator first, and a god game second. I'm going to list some of the problems that I've encountered, or that people have brought up on the thread, and how I'd address them. Most of these interrelate, and I'm not worried about specific numbers at this point.

Problem: Latecomers are at a significant disadvantage, both due to the amount of material they have to process and to the fact that they're throwing around significantly less AP than the movers and shakers.
This isn't a rules function, but having someone (probably the GM/mods - if they're active it's little trouble, if not then the game is dying anyway) compile a history as the game progresses is immensely helpful and makes joining an existing game less intimidating. It shouldn't even be a post-by-post summary - "God A and God B fought, before God C raised a demon army to piss in their cheerios; he did a darn good job of it, forcing A and B to unite" is adequate. Sparknotes, people.
Adding upkeep to existing creations helps narrow the contribution difference - Elder Gods with numerous creations they're responsible for can do roughly the same amount of "new stuff" each round as newcomers.
The starting AP boost is helpful, but what if that amount increased as the game progressed? Actually, what if the weekly AP also increased over time, as the world became larger?

Problem: Players would rather make and use their own creations than interact with other player's work, even if it basically means reinventing the wheel.
It should actually be cheaper to do "stuff" to/with creations that aren't yours than it is to your own. I know it's counter-intuitive as all hell, but if this is a behavior we want to incent, then the rules need to directly reflect that. I'm imagining a straight-up AP cost reduction, but it doesn't have to be major - one or two points cheaper to create terrain on another god's plane, a point less to use/adapt an existing magic system than to make your own, a point less to raise a hero from another race, and so on. It just needs to be notable enough to counteract the tendency to play in one's own sandbox. If you have trouble justifying it, think of it as a divine slingshot maneuver (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slingshot_maneuver).

Problem: Players become extremely invested in "their" creations, and resist others mucking about with them IC and OoC. As a result, AP is spent to maintain the Status Quo.
If you're going to pay to "protect" something, we might as well formalize it. Upkeep needs to be a thing, though I'm against complex/increasing upkeep because that's more to track than necessary. Upkeep occurs automatically at the start of each round until you renounce that affiliation. It also counts as AP expenditure for domain purposes, assuming those are kept.
Upkeep does not imply that the creation is "yours" - people can still do stuff to it (even at a reduced cost, as previously suggested). So what does it do?
Fluffwise, things generally work better if a deity is actively invested in it. Civilizations flourish, ideas spread, and the afterlife keeps working without a hitch.
It signifies to other players that you have a vested interest in the realm/concept/species. If you have a plan for said creation, it serves as a notification that they shouldn't mess with it too much. It also helps to actually communicate, of course.
It prevents the creation from being outright destroyed, as well as some resistance to "bad stuff" (see the next problem).
It's an easy way to qualify for a domain.
Probably something else. Who knows?

Okay, so you're tired of paying upkeep, and you renounce a creation. What happens?

Any future actions you do with a creation are at a reduced cost, because it's "not yours". Yay!
Another god can take it under his/her/its/their wing, and begin paying upkeep on it the next round.
Divine actions keep it alive and going - if someone's using it, it's probably not going to die.
If nothing happens with it for a couple of rounds, it begins to fade into the background. Races lose their former glory; societies and organizations dissolve; concepts eventually cease to work or be widespread. Without explicit action, though, nothing is destroyed - anything can be picked back up if someone wants to start paying upkeep for it.

Problem: While destructive actions are important, due to the aforementioned investment players are loathe to let this happen. "Conflict" gods, in particular, cause a ton of OoC discourse.

Make it clear from the start of the game that no one has exclusive ownership over anything within the game. Point misinformed players to the definition of "collaboration".
If no one is invested in (read: paying upkeep for) for a creation, you can do whatever you want with it. All is well.
If a player is invested in a creation, and you have the consent of the player, you can do whatever you want with it. All is well.
If a player is invested in a creation, and you don't have the consent of the player, all might not be well. Here are the breaks:
You cannot destroy outright an invested creation. Sorry No, I'm not.
You can do pretty much any "bad stuff" up to that - with a catch. You must give the player a number of "Outs", things that can mitigate/avert/lessen/sidestep the bad stuff. If there's variable curse costs, the number of Outs should be in proportion to the curse. If there's fixed curse costs, just set that to "three", or have the GM decide based on the magnitude. Note that no matter what they do, the bad stuff still happens and has an impact - an Out is just a chance for the player to salvage or make something of the situation.
Alternatively, that player can receive [some fixed amount/half/all] of the AP spent on the curse to take actions to achieve one of the valid outcomes for an Out. Spending AP to just say "No." is not a valid out. Doing nothing is a valid Out, and is also technically consent, in which case you receive free AP for your troubles.

Problem: Pantheons/alliances are... problematic.
Pull out the AP increases from forming a pantheon. This is nothing but trouble. Also drop the AP costs for creating/joining a pantheon, as well as the "admin" rights.
What pantheons allow you to do is jointly pay AP costs and upkeep for creations. If you're tired of paying 5 points/round (or whatever) for maintaining Arcana as a concept, you find another god to help shoulder your burden. If no one else wants to contribute, then they probably aren't that interested in Arcana anyway, which likely means it's just you playing in your sandbox.
As an aside, a player having shards/fledgling deities under his/her control should probably not be a thing. If it's not generating it's own AP, then it's just another facet of your deity and it's all fluff anyway. If it is, then it's a deity in its own right and should probably have another player to it. In any event, I feel it needs to be a GM thing and not a generally-allowed ability, to discourage AP shenanigans.

Thoughts?

I love this. Upkeep is something I don't have a problem with, but cumulative upkeep is something I'd have to say no to.

A slightly simpler suggestion might be to raise the initial AP cost of every action, instead of requiring an upkeep cost, so that there's less going on at the start of the game and people are forced to make choices about what they want instead of buying up everything at the start. If making a world costs 10 AP instead of 5, then you're more likely to get gods sharing AP so that they can have the things they want. More cooperation, better group synergy?

Interesting idea, I still don't understand why it is harder to form an organization than a society though.

Because an organization is a powerful group within a society. A society might have a military as part of their natural state, but the elite mounted combat units that make their military so feared? That's an Organization.
----------------------------

I came up with an idea just as I was about to fall asleep (it's actually 2 ideas but hey). Its an outgrowth of my originally proposed DOOM system and what Mystic did after the godplague issue. After a certain amount of real world time, the gods become exhausted with all their works, and they rest for a thousand years. During this time, things change without the gods, and when they awaken, the world is not how they originally left it.

1. Heroes, Leaders, Legends are retired. People gain back the AP spent on them as "virtual AP" which can only be spent to make new Heroes, but cannot be used towards domains.

2. Any ongoing curses/blessings are ended. These do not regain "virtual AP"

3. Players bid societies and organizations, of those bidded, X number of them are randomly destroyed or ended. Nations might fall, paladins may become corrupt, certain forms of magic may be lost or forgotten. "Virtual AP" is regained for those societies and organizations lost.

4. Any dead god's creations can be claimed by the newly awakened gods, those that aren't are lost or destroyed.

5. The Age is collected and kept as a setting.

After a set number of Ages, the game ends.

Thoughts?

Agent_0042

2013-05-18, 12:27 PM

Welcome to the vast majority of games. Those who have been doing it a while tend to have an advantage. Ever head of a “Christmas n00b”? Even in video games where things are usually mechanically equal, things are never practically equal. But I digress, let's see what you're suggesting.I get that, but because I view LoC as collaborative fiction with game trappings, the advantage for older players is "The world right now is in the shape that we chose it to be," as far as I'm concerned. I understand my views are not universal.

So... what exactly is the point of being an Elder God if your stuff is easier to mess with and you can't even do anything more than some newbie Fledgling?Because, if you're not saddled down and have been "releasing" your creations for general use, as I want to be the case, you can in fact do more.

Depending on how much you're talking about, it could easily become that there's no such thing as a Fledgling anymore making working one's way up a bit too easy; an Intermediate is half an Elder after all, and it's far faster to make two Intermediates by a poor version of the system.I agree, but that's all numbers. I'm still at the spitballing phase here.

In TBS, concepts are alchemized. You can't add a concept another god controls, though we try to make sure that there are lots of little specializations for the concepts we'd associate any decent civilization to have (literacy, mining, watercraft, animal domestication, education, etc)Concepts aren't the problem - it's species, societies, and lands/planes, mostly. Once someone makes their pet race, they generally don't want to bother with other people's civilizations.

Problem is you might have impish Fledglings unafraid of the bigger deities and civilizations. It's all fun and games until you miss your slingshot and it's Jupiter that takes a Shoemaker Levy 9 to the face, and then Shoemaker Levy just walks away from it. Doing stuff with, fine, (to a certain point then it BECOMES a shared thing. In TBS, the god Flux has done more with Chronamus' gnomes than he has, particularly by abusing the hell out of a “one or two” AP reduction to Concepts. And he actually PAID for his reduction with a monument.) But doing stuff to? Madness. If you're trying for a world-builder, that gives the gods of destruction WAY too much leverage. I figured my bit for curses would alleviate this, but if it's an issue curses can be excluded from this - only beneficial or neutral actions gain the cost reduction.

And if somebody's trying to turn somebody else's Santa's Workshop into Warhammer 40k... or vice verse... see the problem with reducing the status quo? Working concepts are too easy to bastardize if somebody with a different vision for your creation decides they want to make some changes against your will.That's a communication problem, and no rule will fix that. If it's not agreed upon what style a given LoC will be, or if people writing about the same thing are not on the same page, the collaborative fiction will fall apart. Period.

Fair enough, though with advanced civilizations with their own miniature pantheon working on them, how exactly do you calculate who gets stuck with the bill at the end of the meal?Total up the upkeep, divide evenly, and round up, unless otherwise specified by the players involved?

Typically “I made X” gives people a good indication that X is yours and that you should only mess with X in a way that would be fun for all involved.Well, yeah, but also for when people appropriate abandoned creations.

So's just about everything if you theme a week or two's actions ahead of time, but yes, it is... but just the Protection domain or one of the Race domains. Kinda lose their specialness if everybody's doing it, doesn't it? Very cookie-cutter.Or if you're invested in Magic or Storms or what have you. Yeah, I probably could've left this out, but I wanted to be clear that the AP counts.

What, I'm supposed to? You wrote the suggestion, come up with something (or don't).Heh, placeholder from when I was drafting the post.

Click here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZvCI-gNK_y4).Nope. I'm afraid of Rick.

This happens naturally to forgotten players' stuff, or stuff players have forgotten, in every game I've ever played. No need to mention it. I'd throw it in anyway for completeness.

Also “griefing” while they have their dictionaries open.That would definitely help.

Within reason. Again: Santa's Workshop, Warhammer 40k. Assume you have permission so long as you stick with the general theme.Specification, consent to do whatever it is you want to do.

You know, I would think I'd find some problem with this... I don't. Smashers are happy, you're happy, some conflict happens and nobody (but some NPCs) got hurt. Assuming the effects of the smashing don't cost the target more AP than they cost you, I'm perfectly fine with this brand of cursing, though I'd prefer if people talked about any major ones beforehand.Of course; communication's always nice. For the people that didn't pull out that dictionary, though, here you go.

That's what Alliances are for.Well, there you go. Drop pantheons, then. Shouldn't everyone be part of the same pantheon anyway?Back in my day we didn't have no fancy pancy alliances mumble grumble

While I agree with the Shard thing (not that it's an actual supported action by the TBS rule set), I think Legends should be important, as first of all they're EXPENSIVE, and they require the most RPing out of any action. And yes, they do generate AP. Won't pay for themselves for a VERY long time, but they do. If you spend that long playing a character, and burn that much AP on it (a total of 12 by TBS standards), I'd be very against you losing control of that character. Think of Legends as characters with “Divine Rank 0”, to put it in D&D terms.It really depends on whether people are on board with multiple characters or not. Normally I'm cool with it, but in a game I'm playing with random internet people, I'd rather play it safe. That's just my hangup, though.

Yes, I've got a few, see above.Oh, there they are!

Man on Fire

2013-05-18, 12:47 PM

I already suggested things that would be good solutions to "Santa's Workshop-Warhammer 40k" problem

A) Have all the players decide the theme of the world before hand. If you agree on making Fairy tale world (like, say Narnia or Orphan's Tales) you do it, if agreed want to make High Fatasy (like Middle Earth, Fionavar or Belgaraid) you do high fantasy, you agreed on Warhammer 40k you do Warhammer 40k
B) Have each god assigned a theme they stick to. If that's the case if Asan (theme: Fairy tale) has Haruhi Suzumia (theme: Humoristic) and Nyarlatothep (theme:Cosmic Horror) both asking premision to play with his stuff, he knows what to expect. And nobody can blame Haruhi if she will turn it into a madhouse because that's her theme.

One more thought:
Compromise mehod that also requires recrutations to be occasional stuff .Maybe combining it with Ages Elricaltovilla mentioned?
Besically it means that from now on players aren't recruited all the time but at some specific moments, each representing next generation of gods. And these new guys could have different theme agreed upon that their predecessors.
For example:
First Age Generation is made of Aslan, Raknoth Marugrim, Torak, Mystra and Odin*. They all agreed on making standard high fantasy setting.
Once their Age ends, they leave the setting for some time. Once Second Age starts, new generation of gods is introduced. They're Haruhi, Delirium, Loki, Dark One and Death**, whose agreed theme is humor. They attempt to make setting more lighthearded and fun, sometiems clashing with old generation in the process.
At the dawn of third Age yet another group of gods is introduced: Nyarlatothep, Nurgle, Idea of Evil, Darkseid and Chaos King***. Their theme is Cosmic Horror/Dark fantasy and they work towards reshaping the world to their liking.
This way we get three settings: Standard high fantasy, world where fun-happy new generation clashes with old, serious elders and world where bunch of jerks try to ruin everything and others attempts to do some sort of damage control.

And don't tell me that would make some gods impossible to play - you can play any kind of god, this would only be decision of the tone and style of the world you are building together. I could do a mix up and say first generation is now Odin, Delirium and Idea of Evil, second is Nyarlatothep, Torak and Haruhi and third is Nurgle, Aslan and Loki and it would work, they would be just played in different tone than under original assumptions. And this is addition to keep Ages different and to keep it from being boring "same old, same old" as already existing worlds of the choosen theme.

*- Narnia, Fionavar Tapestry, Belgaraid, D&D, Norse Mythology
** - Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumia, Sandman, Journey Into Mystery, Order of the Stick, Discworld
*** - Cthulhu Mythos, Warhammer, Berserk, New Gods, Incredible Hercules

3. Players bid societies and organizations, of those bidded, X number of them are randomly destroyed or ended. Nations might fall, paladins may become corrupt, certain forms of magic may be lost or forgotten. "Virtual AP" is regained for those societies and organizations lost.

4. Any dead god's creations can be claimed by the newly awakened gods, those that aren't are lost or destroyed.

Two questions:
1) Who chooses the way of which destruction of thoe unlucky ones happens? Player wh ocreated them? GM? Any willing player? (I woudl suggest that order of things for it)
2) What if two gods want the same creation?

Other than that, I'm all for Ages idea.

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-18, 12:55 PM

One more thought:
Compromise mehod that also requires recrutations to be occasional stuff .Maybe combining it with Ages Elricaltovilla mentioned?
Besically it means that from now on players aren't recruited all the time but at some specific moments, each representing next generation of gods. And these new guys could have different theme agreed upon that their predecessors.
For example:
First Age Generation is made of Aslan, Raknoth Marugrim, Torak, Mystra and Odin*. They all agreed on making standard high fantasy setting.
Once their Age ends, they leave the setting for some time. Once Second Age starts, new generation of gods is introduced. They're Haruhi, Delirium, Loki, Dark One and Death**, whose agreed theme is humor. They attempt to make setting more lighthearded and fun, sometiems clashing with old generation in the process.
At the dawn of third Age yet another group of gods is introduced: Nyarlatothep, Nurgle, Idea of Evil, Darkseid and Chaos King***. Their theme is Cosmic Horror/Dark fantasy and they work towards reshaping the world to their liking.
This way we get three settings: Standard high fantasy, world where fun-happy new generation clashes with old, serious elders and world where bunch of jerks try to ruin everything and others attempts to do some sort of damage control.

And don't tell me that would make some gods impossible to play - you can play any kind of god, this would only be decision of the tone and style of the world you are building together. I could do a mix up and say first generation is now Odin, Delirium and Idea of Evil, second is Nyarlatothep, Torak and Haruhi and third is Nurgle, Aslan and Loki and it would work, they would be just played in different tone than under original assumptions. And this is addition to keep Ages different and to keep it from being boring "same old, same old" as already existing worlds of the choosen theme.

*- Narnia, Fionavar Tapestry, Belgaraid, D&D, Norse Mythology
** - Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumia, Sandman, Journey Into Mystery, Order of the Stick, Discworld
*** - Cthulhu Mythos, Warhammer, Berserk, New Gods, Incredible Hercules

Two questions:
1) Who chooses the way of which destruction of thoe unlucky ones happens? Player wh ocreated them? GM? Any willing player? (I woudl suggest that order of things for it)
2) What if two gods want the same creation?

Other than that, I'm all for Ages idea.

1) that order sounds perfect.
2) I'd say they bid or roll for it. If someone is willing to give up more stuff then they probably want whatever that thing is more. If that doesn't work, both sides roll a 1d100 and highest number gets it :smallsmile:

Grinner

2013-05-18, 01:22 PM

I love this. Upkeep is something I don't have a problem with, but cumulative upkeep is something I'd have to say no to.

A slightly simpler suggestion might be to raise the initial AP cost of every action, instead of requiring an upkeep cost, so that there's less going on at the start of the game and people are forced to make choices about what they want instead of buying up everything at the start. If making a world costs 10 AP instead of 5, then you're more likely to get gods sharing AP so that they can have the things they want. More cooperation, better group synergy?

I don't think it would work out quite like that, because it wouldn't necessarily encourage cooperation. That would be the smart move, yes, but not everyone holds the same priorities. More likely, I can see some merely taking longer to create things.

mystic1110

2013-05-18, 01:56 PM

So im trying to incorporate all the advice and everything being talked about into compromises that I'm not sure anybody will be happy with. This is what I have so far. A lot of it is simplified from the original rules - in others I added thematic advice to promote the collaborative interactions we crave. Note I took out AP from the pantheon rules and instead made it about the authority of the pantheon leader. I added the upkeep to the nation and took out leaders and seekers. Please tell me if this is at least in the right direction (the rule aren't complete: they dont include the creation of artifacts/relics/races/conceptsetc)

*******

Pantheons

When you a born into the game - you automatically join a pantheon between your progenitor and yourself, unless your progenitor is already part of a pantheon and in that case you will join that pantheon. A god may only be a member of one pantheon at a time.

The pantheon is a sacred bond of fealty to the leader - gods in a pantheon aren't equals but instead sworn to the Leader.

Once per week the leader of a pantheon may ORDER a god in their pantheon to perform any action they are capable of performing OR may ORDER the pantheon as a whole into a cause - disobedience results in eviction from the pantheon. A god is never forced to use AP to fulfill an order.

But being a leader brings it's own responsibilities. The leader of any pantheon must obey these rule:

Pantheon leader cannot openly act against the good of the pantheon. If he does, the strongest member may challenge him for the rulership.
Pantheon leader must defend members of his pantheon against attacks of other gods (that he knows of), either by himself or by sending other members of the pantheon.

Create Pantheon: 1 AP
Join a pantheon: 1 AP
Subordinate your pantheon to another pantheon: 1 AP.

Societies

When you make a race - in the beginning they live spread out - in a loose tribal system as the default. Use the create Society action to begin to form social connections and a collective history. Once you are ready to have your race progress into groups of more than a village of a hundred use the Form nation action to collect your race into a country or even an empire. Once you have a nation set up you may create guilds, religious groups or secret societies within with the form organization action.

Now all empires and civilizations have their golden ages, and their falls. During Rollover you must reuse the Form Nation action, or your nation dissolves. Because your nation falls DOES not mean that your organizations fall - the remnants of your assassin guild, religion, etc stick around and form the history of the world - and build the roots for the next time your society is ready to advance to the level of a nation.

You may form nations of other people’s races – a god Never has complete control/ ownership over every single individual being of the race he or she creates. You may even form organizations in other nations.

1 AP Form Society
2 AP Create Nation
1 AP Form Organization

Heroes and Legends

What are myths without heroes? You may create a mortal to work in your gods stead or even against yourself on the material plane.

Raise Hero: You may only use this action inside a Nexus you control. You may only have 1 Hero per Nation. A Hero grants +1 AP at rollover. The trick is to expend this extra AP in a way to enhance the Hero’s stature – don’t just use the Hero to farm for more AP – try to tell a story with the hero. Make us care.
Create Legend: You may create a legend out of a hero. You may only use this action inside a Nexus you control. The only other restriction is that a hero must have existed for at least 2 rollovers to become eligible to becoming raised to a legend – a god may only create one legend. A legend is basically a demi god. In fact Legends count as fledging gods that may not use an enhance domain or gain domain action. They gain 2 AP each rollover.

Curses/Blesses

Blesses and Curses are the will of the gods made manifest. They can range from a golden age for an empire, or to increase the mortal population. The population that finds themselves under the pleasure of a god will find their crops prosperous and their ways smoothed, as the subtle magic of the god is worked in their favor, The population that finds themselves under the curse of a god will find their crops barren and their land blighted, as the subtle magic of the god works against them.

The important thing to remember is to try to keep curses and blesses subtle – the ocassional overt action of a god is impressive but it gets boring quickly – make blesses and curses much much more than: “everyone is super strong now” – instead go for blesses like “I impart the wisdom of martial training and harsh conditions to my people – over the years they become stronger, more durable – their children fit for survival in my vision of the world”

Blesses and Curses cost 1 AP

Blesses and Curses can be countered by other gods, however. Each time it is countered, it becomes harder and harder for the gods to exert their will over each other. A blessing or Curse only takes 1 AP to create, and 2 AP to counter, however, once countered, it takes 3 AP to reinstate the curse, and 4 AP to recounter it, and so on.

Do not treat “curse wars” like this:

1 AP: Make super healing plants.
2 AP: Kill all super healing plants.
3 AP: Recreate super healing plants.
4 AP: Kill all super healing plants.
5 AP: Recreate super healing plants.

Treat them Like this:

1 AP: Make super healing plants.
2 AP: Super healing plants are struck with a disease like real world plants and large cluster of them die because of lack of genetic diversity, now they only exists but far spread out, rarer and never in large clumps.
3 AP: Super healing plants emit an aura that make them easy to find.
4 AP: Plant poisonous plants around the world that emit the same aura, look the same and kill instantly, so a person looking for these plants will have to journey towards them but will never know if they will die or survive at the end of the journey.
5 AP: Create spirit guides that aren't an actual species but a manifestation of that super healing plant's benevolence, and like the will o' wisps in "Brave" they lead people away from the poisonous plants.

Land Actions

A big part of being a god is changing the landscape around you!

Alter Land 1 AP: Alter land allows a god to change already existing landscapes. It can be used to create mountain ranges, vast forests, lakes, swamps, or any other kind of "land type" you could think of. This includes razing and raising cities! Alter land can also be used to raise small chains of islands from the sea. These islands cannot be very big, but can be large enough to support a small kingdom. Think about the size of Hawaii. Alter land actions can also be used to change the layout of existing land, such changes can be the creation of the largest mountain in the world to the greatest forest.
Create Land 2 AP: allows a god to create land where there is none. It can be used to raise a small continent from the sea, or create large, floating islands in a plane where there is no planet. Land created by Create Land can be up to the size of Russia
Forge Astronomical Object 3AP: Use this action to create a celestial body such as a moon, planet, asteroid, or sun. If your astronomical object has special properties such as an empathic link to yourself, or can move contrary to the rules of gravity and physics – it is a Relic NOT an Astronomical Object
Form Nexus 2 AP: You may create a location of mystic and divine energy connected to a preexisting sanctum your god control/owns. A nexus may be a building, a door, a portion of a forest, a specific cave, but must be a specific location – it cannot be “the ocean.” Promoting mortals to higher rank of mortal can only occur in a Nexus.
Weave Sanctum 2 AP: You may create a location of divinity attuned to your god. This location may be anywhere not on the material plane. Your seat of power may be a layer of a plane, or a simple foreboding castle. Gods may only enter another God’s sanctum if they have permission or initiated combat.
Imagine Plane 5AP : Imagine Plane allows a god to create the fabric of their own reality. Planes are entire dimensions apart from the normal world, and can take any form a god can imagine. Hell, Heaven, or Limbo, are examples of planes. When weaving a plane, the creating god must decide on any special features it has, such as accelerated time, or empowered magic. A god may also decide how many layers there are initially. This can vary from one, to thousands, though most planes have less than three. Unlike a sanctum a god gets no special benefit for being within his or her own realm or plane. Your god does not "own" a plane he made - in fact other gods creating and living in a plane you made is encouraged!!
.

Losing in RCR

If you and another player can't come to an agreement concerning the outcome of a conflict you may resolve to go into to RCR. Remember though RCR is a last resort: try to come up with a compromise OOC first. But if neither player wants to let their god Lose: roll the dice.

The Winning player may elect to do ONE of the following actions to the losing player

a) Destroy the Capital of Losing players society AND/OR b) force losing players mortal race into a diaspora OR enslave the losing god's society to the winning god's society. This is not a curse and can't be countered.
Destroy or steal all of the Relics that the losing god has on their person at the moment of the battle. This is not a curse and can't be countered.
Subordinate the losing god to the winning god. If the winning god is the head of a pantheon: The Losing god must quit his or her existing pantheon (including the AP loss) and join the pantheon of the winning god. If the winning god is not a head of a pantheon, the winning god may give one command to the losing god to follow - this command does not force the losing god to expend AP.
Mercy. The winning god can elect to do nothing.

Man on Fire

2013-05-18, 02:00 PM

I'm stil lsayig to get rid of RCR altogether and have some way to make PVP that don't have an impact on people's creations. Tehre are other, better ways to get rid of things.

rweird

2013-05-18, 02:02 PM

A bit of confusing wording for heroes and legends.

Raise Hero: You may only use this action inside a Nexus you control. You may only have 1 Hero per Nation. A Leader grants +1 AP at rollover. The trick is to expend this extra AP in a way to enhance the Hero’s stature – don’t just use the Hero to farm for more AP – try to tell a story with the hero. Make us care.

I think you mean Hero due to leaders being mentioned nowhere else, and that is just a minor inconsistency.

mystic1110

2013-05-18, 02:07 PM

I'm stil lsayig to get rid of RCR altogether and have some way to make PVP that don't have an impact on people's creations. Tehre are other, better ways to get rid of things.

2 things; 1) I would think that RCR will probably be around to stay in one form or another so we should still figure out what happens when you lose & 2) RCR is not about getting rid of things. It's about player conflict. Before RCR OoC fights about who should win or lose ended up killing games - and you can't just leave it to the DM since they get accused of favoritism all the time.

A bit of confusing wording for heroes and legends.

I think you mean Hero due to leaders being mentioned nowhere else, and that is just a minor inconsistency.

Thanks - I fixed it. What do you think of the rules in general however?

Man on Fire

2013-05-18, 02:07 PM

When you a born into the game - you automatically join a pantheon between your progenitor and yourself, unless your progenitor is already part of a pantheon and in that case you will join that pantheon. A god may only be a member of one pantheon at a time.

The pantheon is a sacred bond of fealty to the leader - gods in a pantheon aren't equals but instead sworn to the Leader.

Once per week the leader of a pantheon may ORDER a god in their pantheon to perform any action they are capable of performing OR may ORDER the pantheon as a whole into a cause - disobedience results in eviction from the pantheon. A god is never forced to use AP to fulfill an order.
Create Pantheon: 1 AP
Join a pantheon: 1 AP
Subordinate your pantheon to another pantheon: 1 AP.

And what gods get from being in pantheon?
Also, I suggest setting limitations for the leader. Say this:
* Pantheon leader cannot openly act against the good of the pantheon. If he does, the strongest member may challenge him for the rulership.
* Pantheon leader must defend members of his pantheon against attacks of other gods, either by himself or by sending other members of the pantheon.

Man on Fire

2013-05-18, 02:09 PM

2 things; 1) I would think that RCR will probably be around to stay in one form or another so we should still figure out what happens when you lose & 2) RCR is not about getting rid of things. It's about player conflict. Before RCR OoC fights about who should win or lose ended up killing games - and you can't just leave it to the DM since they get accused of favoritism all the time.

Okay, then keep RCR but get rid of it causing destruction of civilisations or capitals or things liek that. This one would be just allowing gods to bully others. Destroying/stealing relics may stay, but I would limit it to ONE relic.

mystic1110

2013-05-18, 02:09 PM

And what gods get from being into pantheon?

Nothing. Which is alright - pantheons were originally just intended to have groups of gods who care about being in a group - this seems to accomplish the same goals and actually makes being the leader mean something. Also this way who your family is becomes important.

Also, I suggest setting limitations for the leader. Say this:
* Pantheon leader cannot openly act against the good of the pantheon. If he does, the strongest member may challenge him for the rulership.
* Pantheon leader must defend members of his pantheon against attacks of other gods, either by himself or by sending other members of the pantheon.

Those are excellent suggestions!! :smallbiggrin:. Ill add those to my last post!!

mystic1110

2013-05-18, 02:13 PM

Okay, then keep RCR but get rid of it causing destruction of civilisations or capitals or things liek that. This one would be just allowing gods to bully others. Destroying/stealing relics may stay, but I would limit it to ONE relic.

Well if Relic would be 4 AP - the destruction of a capital (1 AP alter land action) and the diaspora of a civilization (loss of a nation which is worth a continuous 2 AP action) would only be around 3 AP.

The losing god could probably sulk for a little bit and then make a new nation/capital very easily, built on the history of the old.

Man on Fire

2013-05-18, 02:25 PM

Well if Relic would be 4 AP - the destruction of a capital (1 AP alter land action) and the diaspora of a civilization (loss of a nation which is worth a continuous 2 AP action) would only be around 3 AP.

The losing god could probably sulk for a little bit and then make a new nation/capital very easily, built on the history of the old.

It simply doesn't feel natural to me that civilisation gets wrecked not because god punished it for crimes of other god, but because he punched the guy in the face, it sounds horribly stupid. I get that you could have "and then Zeus struck Aslan from the sky and he had fallen into Car Paravel with such force the castle was no more" but how many times would we get away with thi before it would become boring? Once, no more.

Maybe better idea would be to allow winning God spend AP and go destroy/wreck something loser made (as long as crime is appriorate to punishment), without possibility of undoing it?

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-18, 02:34 PM

rweird

2013-05-18, 02:40 PM

Thanks - I fixed it. What do you think of the rules in general however?

Not sure, I think I'd be fine with playing another LoC game as is with cost reductions being the only thing changed (I think just making it be a minimum reduction to 1/2 the original cost rounded up). I haven't seen any problems with gods being bullies or whatever.

So far everything has gone okay excepts for Infusions and cost reductions, maybe make the person have to run any Monument or Cosmic decree past the other players OoC and see if anyone has big problems, then talk about it and work it out.

The problems mainly are due to people not asking, and people disliking what other gods (mainly due to not liking the power of infusions). Just making people have to discuss Monuments and Cosmic Degrees OoC before using them might solve it.

For how people play, I don't know how much changing rules will change that. I personally have enjoyed it as it is, there are so many different ways you could go with this, though I don't know if any of them are necessary, I like the RCR part, though include that if both players agree, they could change what they risk (for example, they agree that one civilization should destroy the other entirely, though both wants it to be there civilization, and are okay risking it).

Include things about roleplaying and what your god doing making sense for the character, along with world building, and just to not be a jerk. Games are supposed to be fun.

The new system probably will work too, though I don't really know. It needs a "Artifacts, Relics, and Monuments [if kept]" section along with a "Infusions" section.

Rizban

2013-05-18, 02:46 PM

For potential RCR loss results, allow me to once again quote the original ruleset.

Divine Injuries
A 1 point reduction in the loser's DR.
The winner gains one of the loser's portfolio elements. Any domains related to it are lost if the loser does not gain a new element to accompany them within two Months.
The winner may Contest one of the loser's Domains.
If the combatants had a Contested Domain, the winner can officially claim the domain as his own. The loser no longer has the Domain.
Steal artifact and reform it
Break one of the loser's artifacts and gain 1 AP
Reduce enemies AP by 2d6. If they don't have enough, they loose half of their weekly AP until the debt is paid off.
Some other penalty that both parties can agree upon, such as a roleplaying requirement which must be followed, e.g., never directly attempt to influence the winner's followers in a certain region, support the winner as an Ally in future combats, give up being patron deity of a specific city

NichG

2013-05-18, 02:47 PM

Rizban

2013-05-18, 02:49 PM

Permanent AP gain/loss is a SEVERE penalty.

rweird

2013-05-18, 02:52 PM

Permanent AP gain/loss is a SEVERE penalty.

Agreed, nothing that major should be included, regardless of who is the attacker or defender.

Man on Fire

2013-05-18, 03:00 PM

What about when civilization A attacks civilization B? No gods are involved but there's still RCR going on. Think Illiad for a good example of what I'm talking about.

That's a different case altogether. There I could see it, but ot when two gods are fighting.

mystic1110

2013-05-18, 03:11 PM

It simply doesn't feel natural to me that civilisation gets wrecked not because god punished it for crimes of other god, but because he punched the guy in the face, it sounds horribly stupid. I get that you could have "and then Zeus struck Aslan from the sky and he had fallen into Car Paravel with such force the castle was no more" but how many times would we get away with thi before it would become boring? Once, no more.

Maybe better idea would be to allow winning God spend AP and go destroy/wreck something loser made (as long as crime is appriorate to punishment), without possibility of undoing it?

That could work. . .

"Loser cannot "Counter" the winners actions till the next rollover?

Also rweird i'll try to write up my vision for relics/artifacts/infusions given everyones suggestions to include them in my next "rule" update post :smallsmile:. And I think players being jerks is not the concern. I think we're trying to shift LOC back to its original intention - world building, and to do that the AP rules need for fixing in order to make players care and advance the world. (One thing I desperately want is for people to care about other planes)

rweird

2013-05-18, 03:12 PM

Maybe separating Divine RCR, and Society RCR into two categories, maybe one for Divine v.s. Society too (or each takes results from its own list).

Also include that victory in RCR lets a god employ a concept of the defeated god.

Man on Fire

2013-05-18, 03:14 PM

That could work. . .

"Loser cannot "Counter" the winners actions till the next rollover?

Sounds okay.
Maybe even go and have RCR whenever the god attemps to meddle with other god's creation and players cannot agree on it? They go with usual RCR routine and if agressor wins, he does whatever he wanted to do and cannot be countered until the next rollover.

mystic1110

2013-05-18, 03:21 PM

Everyone else what do you think of :can't counter till next rollover as a good RCR punishment (outside everything else by player agreement)

And here are all the types of combat I can see:

God vs. God
God vs. Society/Organization/Nation
God vs. Legend/Hero
Society/Organization/Nation vs. Society/Organization/Nation
Society/Organization/Nation vs. Legend/Hero
Legend/Hero vs. Legend/Hero

rweird

2013-05-18, 03:25 PM

I think the can't counter is good, maybe if the defender wins, then the aggressor can't attack the defender for a week.

Rizban

2013-05-18, 03:39 PM

NichG

2013-05-18, 04:21 PM

Permanent AP gain/loss is a SEVERE penalty.

The question is, are you including RCR because you want it to be a part of play, or is it simply a fallback when the players can't come to an agreement? If its the second, then making the penalty for using it severe makes sense, because that strongly discourages its use.

Rizban

2013-05-18, 04:38 PM

And if you make is unusable, then it is unusable, and people will resort to the "nuh uh" resolution method and just ignore it. The only way around that is to make it mandatory, which the defeats the purpose of it servin as only a fallback.

Emperor Demonking

2013-05-18, 05:00 PM

The question is, are you including RCR because you want it to be a part of play, or is it simply a fallback when the players can't come to an agreement? If its the second, then making the penalty for using it severe makes sense, because that strongly discourages its use.

But surely if the aggressor is punished when RCR is used then that rewards the defender who is likely the 'they're mine!!!' person anyways. It doesn't punish using RCR, it rewards people with a 'My Sandbox' attitude to the game.

Loser can't counter is a good penalty.

Mystic:
You ignored Hero & Nation/Order/Society vs Order and the other multiple cases. I think that the difference between society fighting and gods fighting is that the victor can only take actions relation to who they victored over; that solves the I beat your god thus I destroy your society that somebody had.

rweird

2013-05-18, 07:29 PM

Lo, we have spotted the first large step of the road of civ rules.

"You may grant any race or organization you control any concept you create or Alchemize. If you want to give your creations a concept that was created by another deity, or use another concept to Alchemize with your own, you must engage that deity in combat."

In current rules, I think that you should be able to do what the current rules say RCR can be used to if you win in RCR. I don't see the problem with that.

ArcturusV

2013-05-18, 09:39 PM

Since RCR is intended to be a last resort, why not make it favor the defender as far as consequences? Otherwise, it makes sense for a god who wants to harm another god specifically to try to provoke lots of RCRs by attacking things they don't care about but that the other god does, just so they can force that other god into risking an RCR with poor odds for them.

So for example:

Results of an RCR:

- Aggressor wins, their aggressive action goes through but no other consequence for defender.

- Defender wins, they permanently steal one point of the aggressor's AP income.

Do you mean Income, or do you mean Treasury? One suggests that if I RCR and lose, I gain -1 AP every tick, and the defender gets +1 AP every tick. The other means that when I lose, the defender just takes 1 AP out of my stockpile (Or they gain 1 and I have a total of -X AP that I have to pay off next tick).

I THINK you meant the latter, but you made it sound like the former. That might be why people are saying it's a harsh penalty.

Thinking about it, I'd rather have a sliding scale of victory myself. Again, it seems like one of the things people are likely to be upset about is the Upsets, of course.

having a sliding scale of Victory/Defeat might alter it. Pulling from some board wargames, where you have various levels of victory/defeat. "Outstanding Victory, Total Victory, Marginal Victory..." etc.

Not sure how to implement it numbers wise. Or what it'd mean in the stakes for RCR yet.

But if your Fledgling God beats up an Elder Deity, it's likely to be by just a point or two. They BARELY squeaked out a victory that they most likely shouldn't have. And thus by winning by only 1-2 points it's a "Marginal Victory" or even a "Pyrrhic Victory". And the stake resolution reflects that. So yeah, I took over the God's monument, kicked the Elder God out. But in doing so I left myself weak enough that if anyone other than the God I defeated RCRs me in the next 3 days, they win. No contest. I have expended so much divine power and will that I am exhausted and unable to defend myself. Plus side is the damaged Elder God can't just "tag back" me.

Emperor Demonking

2013-05-18, 11:16 PM

mystic1110

2013-05-19, 12:31 AM

Rizban

2013-05-19, 12:44 AM

On an unrelated point, is it possible to have a more neutral name for the bless/boon/exalt/praise families? To give an example of why I want it: If I want the blood of the local fauna to heal the sick then that's a boon, if I want them to be unusually aggressive then that's a cure, yet if I want them to be an unusually red colour then I'm stuck.

Why would you have to spend AP to make them particularly red in color? That's pure fluff with no "mechanical" effect. Just say it's red and be done with it. Not everything has to have a specific rule with an AP cost.

NichG

2013-05-19, 02:50 AM

Do you mean Income, or do you mean Treasury? One suggests that if I RCR and lose, I gain -1 AP every tick, and the defender gets +1 AP every tick. The other means that when I lose, the defender just takes 1 AP out of my stockpile (Or they gain 1 and I have a total of -X AP that I have to pay off next tick).

I THINK you meant the latter, but you made it sound like the former. That might be why people are saying it's a harsh penalty.

I meant the former, and I meant it to be extremely harsh. Note that I was listing this as the desired design structure if RCR was meant to only be a fallback if there was no possible compromise between the players. My thought was, lets say you have someone who is deciding to be a griefer and because of the structure of the game is even encouraged to take that role a little (playing a god of Destruction, has no people, no civilization, no relics, just wants to destroy). You can't hurt them by taking away their creations - they just want to make other people's creations go away. So instead, make it so they have to pick very very carefully what they destroy such that either that destruction is agreed to by the other party (due to some deal or plot agreement) or that they can't just afford to do it every week because of the power drain.

Basically the idea was, if you want people to say 'okay you can mess with my stuff but I get this in exchange' and other deals like that, you have to make it really really harsh to force the issue. If on the other hand you're going for a system where RCRs are a matter of course and are going on all the time as normal, its obviously not as good of an idea to design in a way to discourage their use.

I don't really have a horse in the race as to one way or another, except that I personally think griefing behavior is worse than deciding to be isolationist and just play with ones' own toys. Griefing lowers the experience for everyone, whereas an isolationist can just be ignored.

Elemental

2013-05-19, 03:54 AM

I like the new rules so far. Except, you forgot to put the costs of heroes and legends in. Either that, or they're not clearly stated.
Anyway... It's these I wish to comment on:

a) Destroy the Capital of Losing players society AND/OR b) force losing players mortal race into a diaspora OR enslave the losing god's society to the winning god's society. This is not a curse and can't be countered.
Destroy or steal all of the Relics that the losing god has on their person at the moment of the battle. This is not a curse and can't be countered.
Subordinate the losing god to the winning god. If the winning god is the head of a pantheon: The Losing god must quit his or her existing pantheon (including the AP loss) and join the pantheon of the winning god. If the winning god is not a head of a pantheon, the winning god may give one command to the losing god to follow - this command does not force the losing god to expend AP.
Mercy. The winning god can elect to do nothing.

-The first one should only be for AP between mortal societies and monsters where it makes sense (Godzilla being the first example I can think of). Also, don't limit it just to the capital city, decline can be brought about by the destruction of other parts of the Empire.
My suggestion is you change that from "Destroy the Capital of losing player's society" to "Lay thematic waste to losing player's society". After all, a rampaging horde won't stop at one city just because that's where parliament meets.
-The second one should have an option to "scatter" relics across reality. As in, they're not destroyed or taken, but the victor has willed them to be lost such that the original holder cannot find them without searching. I'm only suggesting this because it could be interesting for a divine sword to fall from the sky in an out of the way part of some forest. Lost tools of the Gods could provoke interesting story lines.
-And I've got no problem with the other two and mercy is the best possible option.

On an unrelated point, is it possible to have a more neutral name for the bless/boon/exalt/praise families? To give an example of why I want it: If I want the blood of the local fauna to heal the sick then that's a boon, if I want them to be unusually aggressive then that's a cure, yet if I want them to be an unusually red colour then I'm stuck.

The names are just names in this case. Every blessing is a curse and every curse is a blessing, depending on how you look at it. If you make them unusually red, that removes their camouflage so is a curse, but it's a blessing for the local people because they can hunt them easier.
That said, I do like Mystic's suggestion of just calling it "Divine Word". But we can probably think of something better given time.

Emperor Demonking

2013-05-19, 08:13 AM

The names are just names in this case. Every blessing is a curse and every curse is a blessing, depending on how you look at it. If you make them unusually red, that removes their camouflage so is a curse, but it's a blessing for the local people because they can hunt them easier.
That said, I do like Mystic's suggestion of just calling it "Divine Word". But we can probably think of something better given time.

I agree that that's the intention, but I think the way the rules are set up currently it feels awkward to do something that can't be categorized into boon or curse. I like Mystic's 'Divine Word' suggestion.

Rizban: I think that when creating the animals then they can make them red, but I don't think gods should just be able to come from the sky and make quite major, even if only cosmetic or Schelling, effects for free.

Agent_0042

2013-05-19, 11:54 AM

Divine Word?

How about "Edict"?

NichG

2013-05-19, 05:57 PM

Call the cosmetic change an Omen, and have it be something you get for free whenever you spend AP in a localized area for any effect, at a scale one larger than the scale of the AP expenditure.

If you make plants in a single grove cure the sick, the forest changes color in a radius around the grove (or whatever Omen you please, or nothing). If you create a new civilization, perhaps the lands around the civilization take on a subtle change in character, heralding to the mortals the emergence of a new people. Or at that scale, perhaps some event happens in the skies.

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-19, 07:18 PM

I think it might be a good idea at this point to collect all the suggested mechanical changes to the system in one post and then... vote on them? At least give them a look over to see how well they fit together.

Man on Fire

2013-05-20, 10:26 AM

I would like to suggest rules for Themes, that I talked before. Combined with Elricaltovilla's idea of Ages. It's alternate system of play that also change a bit the way recruiting happens:

1. At the begining of the game all players vote for, or in other way agree on the theme of their world, choosing from the list below. This theme is supposed style of the world they are creating, decribing it's tone and appriorate tropes. Player are expected to work together and cooperate toward achieving this style of work, even if that means sometimes laying destruction on their own creations. GM can reward players who sacrifice their own works in order to make the world stick more to the theme.

Players may suggest their own theme or choose from the list below:

High Fantasy.
Heroic Fantasy.
Low Fantasy.
Dark Fantasy
Parody.
Urban Fantasy.
New Wierd.
Cosmic Horror
Modern Fairy Tale
Steampunk
Space Opera
Mecha
Cosmic Gods
Fantasy Shonen
Lack of Theme

2) game is divided into Ages. Each Age lasts 15 rounds, which is roughly equivalent of from 1500 to 15000 years in the world. At end of each Age gods leave the world for one week - from 10000 to 100000 years in the world. Setting as made to this point becomes saved.

3) During one week pause new recruitation takes place, in which new players introduce their new gods and chose another theme from the list - they may either agree on theme chosen by previous generation of gods, or pick up their own.

4) At the start of new age all estabilished elements of previous setting are put on an auction. Players, both new and old generation, get 1000 points for each other player in the game, which they can use to bid any eastabilished element of the world. The one who gives the most takes that thing over.

5) Thigns that haven't been taken over by any player are destroyed. The exact way of their fall should be determined by their creator, and if he's nto present, GM or any willing player. GM or any willing player writest psot about cause of their destruction, without having to spend any AP on it.

6) For each 10 things player had bought, one, of that player's choice, gets destroyed. Player can write about it's destruction in any way he wants. Civilisations fall, curees and blessings loose their powers, orders or organisations become corrupted or annihilated, Relics get lost - that's only few of suggested way what can happen.

7) All heroes and leaders at start of new age are long pressumed dead. They aren't bided in licitation.

8) Younger generation of gods is expected to work on the theme they all agreed upon, while the older generations are expected on perserving the theme estabilished in previosu age. Both sides can attempt to subvert to their theme belongings of god of other theme, but we would advise asking said player about it first.

9) Once god chances part of the setting to fit hi theme, diety of other theme may undo the change, but never completely - you cannot just spend Ap and say this didn't happen, but you can reduce the problem. Think of it this way - gunshot woud can be patched and heal, but it will leave a mark of it being on your body, sometiem very significant.

10) Gods of different themes can join any pantheon they way, even if it's not of their theme, they follow appriorate pantheon rules.

mystic1110

2013-05-20, 10:50 AM

Preaplanes

2013-05-20, 12:09 PM

Man on Fire

2013-05-20, 01:00 PM

What exactly is a "round"? A page? A month? A post? A week? A rollover?

In our game a round was one week, from 12 o'clock at Wensday to next week's Wensday, 12 o'clock - at start of next round points were resetting themselves. Don't know how you people call it these days.

Preaplanes

2013-05-20, 05:15 PM

In our game a round was one week, from 12 o'clock at Wensday to next week's Wensday, 12 o'clock - at start of next round points were resetting themselves. Don't know how you people call it these days.

Ah. TBS rules it's 1 week as well, though we called it a "rollover".

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-20, 05:17 PM

ArcturusV

2013-05-20, 09:24 PM

The issue I have with it, is that it kills off momentum on each Age Transition. One thing I've learned after years of Forum RPGs is that the moment momentum falters and people stop posting in the RPG for an unusual break, it is generally on its last legs. It is not going to recover.

Not saying it would necessarily be lethal. But telling everyone to stop for a week (Or more as you take time to hash out Age Themes and Bidding after recruitment), just seems like it's something where you'll lose momentum, players, and possibly kill it off on one of those breaks.

Probably needs a swifter resolution. Keep Recruitment open, always. But only allow people to jump into the game say, every Saturday or something. And try to base your recruitment around that. Say every fourth week/recruitment cycle is where the new Age starts, and people recruited during the month get to be the New Kids of the Age.

mystic1110

2013-05-20, 09:26 PM

Elemental

2013-05-21, 12:25 AM

When I get back from work (I haz real job now :smallbiggrin:) I'll get right on it!!

Huzzah! Employment!
Anyway... I shall look forward to the vote which should begin at around seven tomorrow morning if I am correct.

Queen Sapes

2013-05-21, 02:20 AM

Just something I'd like to suggest, and sorry if others have already suggested it or if it's already been talked about, but I'd like to see the two starting domains play a bigger role. My idea was to allow for a player to name one or two abilities they create themselves for their good that relays to their starting domains.

For example, a god who has the domain Life (Presevation) could be able to sense when and where life is in danger currently. Or if their domain is Luck (Probability), they could calculate the potential probabilities of any number of events occurring at whatever given time.

Perhaps a deity could even have two, such as a god of Time (Flow) and Travel (Planar) could see all events that would occur in the timeline except for the acts performed by other gods. And they could also view all realities that split off of the point in time they currently reside in.

The ability in question of course would have to be approved by the person in charge of the game, but I think it would add a fun addition to the game, and grant better roleplaying opportunities.

mystic1110

2013-05-21, 08:16 AM

OK these are the issues up for vote so far.

Bless/Curse (Omen/Word) System

Variable power; OR
1 AP for anytype of Bless/Curse

Pantheon System

The family type system with no AP, no combat ;
family type system with AP, no combat ; OR
Keep system as is, no combat bonuses, but rules of shared alignment.

Theme system

Choose theme at the beggining of the game;
Choose theme at the beggining of each "age"; OR
None

Doom System;

As proposed by Electrivilla;
similar to the one in the game "gods of mortals (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=279695)"; Or
None

RCR System;

A "fixed" version of the one in "Blankest Slate"
As in original system as in "Originators of Divine Law;" OR
Other/compromise

RCR Lose System;

As in original system as in "Originators of Divine Law;"
"Can't Counter Only;" OR
Other/compromise

Relics/Artifacts;

Relics can only grant RCR bonus or thematic bonus;
Relics can grant RCR bonus or AP reduction of sometype;OR
Relics can only grant thematic bonus

Hero Progession

Hero --> Legend Progression as in my last draft; OR
Hero/Leader --> Seeker --> Legend progression as in first draft.

Infusions

1 Infusion per divine level; OR
1 Infusion per ever odd divine level

What can infusions do (AKA which actions do you want to be in the game)

Evolve Physically (extra 1 AP per rollover)
Divine Decree (basically a SUPER curse/bless (word/omen))
Break the Chains (break the material plane only for fledging god rule)
Monumnet (SUPER relice)
Any mix of the above
NONE of the above

Society Progression

Age type system;
Ap action of society. Nation seperate action. organization seperate action;
Ap action of society --> Nation --> organization; OR
Ap action of society --> Nation. Organization seperate action.

Upkeep system

Pay upkeep on society
Pay upkeep on nation
pay upkeep on organization
any mix of the above
None of the above

Races/Concept System

Variable power; OR
X AP for anytype of Races/Concept

====

i'm sure I forgot other points of contention :smallfrown:

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-21, 10:32 AM

OK these are the issues up for vote so far.

Bless/Curse (Omen/Word) System

Variable power; OR
1 AP for anytype of Bless/Curse

Pantheon System

The family type system with no AP, no combat ;
family type system with AP, no comibat ; OR
Keep system as is, no combat bonuses, but rules of shared alignment.

Theme system

Choose theme at the beggining of the game;
Choose theme at the beggining of each "age"; OR
None

Doom System;

As proposed by Electrivilla;
similar to the one in the game "gods of mortals (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=279695)"; Or
None

RCR System;

A "fixed" version of the one in "Blankest Slate"
As in original system as in "Originators of Divine Law;" OR
Other/compromise

RCR Lose System;

As in original system as in "Originators of Divine Law;"
"Can't Counter Only;" OR
Other/compromise

Relics/Artifacts;

Relics can only grant RCR bonus or thematic bonus;
Relics can grant RCR bonus or AP reduction of sometype;OR
Relics can only grant thematic bonus

Hero Progession

Hero --> Legend Progression as in my last draft; OR
Hero/Leader --> Seeker --> Legend progression as in first draft.

Infusions

1 Infusion per divine level; OR
1 Infusion per ever odd divine level

What can infusions do (AKA which actions do you want to be in the game)

Evolve Physically (extra 1 AP per rollover)
Divine Decree (basically a SUPER curse/bless (word/omen))
Break the Chains (break the material plane only for fledging god rule)
Monumnet (SUPER relice)
Any mix of the above
NONE of the above

Society Progression

Age type system;
Ap action of society. Nation seperate action. organization seperate action;
Ap action of society --> Nation --> organization; OR
Ap action of society --> Nation. Organization seperate action.

Upkeep system

Pay upkeep on society
Pay upkeep on nation
pay upkeep on organization
any mix of the above
None of the above

Races/Concept System

Variable power; OR
X AP for anytype of Races/Concept

====

i'm sure I forgot other points of contention :smallfrown:

14. Divine abilities.

1. Yes like in current rules
2. Yes, but tied to domains as presented by Elricaltovilla
3. No
4. Alternative idea for abilities

15. Banning gods from the mortal realm

1. Anyone above fledgeling
2. Anyone above fledgeling but allow break the chains
3. No gods banned
-----------
Also, you spelled my name wrong mystic :smalltongue:

EDIT: I have a very detailed argument against the banning the gods from the mortal world rule, but I'm on my phone so I'll postpone posting it until I get home from work.

rweird

2013-05-21, 04:42 PM

Bless/Curse (Omen/Word) System
2, I don't understand how scaling power works, and have a feeling that'd make the cost really high and invite curse wars. I like the Scourge/Boon in addition too though.

Pantheons: Don't know.

Theme system: Not 2, don't care otherwise.

Doom:
Don't understand Gods and Mortal's Doom system. Not voting yet.

RCR System:
Depends on what the fixed system is. Not voting yet.

RCR Lose System: 3, more options, and the Originators of Divine Law system requires you to adopt to much else.

Relics/Artifacts;
Cost reductions should be limited somehow, I think to half base cost rounding up, 1&2 assuming cost reduction restrictions.

Hero Progession: Not sure yet, don't remember either all that well. Not voting yet.

Infusions: Proposing 3rd option, 1/divine rank, though only half rounded down can be Monuments or Decrees.

What can infusions do (AKA which actions do you want to be in the game)
All of the above, though check OoC first for a Monument or Divine Decree.

Society Progression: Don't understand what you mean.

Upkeep: Against 1&2, don't really care if Organizations have upkeeps, though if they do, I don't think the should be scaling.

Races/Concept System: 1, I think that arcane magic should cost more than getting pointy sticks.

Milo v3

2013-05-21, 08:34 PM

Bless/Curse (Omen/Word) System

1 AP for anytype of Bless/Curse

Pantheon System

Keep system as is, no combat bonuses, but rules of shared alignment.

Theme system

Choose theme at the beggining of each "age"

Doom System;

I'm got no idea what this is? Could someone explain it to me?

Relics/Artifacts;

Relics can only grant RCR bonus or thematic bonus;

Hero Progession

Hero/Leader --> Seeker --> Legend progression as in first draft.

Infusions

1 Infusion per ever odd divine level

What can infusions do (AKA which actions do you want to be in the game)

Evolve Physically (extra 1 AP per rollover)
Divine Decree (basically a SUPER curse/bless (word/omen))
Break the Chains (break the material plane only for fledging god rule)
Monumnet (SUPER relice)
Any mix of the above

Society Progression

Ap action of society --> Nation --> organization

Upkeep system

None of the above

Races/Concept System

Variable power

Divine abilities.

No, I think that should be fulfilled by flavour

Banning gods from the mortal realm

Anyone above fledgeling but allow break the chains

Queen Sapes

2013-05-21, 09:14 PM

Bless/Curse (Omen/Word) System

Variable power

Pantheon System

family type system with AP, no combat

Theme system

None

Doom System;

As proposed by Electrivilla

RCR System;

Other/compromise

RCR Lose System;

Other/compromise

Relics/Artifacts;

Relics can only grant RCR bonus or thematic bonus;

Hero Progression

Hero/Leader --> Seeker --> Legend progression as in first draft.

Infusions

1 Infusion per ever odd divine level

What can infusions do (AKA which actions do you want to be in the game)

Evolve Physically (extra 1 AP per rollover)
Break the Chains (break the material plane only for fledgling god rule)
Monument (SUPER relic)
Any mix of the above

Society Progression

Ap action of society --> Nation. Organization seperate action.

Upkeep system

pay upkeep on organization

Races/Concept System

Variable power

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-21, 10:04 PM

OK these are the issues up for vote so far.

Bless/Curse (Omen/Word) System

Variable power

Pantheon System

family type system with AP, no combat bonus

Theme system

Choose theme at the beggining of each "age"

Doom System;

As proposed by Elricaltovilla (only if no Age System)

RCR System;

A "fixed" version of the one in "Blankest Slate"

RCR Lose System;

"Can't Counter Only"

Relics/Artifacts;

Relics can only grant RCR bonus or thematic bonus

Hero Progession

Hero/Leader --> Seeker --> Legend progression as in first draft.

Infusions

1 Infusion per ever odd divine level

What can infusions do (AKA which actions do you want to be in the game)

Divine Decree (basically a SUPER curse/bless (word/omen))
Break the Chains (break the material plane only for fledging god rule) (Contingent upon banishment of elder gods, which I think is a bad idea)

Society Progression

Age type system;

Upkeep system

pay upkeep on organization

Races/Concept System

Variable power; OR

Divine abilities.

Yes, but tied to domains as presented by Elricaltovilla

Banning gods from the mortal realm

No gods banned

=====================

Elricaltovilla's Doom System
Every AP your god spends adds to his/her doom counter. Each week, you roll 1d100, if you roll less than your doom counter, your doom activates.

A doom is a 5 AP Curse that affects a random area (determined by mod or dice?) or people and is thematically tied to your god's original two domains. You are responsible for writing up the post unleashing your doom and dealing with the fallout of that doom.

You can choose to unleash your doom early, if done so the Curse action is equal to 1/10th of your Doom counter, minimum 1 and maximum 3. If you choose to unleash your doom, you can choose the target of your doom.

Why Gods Should Be Allowed to Walk the Earth

There is no Real Life mythological support for banning powerful deities.

Odin Thor and Loki often walked among mortals, Zeus and Apollo went around procreating with every single mildly attractive greek woman, and Horus, Ra and Osiris spent plenty of time in egypt.

It doesn't encourage players to expand the outer spheres.

Any player that wants to make extra planes is going to do so regardless, and any player that doesn't give a crap about extraplanar travels isn't going to change their mind because you force their hand.

Players who want their gods to be on the mortal plane will always find some way to weasel out of being banished.

Whether by focusing on their demigods, breaking the chains, building a relic or just only sending messengers, elder gods will get around being blocked from the mortal plane and trying to stop them from doing so just encourages them to leave the game once they can no longer frolic with their mortal flock.

It encourages "backwards" universe construction.

In most mythologies, the mortal world is the last world constructed, by putting weaker gods on the mortal plane, you encourage making the mortal plane first, when by most logic the mortal plane only functions because all the other planes of existence are already present to set up the physical laws of the Mortal Realm.

It weakens players that try to maintain a close connection to their mortals, encouraging bullying of players that deliberately slow down their deific growth to stay close to their mortals, making them the easiest targets, when they didn't do anything to deserve being targeted.

Elemental

2013-05-21, 11:24 PM

Bless/Curse (Omen/Word) System

Variable power
(By which I assume you mean scourge/boon and bless/curse?)

Pantheon System

The family type system with no AP, no combat

Theme system

Choose theme at the beginning of each "age"; OR

Doom System;

As proposed by Elricaltovilla

RCR System;

Abstaining because I've used it less than three times in all my games.

RCR Lose System;

Which was the one you proposed at the end of page nine?

Relics/Artifacts;

Relics can only grant thematic bonus

Hero Progession

Hero --> Legend Progression as in my last draft
(But limit their maximum AP to four so it doesn't get ridiculous.)

Infusions

1 Infusion per divine level; OR

What can infusions do (AKA which actions do you want to be in the game)

Divine Decree (basically a SUPER curse/bless (word/omen))
Monument (SUPER relic)

Society Progression

Age type system;
Ap action of society --> Nation. Organization separate action.
(Not sure what you meant here... So I selected both.)

Upkeep system

Pay upkeep on nation

Races/Concept System

Variable power

The additions by Elricaltovilla which I agree need to be decided upon:

14. Divine abilities.

1. Yes like in current rules
(I think we can rely on the players to choose fitting abilities without having to tie them all to a domain.)

15. Banning gods from the mortal realm

1. Anyone above lesser

Why I disagree with Elricaltovilla
1. And they all departed eventually for one reason or another.
A fledgling God among mortals is a major part of their world, one doesn't need to be an Elder to hurl lightning bolts, change shape, bring forth plagues and get into affairs with everyone they remotely feel like.
I feel like the current rules support the mythological histories of the Gods eventually leaving the mortal world after teaching and guiding their peoples.

2. And how is that different from usual? Most mythologies point to the gods making this or that paradise or hell and then spending all their time watching over the mortals, whether that be out of kindness, pity or a desire to thwart one another.

3. Which is echoed in so many mythologies and religions. The gods have always sent messengers and agents to do their bidding, whether they be Valkyries, Angels, Demons or people wearing ridiculous hats.

4. If that so bothers you, maybe we should ban the construction of anything on the mortal plane for the first week? That way people will be encouraged to do something with other planes or the Void. And then at the first rollover, the Sun dawns on a new world, unless someone decides to make a Sun to dawn, at which point, the Sun dawns on a new world shortly after rollover.
Actually... I quite like this idea, what do you think?

5. Well... One can't argue with that point. On the other hand, the mortal plane is a sanctuary against the more powerful Gods. After all... Isn't that the traditional place for lesser gods to hide from the wrath of those more powerful than themselves?

ArcturusV

2013-05-22, 03:10 AM

Bless/Curse (Omen/Word) System

I'll cast my vote for variable power. 1 AP for singular target stuff. E.g: "I turn Barnabus Jones into a pillar of salt" is a 1 AP action. Wide dispersal stuff is 2 AP "I bless the land of Lorn with gentle seasons and bountiful crops".

Pantheon System

I'd say to have a family system with AP benefits but no combat benefits. Rather than the AP benefits being "Free AP" rather it be something like like free sharing. So that you can share Concepts with others in your pantheon for free (But not with the entire world if you don't want to), mass blessings/curses can apply to everyone under the protection of pantheon, etc.

Theme system

Going to go with "Ages". Possible with some revision.

Doom System;

No particularly strong feeling. I'll have to see it in action.

RCR System;

Going to go with something else on this one. Not sure I like any of the solutions posed so far, they seem to have problems on the conceptual/execution side of things, where what RCR is supposed to achieve conceptually isn't matching up with what it does mechanical execution.

RCR Lose System;

I'm going to suggest another option. I kinda liked what I proposed earlier. But I think we can do better than the options currently on the table as well.

Relics/Artifacts;

I'm going to go with RCR bonuses or Thematic bonuses. These Thematic bonuses should be closer to what I suggested earlier, like giving free concepts that are fixed unless you use an Alter Relic action or the like.

Hero Progression

I'm going for Hero/Leader -> Seeker -> Legend progression with Heroes and Leaders having fundamentally different roles.

Infusions

Hmm. Going to go with neither really. Infusions seem to be something that everyone has a huge problem with. I don't think the number of infusions is so much the issue as what people can/do accomplish with them. In that regard I'd say nix all Infusion references and rules. A Cosmic Decree could be closer a "Super Bless/Curse". Monuments could just be a thing limited to 1 per deity only. Divine Infusions could just be a flat AP expenditure for RCR bonuses. Might want to balance it out by Burn Out, say something like you can throw in 5 AP to divinely infuse something (Relic, Artifact, Order, Hero, etc) giving it triple the usual bonus to RCR, but afterwards it's destroyed or must be repaired with some AP spent before it can be properly used again.

What can infusions do (AKA which actions do you want to be in the game)

I basically covered this above. Though I think Break the Chains should be nixed off the board. A god can either ascend or remain on the mortal coil, not both. This also would force more development and play in the extraplanar realms, which doesn't sound like a bad thing at all.

Society Progression

I'd suggest the Society, Organization, Nation AP actions as separate actions. Don't like the Maintenance thing. Ages sound like a nice concept. But I probably wouldn't suggest it. Too dependent on the particular temperaments of the players involved. Likely to result in bad times.

Upkeep system

No problem with upkeep, but the compromise candidate for me would be a scale based on Time and Concepts. As long as a society/nation is growing, it is maintained. It's when it stagnates that it starts to decline. So something like that you need to spend 1 AP per week for every Society, Nation, and Order you control on CONCEPTS that they use. If you fail to put up that much, your society is in Unrest next week. If you fail to pay that much the week after there is a state of anarchy and you lose what you didn't pay for. So if you have 3 Orders, 2 Societies, 1 Nation, and only pay up 4 AP per week, you'll end up having to (after 2 weeks), drop two of those, lost and gone forever.

Allow other gods to help cover you by paying in concepts to your society or with Open Concepts. So if some god creates Arcane Magic for 7 AP and shares it with everyone, bam, you're covered for 7 maintenance AP for the week.

Races/Concept System

I prefer variable costs myself. I just don't see why a Vulcan should be the same price as a Vorlon.

ShadowFireLance

2013-05-22, 03:18 AM

I'm going to overhaul the entire game, and make a subshoot, more focused on Combat, and a little more complex.
Just to let you guys know.

mystic1110

2013-05-22, 09:14 AM

I'm going to overhaul the entire game, and make a subshoot, more focused on Combat, and a little more complex.
Just to let you guys know.

Sure i would play that. It would be interesting to see what happens.

I would also like someone to run a god-game world-building game with no rules whatsoever, only thematic sense and good faith by the players. I envision that it would be disaterous but again it would be an interesting test.

Also also: more votes people!!

Man on Fire

2013-05-22, 10:51 AM

1 Blees/Curse: Variable power
2 Pantheon: family type system with AP, no combat
3 Themes: Choose theme at the beggining of each "age"
4 Doom System: None
5 RCR System: Other/compromise
6 RCR Lose System: Can't Counter Only
7 Relics: Relics can only grant thematic bonus
8 Heroes: No vote
9 Infusions: 1 Infusion per divine level
10 What Can Infusion Do: Any mix of the above (As in, "Choose ONE!" each time you do an infusion)
11 Age type system
12 None of the Above*
13 Races/Concept System Variable power
14 Divine Abilities: Yes, but tied to domains as presented by Elricaltovilla
15 Banning Gods fro mthe mortal realm: Anyone above fledgeling but allow break the chains

* - I would like to point out my suggestion for prostponded upkeep and/or phases has been ignored.

mystic1110

2013-05-22, 10:53 AM

* - I would like to point out my suggestion for prostponded upkeep and/or phases has been ignored.

No it hasn't? Isn't that what the choice of age type system under society was?

Man on Fire

2013-05-22, 12:19 PM

No it hasn't? Isn't that what the choice of age type system under society was?

I though it reffered to Elricaltovilla's idea of Ages, I was even going to point out how people can vote for "themes at start of each age" but not for Age system. My bad, sorry.

mystic1110

2013-05-22, 12:31 PM

I though it reffered to Elricaltovilla's idea of Ages, I was even going to point out how people can vote for "themes at start of each age" but not for Age system. My bad, sorry.

Wait I'm confused. . .

The age system for society was basically that the longer a society is around the more advance it gets

The age system for Theme system was that gods may only join every other week - and before they make their god, the week before palyers vote for what they want the next age to represent. So the game starts of high fantasy so each god is high fantasy based. next week they vote grimdark - so the next batch of gods will be grim dark the week after that they vote scifi- and so on and so on

Man on Fire

2013-05-22, 12:55 PM

Wait I'm confused. . .

The age system for society was basically that the longer a society is around the more advance it gets

The age system for Theme system was that gods may only join every other week - and before they make their god, the week before palyers vote for what they want the next age to represent. So the game starts of high fantasy so each god is high fantasy based. next week they vote grimdark - so the next batch of gods will be grim dark the week after that they vote scifi- and so on and so on

I don't think these are appriorate describtions of either of those things, not in ways I proposed them at least.

What I'm talking about for societies was the idea of "Expansion-Stagnation-Decay" phases.

Ages for themes worked quite differently in my proposal - there are moments where players join and before that they choose new theme - but only new ones, the old ones stay with their old theme to repreent conflict between generations.

ShadowFireLance

2013-05-22, 12:55 PM

mystic1110

2013-05-22, 01:16 PM

Ages for themes worked quite differently in my proposal - there are moments where players join and before that they choose new theme - but only new ones, the old ones stay with their old theme to repreent conflict between generations.

Thats what I meant :smallredface:

mystic1110

2013-05-22, 01:20 PM

...Sounds awesome. I'm doing something of that in LoD, So...It might be a bit simlilar.

LoD? Lords of Destruction :smallwink:? Link to that game please :smallsmile:

ShadowFireLance

2013-05-22, 01:23 PM

LoD? Lords of Destruction :smallwink:? Link to that game please :smallsmile:

Lords of Divnity.
Its the offshot of this game, I'm overhauling this system to make it a little more complex and a little more..oh, whats the word, more focused on mortals then the other games.

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-22, 01:32 PM

LoD? Lords of Destruction :smallwink:? Link to that game please :smallsmile:

Can we make lords of destruction too? I totally want in on the mayhem.

mystic1110

2013-05-22, 01:33 PM

Lords of Divnity.
Its the offshot of this game, I'm overhauling this system to make it a little more complex and a little more..oh, whats the word, more focused on mortals then the other games.

That certainly one way to see what works best. I would even recomend everyone to run there own games - come back here and say what worked and what didn't.

Anyway: plea to those people who didn't vote yet. Please Vote :smallsmile:!

mystic1110

2013-05-22, 01:35 PM

Can we make lords of destruction too? I totally want in on the mayhem.

What would that be lol; Like LOC, but ONLY RCR bonuses, if you lose RCR your god automatically dies, and all your creations are stolen/destroyed, and no blesses? :smalltongue:

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-22, 01:37 PM

What would that be lol; Like LOC, but ONLY RCR bonuses, if you lose RCR your god automatically dies, and all your creations are stolen/destroyed, and no blesses? :smalltongue:

No. Give me some credit mystic, or at least the benefit of the doubt.

ShadowFireLance

2013-05-22, 01:38 PM

What would that be lol; Like LOC, but ONLY RCR bonuses, if you lose RCR your god automatically dies, and all your creations are stolen/destroyed, and no blesses? :smalltongue:

Sounds amazing, I want to play something like that.

Man on Fire

2013-05-22, 01:39 PM

Lords of Destruction could be some sort of expansion to make wrecking stuff in the setting easier.

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-22, 01:43 PM

Lords of Destruction could be some sort of expansion to make wrecking stuff in the setting easier.

Yes. And we sell the rules in randomized booster packs of twelve 3" x 5" cards with randomized rarity ratings for people to collect. :smalltongue::smalltongue::smalltongue:

mystic1110

2013-05-22, 01:51 PM

:
No. Give me some credit mystic, or at least the benefit of the dout.
:smallfrown:

Sounds amazing, I want to play something like that.
:smallbiggrin:

Lords of Destruction could be some sort of expansion to make wrecking stuff in the setting easier.
:smallamused:

So.... one more thread in addition to this one working out what LoD would be like?

ShadowFireLance

2013-05-22, 01:56 PM

:
:smallfrown:

:smallbiggrin:

:smallamused:

So.... one more thread in addition to this one working out what LoD would be like?

Please don't steal the LoD....:smallfrown:

mystic1110

2013-05-22, 02:01 PM

Fun glib intro/rules I wrote while i'm bored at work :smallbiggrin:

Lords of Destruction

Do you think you're GOD enough for this game? This isn't some collabaroative fun time you PUNK! This is LORDS OF DESTRUCTION, where if you lose you DIE!

Unlike other god games, there are winners and losers. If you become engaged in divine combat and lose: SUCKS FOR YOU! Game over. Make a new character and apply again for all we care. If you win? ALL THE BASEARE BELONG TO YOU!

Other than that it's like a regular God Game. The point is to build a setting. WAIT. Did I say build? I meant DESTROY!

Destruction for a Lord of Destruction is inherently easier. Want to make a new continent? Great 3 AP please. Want to burn one down to the ground? HAHA 2 AP! Want to give food to needy children? What are you, Mother Theresa? 3 AP. Burn them to Ash? 2 AP! Want to do something not burning? TOO BAD!

So I ask again: wanted to play that insane blood soaked god? Here is your best chance! But also do you want to play the greatest defender of mortals the world has ever seen? THIS IS YOUR GREATEST CHALLENGE!

Can you RISE UP to be a LORD OF DESTRUCTION!

rules

Every god starts out with 1 domain/protfolio - all of your creation/destruction must be thematically linked to that domain and/or portfolio.

Ap actions:

2 AP Boring creation: Want to make something? Anything? Well it costs 3 AP. A new plane? A new artifact? A Hero? A country? A religion? ANYTHING! As long what you make is thematically linked to your domains

1 AP Awesome Destruction: Want to destroy something? Anything? YOU GO IT. No room for whining in LoD. Somebody doesn't want you destroying the planet? Sucks for them. Blow it up! They can always make a new one. You can destroy anything! As long as how you destory is thematically linked to your domains.

3 AP New Domain: So you're the god of fire and you want a new domain to play with? Alright. You may take a new domain after using 4 boring creation actions. Sorry Awesome Destruction is cool and all but no domain for you. You need to use 4 more actions before using this action again

Pantheons? Puh lease - Lords of destruction only have mutually assured destruction pacts.

Every god starts off with 10 AP and gets 2 + amount of domains he/she has per rollover.

RCR:

RCR is simple upon creation each god rolls for HP (lets say 5d6). Then in battle each player rolls 1d6 for attack and 1d6 for defense. You lose life equal to opponents attack minus your defense. Once you lost this life it does not regenrate at rollover. Each domain gives you +2 to your attack OR defense OR 1d6 more HP (even the free one!) YOU MUST CHOOSE WHAT THE DOMAIN GIVES YOU BEFORE YOU STSRT THE GAME AND EACH TIME YOU GET A NEW DOMAIN. Boring creation can give you an artifact that will give you +1 to attack or defense or even allow you to add 1d6 to your HP. You can only have 2 artifacts per domain.

Awesome destruction actions can be used to give yourself +1 to attack damage. YOu can only use this once per combat!

When you lose RCR you DIE, and the winning god can decide to do whatever he/she wants with anything you ever made.

You may give aid to another god, by adding your attack roll to her attack roll, or by adding your defense roll to her defense roll. BUT you must spend a boring creation action first. Lords of destruction do not normally offer help to the weak, they prefer to let another god die honarably rather than save them shamefully.

=====

There simple

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-22, 03:28 PM

Please don't steal the LoD....:smallfrown:

How about:

Gods of Destruction?

Deities of Destruction?

Pantheons of Destruction?

Destroyers of Destruction?

:smalltongue:

And mystic, I didn't mean to imply that I thought you were insulting me, I just think that I can do better than "destroy the destroying destroyers with lots of destruction."

Not that that wouldn't be all kinds of epic :smallbiggrin:

Man on Fire

2013-05-22, 03:41 PM

That certainly one way to see what works best. I would even recomend everyone to run there own games - come back here and say what worked and what didn't.

Maybe you could start one once we're done? I would be happy to play, especially if one of my ideas sees it through.

mystic1110

2013-05-22, 03:45 PM

How about:

Gods of Destruction?

Deities of Destruction?

Pantheons of Destruction?

Destroyers of Destruction?

:smalltongue:

And mystic, I didn't mean to imply that I thought you were insulting me, I just think that I can do better than "destroy the destroying destroyers with lots of destruction."

Not that that wouldn't be all kinds of epic :smallbiggrin:

Refer to the post above yours with the entire RCR/AP/DOMAIN rules of Lords of destruction :smallwink: (actually they look fun :smalltongue:)

Maybe you could start one once we're done? I would be happy to play, especially if one of my ideas sees it through.

I would love to play in one with whatever rules we decide upon , but I realized after modding alot of game: I'm not great at it :smallfrown:

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-22, 03:53 PM

Refer to the post above yours with the entire RCR/AP/DOMAIN rules of Lords of destruction :smallwink: (actually they look fun :smalltongue:)

I would love to play in one with whatever rules we decide upon , but I realized after modding alot of game: I'm not great at it :smallfrown:

You're a better MOD than I am, mystic. I think the game could benefit a lot from more... assertive? moderation though. Don't be afraid to put your foot down :smallsmile:

Maybe giving MODs a list of pre approved (I hate using this word) punishments for people trying to screw with the rules/other players would help MODs both new and old be more assertive.

Betrayer

2013-05-22, 03:55 PM

I would definitely play that game. Could be fun to start in the world recently abandoned by say, some lords of creation...

Also, serious incentive not to go to RCR, as you could die. Which is good. Presumably you can't destroy other people's artifacts without their consent?

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-22, 03:58 PM

mystic1110

2013-05-22, 04:02 PM

Actually no: there would be no limit to what you can destroy. GOD :smalltongue: (Gods of Destruction - allowing ShadowFireLance to keep LoD :smallsmile:) is not about consent - its about trying really hard not to piss anyone else off. No OoC arguements, someone destroys something of yours you can KILL him, hell other players might kill him so he wont destroy anything of theirs.

No whining allowed :smallcool:, if you want to protect something, you better make alliances or protect it your goddamn self :smallamused:.

I limited the arms race by tying artifact/relic creation to how many domains you have and requiring you to make 4 things before taking a new domain.

Also i varied the attack/hp/defense stuff by allowing you to specialize with each domain and artifact.

Anyway i thought of those rules in like 10 minutes. We can test them out whenever - but they look BRUTALly fun :smalltongue:

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-22, 04:07 PM

Actually no: there would be no limit to what you can destroy. DD (Divine Destruction - allowing ShadowFireLance to keep LoD :smallsmile:) is not about consent - its about trying really hard not to piss anyone else off. No OoC arguements, someone destroys something of yours you can KILL him, hell other players might kill him so he wont destroy anything of theirs.

No whining allowed :smallcool:, if you want to protect something, you better make alliances or protect it your goddamn self :smallamused:.

I limited the arms race by tying artifact/relic creation to how many domains you have and requiring you to make 4 things before taking a new domain.

Also i varied the attack/hp/defense stuff by allowing you to specialize with each domain and artifact.

Anyway i thought of those rules in like 10 minutes. We can test them out whenever - but they look BRUTALly fun :smalltongue:

If I was going to make one change to this, I'd say instead of each fight be a one off, have them last 3 rounds. That way somebody can get lucky, or try to run away like the dirty rotten stinking coward they are :smalltongue:

mystic1110

2013-05-22, 04:13 PM

I guess since I included HP they could go on till one person DIES, BEGS FOR MERCY, CALLS IN BACKUP or FLEES LIKE SOME LORD OF CREATION.

Rizban

2013-05-22, 04:15 PM

If I was going to make one change to this, I'd say instead of each fight be a one off, have them last 3 rounds. That way somebody can get lucky, or try to run away like the dirty rotten stinking coward they are :smalltongue:Three rounds? That sounds suspiciously like the revised original rules concerning combat. :smalltongue:
Original rule was one round only, but I quickly had them revised to three rounds with allies only providing Aid in a single round each time they spend AP to provide Aid. They could, of course, use the Aid action in each round, spending AP each time, to provide Aid.

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-22, 04:22 PM

Three rounds? That sounds suspiciously like the revised original rules concerning combat. :smalltongue:
Original rule was one round only, but I quickly had them revised to three rounds with allies only providing Aid in a single round each time they spend AP to provide Aid. They could, of course, use the Aid action in each round, spending AP each time, to provide Aid.

Yes, that is where I got the idea. Originally I was going to suggest something more complicated, like 1 round per God Level your oponent has over you. So a Fledgeling vs. Intermediate would have to win 2 rounds of combat to win the fight, but the Intermediate would only have to win 1.

Asahel24601

2013-05-22, 04:22 PM

How do I join this game (Lords of Creation)? Do I pm someone, or post on a certain thread?

mystic1110

2013-05-22, 04:24 PM

Fixed. Gods fight till they Die, and if anyone wants to help:

You may give aid to another god, by adding your attack roll to her attack roll, or by adding your defense roll to her defense roll. BUT you must spend a boring creation action first. Lords of destruction do not normally offer help to the weak, they prefer to let another god die honarably rather than save them shamefully.

Let them. :smallbiggrin:

=====

hell i think i might start a GOD game soon. Honestly I think It will be ridiculous, but. . . . it's so simple and hilarious, I would love it if it actually amounts to anything.

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-22, 04:26 PM

How do I join this game (Lords of Creation)? Do I pm someone, or post on a certain thread?

Follow these Recruitment Threads:

Lords of Creation, Originators of Divine Law (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=283976) (uses "revised original rules")

Lords of Creation, The Blankes Slate (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=278826) (uses latest set of rules, which we are in the process of revising in this thread)

Milo v3

2013-05-22, 06:23 PM

ShadowFireLance

2013-05-22, 06:32 PM

I'm also probably going to start recruiting for a game (using the latest edition of the rules) as well.

Sweet, i'm going to join that one too!

Rizban

2013-05-22, 08:48 PM

From past experience, I can say that there's usually a limited player base for LoC. The more games running concurrently, the less likely it is for any of them to survive. With the turnover rates, dividing the player base across multiple games detracts from them all.

There was even a time several years ago when one particular person, whose name I won't mention, deliberately would create multiple LoC games when others were going on and try to recruit the players away just to kill off the other games.

mystic1110

2013-05-22, 08:51 PM

Rizban

2013-05-22, 08:52 PM

With two games going on already, I'd hate to see more new ones started up...

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-22, 08:54 PM

Clearly the answer is to mind control the Forum Mods to require every forum member to belong to an LoC game or forfeit their membership:smalltongue:

This is a joke, please don't banhammer me

Rizban

2013-05-22, 08:58 PM

I dunno... I mean, there's some people I'm not sure I'd want to play LoC with...

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-22, 09:01 PM

I dunno... I mean, there's some people I'm not sure I'd want to play LoC with...

That's the beauty of it though, there'd be so many games the chances of you having to play with those people would go down significantly. And if any of them stumbled into your game, there'd always be new recruiting threads so that people didn't lose their forum membership.

Milo v3

2013-05-22, 09:23 PM

From past experience, I can say that there's usually a limited player base for LoC. The more games running concurrently, the less likely it is for any of them to survive. With the turnover rates, dividing the player base across multiple games detracts from them all.
That's one of the reasons I said probably rather than specifically say that I would.

There was even a time several years ago when one particular person, whose name I won't mention, deliberately would create multiple LoC games when others were going on and try to recruit the players away just to kill off the other games.
I didn't even know about that.

Man on Fire

2013-05-23, 10:03 AM

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-23, 03:16 PM

What the heck? Why would anybody do that? No, really, why?

And we could always start the game on different forums. If anything, I may try it on the forums I played first game, once this edition is done.

You should definitely do that. Spread the love, share the pain :smalltongue:

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-27, 03:42 PM

So is this project done? Have votes been tallied? Did Preaplanes finish their new RCR system (last I checked it was in pre-alpha).

Preaplanes

2013-05-27, 04:50 PM

1. Bless/Curse (Omen/Word) System
1. Variable power.
2. Pantheon System
1. The family type system with no AP, no combat ; alliances provide combat bonuses
3. Theme system
1. Choose theme at the beggining of each "age"; OR
2. None
4. Doom System;
1. None
5. RCR System;
1. A "fixed" version of the one in "Blankest Slate"
6. RCR Lose System;
1. Other/compromise: I really liked Myst's system. Whatever that was.
7. Relics/Artifacts;
1. Relics can only grant RCR bonus or thematic bonus;
8. Hero Progession
1. None of the above; make Seeker an automatic progression a free action after a certain number of posts as a Hero
9. Infusions
1. 1 Infusion per ever odd divine level
10. What can infusions do (AKA which actions do you want to be in the game)
1. Evolve Physically (extra 1 AP per rollover)
2. Break the Chains (break the material plane only for fledging god rule)
3. Monument (SUPER relic)
4. Any mix of the above
11. Society Progression
1. None of the above. We will need some way of gauging a society's power besides sheer number of concepts. A medical society may have RCR in a war, because after all infection and disease are the #1 wartime killers, but I don't think a bunch of healers with sticks would stand a good chance against a bunch of filthy savages with guns. Case in point: the Native Americans getting nearly wiped out by the Europeans despite being (overall) one of the two most medically minded peoples (again, overall, lots of tribes) on Earth. Yes yes, I know, not the most politically correct statement, but a historically accurate one.
12. Upkeep system
1. None
13. Races/Concept System
1. X AP for anytype of Races/Concept

And no, I haven't finished quite yet. Numbers didn't need much tweaking yet (damn I'm good), but I still need to know what we're doing about Nations and Societies and such. Not all nations would have the same chance against a God after all, so I need to know what's being done.

It's the Gods vs Mortals and the Mortals vs Mortals where things start to get... wonky, if not handled properly. So I need to know what's going on before I do anything further.

mystic1110

2013-05-27, 04:55 PM

So is this project done? Have votes been tallied? Did Preaplanes finish their new RCR system (last I checked it was in pre-alpha).

Sorry life is busy at the moment. I'll tally it up and make a "proposal" by the end of the week.

ShadowFireLance

2013-05-27, 10:59 PM

rweird

2013-05-28, 05:38 AM

Something also needs to be adressed.
Killing other gods.
Without consent. I understand that it may slightly go against normal ideals of
"Make teh game less fun for others" But I'm currently in a quite heated argument with a Mod in a different game over this.

I agree, killing other gods without the gods permission shouldn't be allowed, LoC is a collaborative world-building experience, not a game with PvP. Why do you think it should be allowed, and would would allowing it work?

I presume RCR, though that seems to encourage war-gods as other people mentioned, who now can just kill others.

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-28, 06:31 AM

I agree, killing other gods without the gods permission shouldn't be allowed, LoC is a collaborative world-building experience, not a game with PvP. Why do you think it should be allowed, and would would allowing it work?

I presume RCR, though that seems to encourage war-gods as other people mentioned, who now can just kill others.

*Gets on soapbox*

When I go around advocated more RCR, I'm not doing it to make the game less fun for everyone, I'm actually trying to make it more fun and more fair. War gods have their place. They represent a cosmic force that is just as fundamental as time, space, fire, light, death, and life.

For a long time now, gods of war have suffered the indignity of being playable but completely neutered by the player bases' knee jerk reaction to people being able to destroy their creations, which consists of whining at a MOD until they step in, or going to extraordinary lengths to protect their pet creations.

Destruction and conquest are things that happen, they generate the conflict necessary for a great worldbuilding project and leave behind all the fun ruins, temples, and cave systems that make adventuring possible.

Changes need to be made, both culturally and within the rules themselves to allow for players with destructive gods to play their gods to their fullest potential, just as we have empowered the gods of creation.

Thank you.

*Gets down from soapbox*

You would not believe how difficult it is to find a soapbox these days.

Rizban

2013-05-28, 06:50 AM

*Gets on soapbox*

When I go around advocated more RCR, I'm not doing it to make the game less fun for everyone, I'm actually trying to make it more fun and more fair. War gods have their place. They represent a cosmic force that is just as fundamental as time, space, fire, light, death, and life.

For a long time now, gods of war have suffered the indignity of being playable but completely neutered by the player bases' knee jerk reaction to people being able to destroy their creations, which consists of whining at a MOD until they step in, or going to extraordinary lengths to protect their pet creations.

Destruction and conquest are things that happen, they generate the conflict necessary for a great worldbuilding project and leave behind all the fun ruins, temples, and cave systems that make adventuring possible.

Changes need to be made, both culturally and within the rules themselves to allow for players with destructive gods to play their gods to their fullest potential, just as we have empowered the gods of creation.

Thank you.

*Gets down from soapbox*

You would not believe how difficult it is to find a soapbox these days.
I have to agree here. I've played in games where anyone could attack anyone else for any reason and games where no one could fight without permission. I much prefer the games where combat can occur without consent. I have never played a war god, but there are times where forcing someone else into combat is just worthwhile, whether it's because their mortals won't stop harassing yours or it's because they have something you want.

I've even played in a few games where character death was possible. In all of those games only one of them ever resulted in actual deaths, all of which were prearranged before combat started. In all other situations, no one ever even took much damage worth noting.

In the game where characters died, the first death was an NPC god run by the DM as an adversary meant to eventually be killed. The second was an actual player (and Mod) who allied closely with that NPC and tried to take over the universe with him to make everyone else follow his character's rules.
A group of something like 6 or 7 people teamed up and spent over 100 AP to kill off the NPC and start attacking the PC ally, who committed suicide outside of combat.
Another god (run by the same mod) spent her entire life making war on everyone and everything she could. Again, an alliance was formed to stop her, and she committed suicide to escape retribution.
These are the only deaths I have ever seen "caused" by combat when death was permitted, and the only "real" death caused by the rules was an NPC who was meant to die.

Still, the threat of forced combat with real penalties and an actual chance of death can be a meaningful game element that LoC has strayed very far away from. Removing that element, and for many iterations removing combat entirely, (among other things) has really seemed to have ingrained an almost paranoid meta atmosphere where anyone not "playing along" with the established order is instantly ostracized. The ability to force change on the creations and characters of others is something that I believe should have an important role in the game and should not be of limited utility in the rules or highly detrimental to anyone who wishes to pursue it.

Preaplanes

2013-05-28, 08:42 AM

mystic1110

2013-05-28, 08:57 AM

Listen to yourselves for a moment. "Forcing change" on other characters? There's a term for that: "God moding". And ironically, that ISN'T a good thing.

That's not god moding. . . god moding is you making a post like

"Me, God A does X"

And then me following that up with

"Haha Nope! You, God A does Y actually"

Preaplanes

2013-05-28, 09:13 AM

That's not god moding. . . god moding is you making a post like

"Me, God A does X"

And then me following that up with

"Haha Nope! You, God A does Y actually"

"My god Pacifist runs away"

"Haha Nope! Pacitist dies actually. System says so"

Not seeing much of a difference there, Myst.

mystic1110

2013-05-28, 09:32 AM

Preaplanes

2013-05-28, 09:47 AM

Difference between simply saying the other god dies and rolling for it.

But yes, for example turn to the my half joke/half OMG must play this idea of lords of destruction (or whatever we are calling it). While the system would allow a properly played war god, it would not allow a "pacifist god" - or actually it will, but I doubt the pacifist would remain alive that long (unless he somehow gets allies, makes pacts, pretends to be agressive by building power . . . etc).

Actually I like that. Makes you work for your pacifist god. Death encourages diplomacy :smallcool:

There isn't much of a difference if there's a distinct statistical disadvantage, Myst. If I say roll for it, you don't want to, too bad, it's RCR, and guess what? I want to kill your god, you don't want your god to die, that's a conflict. So your god dies, no choice in the matter, with a chance between "slim" and "statistically insignificant" of beating me. And without my system or one like it? It's between "slim" and "none at all".

Essentially: your god dies because I said so.

It also wouldn't allow much but War gods. It's like making a game where everybody's a beach bully breaking other guys' sand castles and beating them up. Not much point in actually making a sand castle in such a place, now is there?

Then you'll run into the same problem as before: an entire world of nothing interesting. Why would somebody join such a game? After a (short) while there won't even be anything to break anymore.

Death doesn't encourage diplomacy, it encourages "screw that game, I'll play something else."

ShadowFireLance

2013-05-28, 09:58 AM

I'm with RWeird and Shadow on this one. Killing gods without consent, big "No" in my book.

A god shows up that opposes mine, and mine is stronger, and I'm playing one that doesn't have any particular moral code? I'm killing him.

Listen to yourselves for a moment. "Forcing change" on other characters? There's a term for that: "God moding". And ironically, that ISN'T a good thing.

Whoa, Whoa whoa, I think people got my ideals wrong, I WANT to kill gods without consent.
it makes it a lot more real, and a little bit more like classical Mythology.

Preaplanes

2013-05-28, 10:00 AM

Whoa, Whoa whoa, I think people got my ideals wrong, I WANT to kill gods without consent.
it makes it a lot more real, and a little bit more like classical Mythology.

In classical mythology we don't have players who think something is unfair.

It's not like I don't know how to exploit a system to make sure it's unlikely I die. Hell, I've got the highest RCR in TBS, and I just gave away a Relic and a Monument! So it isn't that I don't trust my abilities, it's that I don't trust any system like that.

ShadowFireLance

2013-05-28, 10:02 AM

In classical mythology we don't have players who think something is unfair.

It may be unfair, But name ONE Mythology where the gods didn't kill each other.
It's meant as something to keep everyone else on their toes, and it severely annoys the "Gaah, Imma eat ya face" Kinda deities. THEY CAN'T DO ANYTHING.

mystic1110

2013-05-28, 10:04 AM

There isn't much of a difference if there's a distinct statistical disadvantage, Myst. If I say roll for it, you don't want to, too bad, it's RCR, and guess what? I want to kill your god, you don't want your god to die, that's a conflict. So your god dies, no choice in the matter, with a chance between "slim" and "statistically insignificant" of beating me. And without my system or one like it? It's between "slim" and "none at all".

Essentially: your god dies because I said so.

It also wouldn't allow much but War gods. It's like making a game where everybody's a beach bully breaking other guys' sand castles and beating them up. Not much point in actually making a sand castle in such a place, now is there?

Then you'll run into the same problem as before: an entire world of nothing interesting. Why would somebody join such a game? After a (short) while there won't even be anything to break anymore.

Death doesn't encourage diplomacy, it encourages "screw that game, I'll play something else."

I disagree. If death is a realistic possibility, I would guess that no one would want to die. Killing another god would be painting a target on your own back. Think of it like the cold war.

I make a sand castle, 8 other gods make their own sandcastles. If one god decides to start breaking them apart - you don't think the other 8 will destroy him?

In the same vein I make a sand castel, the other 8 gods make sand castels and start warring between each other. I can reamin pacifist/neutral whatever - through creative alliances or promises

mystic1110

2013-05-28, 10:05 AM

In classical mythology we don't have players who think something is unfair.

It's not like I don't know how to exploit a system to make sure it's unlikely I die. Hell, I've got the highest RCR in TBS, and I just gave away a Relic and a Monument! So it isn't that I don't trust my abilities, it's that I don't trust any system like that.

We're not talking about the system atm, we're still talking about the system goals.

Preaplanes

2013-05-28, 10:06 AM

It may be unfair, But name ONE Mythology where the gods didn't kill each other.
It's meant as something to keep everyone else on their toes, and it severely annoys the "Gaah, Imma eat ya face" Kinda deities. THEY CAN'T DO ANYTHING.

Judeo Christian mythology.

ShadowFireLance

2013-05-28, 10:09 AM

Judeo Christian mythology.

Name one that doesn't make me want to violate the forum rules.

Preaplanes

2013-05-28, 10:11 AM

Name one that doesn't make me want to violate the forum rules.

Mythologies people don't actually believe anymore? They're all like that.

Maybe there's a connection?

ShadowFireLance

2013-05-28, 10:13 AM

Mythologies people don't actually believe anymore? They're all like that.

Maybe there's a connection?

For example, Norse Mythology, People kill each other. Greek, Zeus Kills Chronos. Egyptian, Set Kills Osirus. Babylonian, Eu Kills that one guy!

Seriously, it would make the game better.

Preaplanes

2013-05-28, 10:22 AM

For example, Norse Mythology, People kill each other. Greek, Zeus Kills Chronos. Egyptian, Set Kills Osirus. Babylonian, Eu Kills that one guy!

Seriously, it would make the game better.

How is that better?

Again, pet peeve: For the love of god, it's KRONUS, not CHRONOS! They're TWO DIFFERENT GODS!

We're not talking about the system atm, we're still talking about the system goals.

Fine, and that would be a swell deterrant... if this wasn't forum based. First person to walk into the OOC? I'm killing. By the time the next guy arrives, that first guy is dead, and I'll RCR against guy 2.

Half the forum is dead by the time anybody can do anything about it. And if the same player can keep playing, making god after god, there's nothing to stop him from wiping out everybody else with the Law of Large Numbers on his side. If everybody's a Fledgling, there's nothing they can do about it. He wants to take that 1 in 2 chance? Fine, he'll just make a new god if he loses, no skin off his bones.

If it's a reversed thing, like the current sytem, where Rank and raw numbers are important? Well, imagine what kind of havoc somebody who maximized their RCR could wreak. Like me. If I went rogue and didn't start out late, I promise I'd have half the gods killed before they know what's going on. After all, gods aren't omniscient, they can't have any clue what's going on until I show up on their doorsteps!

What kind of mythology has such a revolving door pantheon where nothing remains the same? None.

I'm sorry, I don't really care how it's dressed up, god moding is god moding. And if you have a goal to create a system that advocates it? It's a terrible idea.

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-28, 10:42 AM

mystic1110

2013-05-28, 10:52 AM

Fine, and that would be a swell deterrant... if this wasn't forum based. First person to walk into the OOC? I'm killing. By the time the next guy arrives, that first guy is dead, and I'll RCR against guy 2.

Half the forum is dead by the time anybody can do anything about it. And if the same player can keep playing, making god after god, there's nothing to stop him from wiping out everybody else with the Law of Large Numbers on his side. If everybody's a Fledgling, there's nothing they can do about it. He wants to take that 1 in 2 chance? Fine, he'll just make a new god if he loses, no skin off his bones.

If it's a reversed thing, like the current sytem, where Rank and raw numbers are important? Well, imagine what kind of havoc somebody who maximized their RCR could wreak. Like me. If I went rogue and didn't start out late, I promise I'd have half the gods killed before they know what's going on. After all, gods aren't omniscient, they can't have any clue what's going on until I show up on their doorsteps!

.

Huh? How are you killing people without giving them a chance to roll or defend?

Again you are stuck thinking about the current RCR rules. Again just to use the lords of destruction idea of:

Everyone has 1d6 attack, 1d6 defense, 20 HP
Everyone starts with 1 domain. You can get more domains after X amount of AP.
Domains give you +2 to attack OR defense OR give you +2d6 extra HP
You can't heal HP lose unless you make get another domain and give yourself +2d6 HP
You can make artifacts to give you +1 to attack or defense or provide +1d6 HP
You can only make 2X artifacts where X is the amount of domains you have.
You can give aid to another god by paying X AP. Aid to another god would effectively be adding your attack or defense roll to their attack or defense roll.

Regardless of the balance of that system - combat takes a while. Enough time that you don't run train on anybody else. Also gives enough time for people to talk about it OoC and/or come to peoples aid.

(This system is based on the Omnigenesis system where you could customize attack and defense and HP)

-----

Regardless what the system is . . . i dont see why the possibility of a god dying is a bad thing.

Why shouldn't people try to kill the EVIL god?
Why shouldn't the EVIL god try to kill the GOOD god?
ETC?

-----

anyway I'll just jot you down as voting against killing, and towards a more forgiving "lwhat happens when you lose rcr" system.

I'll tally the votes sometime this week and make a proposal. . .

Preaplanes

2013-05-28, 10:55 AM

So we need a middle ground between "errybody dies all the time" and "nothing changes ever"

In my opinion, if a GOD is killed, that should be a huge WTF moment, not impossible but definitely extremely difficult to accomplish mechanically and absolutely terrifying for the characters to witness/learn about.

Semi-related: I really dislike trying a God's rcr power directly to his/her deific rank. Elder gods should be more powerful because they have more domains, more worshippers and more time to build relics and blessings to protect themselves, not simply because their players have been playing for longer.

Proposed solution to "killing gods question": use war, death, murder etc gods to get rid of gods and creations that have gone neglected. Make it easier to sack a mortal society, but killing a god shouldn't be possible as long as their player remains active.

I'd agree with the proposed solution. Though that's kinda what we have already. I think it's less that people want IC murder gods, otherwise they'd have their fill of that from players that go inactive. I think it's that people want to grief other players.

Killing is fine, but I refuse to play anything that supports griefers. If you want to? Go ahead, not every game is for everybody and that includes me, but don't expect me to do anything but decry such a system.

Want to defeat your enemy without them coming right back? maybe add in a possible consequence that the god is imprisoned for a time. Like a week realtime or the end of an event, whichever comes second.

Want to make it so that somebody doesn't just come right back and smash your stuff? Maybe add a rule of the universe that a defeated god must obey one command of the other god, with a condition you set.

Problem with the semi-related: deific rank is already determined by number of domains. Number of followers is abstract as all getout (and wouldn't make sense for gods like Ao (d&d), who don't give a damn about worshipers but are still boss). Relic stacking is also way too broken as it is, we don't need to encourage it. It gets way too silly. Imagine if Cupid built a few modifications to his bow and killed Oranos. Yeah, like that.

The HP-based system? Even worse for the law of large numbers. Make a new god every time your god dies, make him just as evil with a slightly different theme (mad scientist, eldritch abomination, war god, murder god, extermination god, oblivion god, the list goes on). You could take down an Elder like this without any frustration of a poor chance of doing so. You spend a few throwaway fledgling gods taking the elder down, the elder is toast.

The truth about systems is there is no perfect system. Why do you think global politics are so stupid? The best we can do is look at each RCR on a case by case basis, and yes that requires slightly more moding. You need to regulate players, people are always going to find a way to exploit things, especially if they can gain something or take something away from somebody else if they do so.

If you've got a problem player that contests your rulings? Kick his ass out, he's a problem player! The guy throws a hissyfit at the DM's rulings in a tabletop game, it's no different.

mystic1110

2013-05-28, 10:58 AM

For sake of ease here are the votes:

Bless/Curse (Omen/Word) System

1 AP for anytype of Bless/Curse

Pantheon System

Keep system as is, no combat bonuses, but rules of shared alignment.

Theme system

Choose theme at the beggining of each "age"

Doom System;

I'm got no idea what this is? Could someone explain it to me?

Relics/Artifacts;

Relics can only grant RCR bonus or thematic bonus;

Hero Progession

Hero/Leader --> Seeker --> Legend progression as in first draft.

Infusions

1 Infusion per ever odd divine level

What can infusions do (AKA which actions do you want to be in the game)

Evolve Physically (extra 1 AP per rollover)
Divine Decree (basically a SUPER curse/bless (word/omen))
Break the Chains (break the material plane only for fledging god rule)
Monumnet (SUPER relice)
Any mix of the above

Society Progression

Ap action of society --> Nation --> organization

Upkeep system

None of the above

Races/Concept System

Variable power

Divine abilities.

No, I think that should be fulfilled by flavour

Banning gods from the mortal realm

Anyone above fledgeling but allow break the chains

Bless/Curse (Omen/Word) System

Variable power

Pantheon System

family type system with AP, no combat

Theme system

None

Doom System;

As proposed by Electrivilla

RCR System;

Other/compromise

RCR Lose System;

Other/compromise

Relics/Artifacts;

Relics can only grant RCR bonus or thematic bonus;

Hero Progression

Hero/Leader --> Seeker --> Legend progression as in first draft.

Infusions

1 Infusion per ever odd divine level

What can infusions do (AKA which actions do you want to be in the game)

Evolve Physically (extra 1 AP per rollover)
Break the Chains (break the material plane only for fledgling god rule)
Monument (SUPER relic)
Any mix of the above

Society Progression

Ap action of society --> Nation. Organization seperate action.

Upkeep system

pay upkeep on organization

Races/Concept System

Variable power

OK these are the issues up for vote so far.

Bless/Curse (Omen/Word) System

Variable power

Pantheon System

family type system with AP, no combat bonus

Theme system

Choose theme at the beggining of each "age"

Doom System;

As proposed by Elricaltovilla (only if no Age System)

RCR System;

A "fixed" version of the one in "Blankest Slate"

RCR Lose System;

"Can't Counter Only"

Relics/Artifacts;

Relics can only grant RCR bonus or thematic bonus

Hero Progession

Hero/Leader --> Seeker --> Legend progression as in first draft.

Infusions

1 Infusion per ever odd divine level

What can infusions do (AKA which actions do you want to be in the game)

Divine Decree (basically a SUPER curse/bless (word/omen))
Break the Chains (break the material plane only for fledging god rule) (Contingent upon banishment of elder gods, which I think is a bad idea)

Society Progression

Age type system;

Upkeep system

pay upkeep on organization

Races/Concept System

Variable power; OR

Divine abilities.

Yes, but tied to domains as presented by Elricaltovilla

Banning gods from the mortal realm

No gods banned

=====================

Elricaltovilla's Doom System
Every AP your god spends adds to his/her doom counter. Each week, you roll 1d100, if you roll less than your doom counter, your doom activates.

A doom is a 5 AP Curse that affects a random area (determined by mod or dice?) or people and is thematically tied to your god's original two domains. You are responsible for writing up the post unleashing your doom and dealing with the fallout of that doom.

You can choose to unleash your doom early, if done so the Curse action is equal to 1/10th of your Doom counter, minimum 1 and maximum 3. If you choose to unleash your doom, you can choose the target of your doom.

Why Gods Should Be Allowed to Walk the Earth

There is no Real Life mythological support for banning powerful deities.

Odin Thor and Loki often walked among mortals, Zeus and Apollo went around procreating with every single mildly attractive greek woman, and Horus, Ra and Osiris spent plenty of time in egypt.

It doesn't encourage players to expand the outer spheres.

Any player that wants to make extra planes is going to do so regardless, and any player that doesn't give a crap about extraplanar travels isn't going to change their mind because you force their hand.

Players who want their gods to be on the mortal plane will always find some way to weasel out of being banished.

Whether by focusing on their demigods, breaking the chains, building a relic or just only sending messengers, elder gods will get around being blocked from the mortal plane and trying to stop them from doing so just encourages them to leave the game once they can no longer frolic with their mortal flock.

It encourages "backwards" universe construction.

In most mythologies, the mortal world is the last world constructed, by putting weaker gods on the mortal plane, you encourage making the mortal plane first, when by most logic the mortal plane only functions because all the other planes of existence are already present to set up the physical laws of the Mortal Realm.

It weakens players that try to maintain a close connection to their mortals, encouraging bullying of players that deliberately slow down their deific growth to stay close to their mortals, making them the easiest targets, when they didn't do anything to deserve being targeted.

Bless/Curse (Omen/Word) System

Variable power
(By which I assume you mean scourge/boon and bless/curse?)

Pantheon System

The family type system with no AP, no combat

Theme system

Choose theme at the beginning of each "age"; OR

Doom System;

As proposed by Elricaltovilla

RCR System;

Abstaining because I've used it less than three times in all my games.

RCR Lose System;

Which was the one you proposed at the end of page nine?

Relics/Artifacts;

Relics can only grant thematic bonus

Hero Progession

Hero --> Legend Progression as in my last draft
(But limit their maximum AP to four so it doesn't get ridiculous.)

Infusions

1 Infusion per divine level; OR

What can infusions do (AKA which actions do you want to be in the game)

Divine Decree (basically a SUPER curse/bless (word/omen))
Monument (SUPER relic)

Society Progression

Age type system;
Ap action of society --> Nation. Organization separate action.
(Not sure what you meant here... So I selected both.)

Upkeep system

Pay upkeep on nation

Races/Concept System

Variable power

The additions by Elricaltovilla which I agree need to be decided upon:

14. Divine abilities.

1. Yes like in current rules
(I think we can rely on the players to choose fitting abilities without having to tie them all to a domain.)

15. Banning gods from the mortal realm

1. Anyone above lesser

Why I disagree with Elricaltovilla
1. And they all departed eventually for one reason or another.
A fledgling God among mortals is a major part of their world, one doesn't need to be an Elder to hurl lightning bolts, change shape, bring forth plagues and get into affairs with everyone they remotely feel like.
I feel like the current rules support the mythological histories of the Gods eventually leaving the mortal world after teaching and guiding their peoples.

2. And how is that different from usual? Most mythologies point to the gods making this or that paradise or hell and then spending all their time watching over the mortals, whether that be out of kindness, pity or a desire to thwart one another.

3. Which is echoed in so many mythologies and religions. The gods have always sent messengers and agents to do their bidding, whether they be Valkyries, Angels, Demons or people wearing ridiculous hats.

4. If that so bothers you, maybe we should ban the construction of anything on the mortal plane for the first week? That way people will be encouraged to do something with other planes or the Void. And then at the first rollover, the Sun dawns on a new world, unless someone decides to make a Sun to dawn, at which point, the Sun dawns on a new world shortly after rollover.
Actually... I quite like this idea, what do you think?

5. Well... One can't argue with that point. On the other hand, the mortal plane is a sanctuary against the more powerful Gods. After all... Isn't that the traditional place for lesser gods to hide from the wrath of those more powerful than themselves?

Bless/Curse (Omen/Word) System

I'll cast my vote for variable power. 1 AP for singular target stuff. E.g: "I turn Barnabus Jones into a pillar of salt" is a 1 AP action. Wide dispersal stuff is 2 AP "I bless the land of Lorn with gentle seasons and bountiful crops".

Pantheon System

I'd say to have a family system with AP benefits but no combat benefits. Rather than the AP benefits being "Free AP" rather it be something like like free sharing. So that you can share Concepts with others in your pantheon for free (But not with the entire world if you don't want to), mass blessings/curses can apply to everyone under the protection of pantheon, etc.

Theme system

Going to go with "Ages". Possible with some revision.

Doom System;

No particularly strong feeling. I'll have to see it in action.

RCR System;

Going to go with something else on this one. Not sure I like any of the solutions posed so far, they seem to have problems on the conceptual/execution side of things, where what RCR is supposed to achieve conceptually isn't matching up with what it does mechanical execution.

RCR Lose System;

I'm going to suggest another option. I kinda liked what I proposed earlier. But I think we can do better than the options currently on the table as well.

Relics/Artifacts;

I'm going to go with RCR bonuses or Thematic bonuses. These Thematic bonuses should be closer to what I suggested earlier, like giving free concepts that are fixed unless you use an Alter Relic action or the like.

Hero Progression

I'm going for Hero/Leader -> Seeker -> Legend progression with Heroes and Leaders having fundamentally different roles.

Infusions

Hmm. Going to go with neither really. Infusions seem to be something that everyone has a huge problem with. I don't think the number of infusions is so much the issue as what people can/do accomplish with them. In that regard I'd say nix all Infusion references and rules. A Cosmic Decree could be closer a "Super Bless/Curse". Monuments could just be a thing limited to 1 per deity only. Divine Infusions could just be a flat AP expenditure for RCR bonuses. Might want to balance it out by Burn Out, say something like you can throw in 5 AP to divinely infuse something (Relic, Artifact, Order, Hero, etc) giving it triple the usual bonus to RCR, but afterwards it's destroyed or must be repaired with some AP spent before it can be properly used again.

What can infusions do (AKA which actions do you want to be in the game)

I basically covered this above. Though I think Break the Chains should be nixed off the board. A god can either ascend or remain on the mortal coil, not both. This also would force more development and play in the extraplanar realms, which doesn't sound like a bad thing at all.

Society Progression

I'd suggest the Society, Organization, Nation AP actions as separate actions. Don't like the Maintenance thing. Ages sound like a nice concept. But I probably wouldn't suggest it. Too dependent on the particular temperaments of the players involved. Likely to result in bad times.

Upkeep system

No problem with upkeep, but the compromise candidate for me would be a scale based on Time and Concepts. As long as a society/nation is growing, it is maintained. It's when it stagnates that it starts to decline. So something like that you need to spend 1 AP per week for every Society, Nation, and Order you control on CONCEPTS that they use. If you fail to put up that much, your society is in Unrest next week. If you fail to pay that much the week after there is a state of anarchy and you lose what you didn't pay for. So if you have 3 Orders, 2 Societies, 1 Nation, and only pay up 4 AP per week, you'll end up having to (after 2 weeks), drop two of those, lost and gone forever.

Allow other gods to help cover you by paying in concepts to your society or with Open Concepts. So if some god creates Arcane Magic for 7 AP and shares it with everyone, bam, you're covered for 7 maintenance AP for the week.

Races/Concept System

I prefer variable costs myself. I just don't see why a Vulcan should be the same price as a Vorlon.

1 Blees/Curse: Variable power
2 Pantheon: family type system with AP, no combat
3 Themes: Choose theme at the beggining of each "age"
4 Doom System: None
5 RCR System: Other/compromise
6 RCR Lose System: Can't Counter Only
7 Relics: Relics can only grant thematic bonus
8 Heroes: No vote
9 Infusions: 1 Infusion per divine level
10 What Can Infusion Do: Any mix of the above (As in, "Choose ONE!" each time you do an infusion)
11 Age type system
12 None of the Above*
13 Races/Concept System Variable power
14 Divine Abilities: Yes, but tied to domains as presented by Elricaltovilla
15 Banning Gods fro mthe mortal realm: Anyone above fledgeling but allow break the chains

* - I would like to point out my suggestion for prostponded upkeep and/or phases has been ignored.

1. Bless/Curse (Omen/Word) System
1. Variable power.
2. Pantheon System
1. The family type system with no AP, no combat ; alliances provide combat bonuses
3. Theme system
1. Choose theme at the beggining of each "age"; OR
2. None
4. Doom System;
1. None
5. RCR System;
1. A "fixed" version of the one in "Blankest Slate"
6. RCR Lose System;
1. Other/compromise: I really liked Myst's system. Whatever that was.
7. Relics/Artifacts;
1. Relics can only grant RCR bonus or thematic bonus;
8. Hero Progession
1. None of the above; make Seeker an automatic progression a free action after a certain number of posts as a Hero
9. Infusions
1. 1 Infusion per ever odd divine level
10. What can infusions do (AKA which actions do you want to be in the game)
1. Evolve Physically (extra 1 AP per rollover)
2. Break the Chains (break the material plane only for fledging god rule)
3. Monument (SUPER relic)
4. Any mix of the above
11. Society Progression
1. None of the above. We will need some way of gauging a society's power besides sheer number of concepts. A medical society may have RCR in a war, because after all infection and disease are the #1 wartime killers, but I don't think a bunch of healers with sticks would stand a good chance against a bunch of filthy savages with guns. Case in point: the Native Americans getting nearly wiped out by the Europeans despite being (overall) one of the two most medically minded peoples (again, overall, lots of tribes) on Earth. Yes yes, I know, not the most politically correct statement, but a historically accurate one.
12. Upkeep system
1. None
13. Races/Concept System
1. X AP for anytype of Races/Concept

And no, I haven't finished quite yet. Numbers didn't need much tweaking yet (damn I'm good), but I still need to know what we're doing about Nations and Societies and such. Not all nations would have the same chance against a God after all, so I need to know what's being done.

It's the Gods vs Mortals and the Mortals vs Mortals where things start to get... wonky, if not handled properly. So I need to know what's going on before I do anything further.

mystic1110

2013-05-28, 11:02 AM

I would also love it if more people voted (especially vocal posters on this thread like Rizban)

mystic1110

2013-05-28, 11:51 AM

I will use my own vote as a tie breaker

Votes so far. FYI the votes will be ONLY used as the GOALS/OUTLINE of my next PROPOSAL.

1.Bless/Curse (Omen/Word) System
AP for anytype of Bless/Curse (1 vote)
Variable power (6 votes)

2. Pantheon System
Keep system as is, no combat bonuses, but rules of shared alignment. (1 vote)
family type system with AP, no combat (5 Votes)
The family type system with no AP, no combat ; alliances provide combat bonuses (1 vote)

3. Theme system
Choose theme at the beggining of each "age" (5 votes)
None (2 Votes)

4. Doom system
huh?/No!* (4 votes)
Yes?/Yes! (3 Votes)

5. Relics/Artifacts;
Relics can only grant RCR bonus or thematic bonus (5 Votes)
Relics can only grant thematic bonuses (2 Vote)

6. Hero Progession
Hero/Leader --> Seeker --> Legend progression as in first draft. (4 votes)
Hero --> Legend Progression as in second draft (1 vote)
Other or No vote (2 votes)

7. Infusions
Infusion per every odd divine level (4 votes)
Infusion per every divine level (2 vote)
None (1 vote

8. What can infusions do (AKA which actions do you want to be in the game)
Evolve Physically (extra 1 AP per rollover) (5 votes)
Divine Decree (basically a SUPER curse/bless (word/omen)) (6 votes)
Break the Chains (break the material plane only for fledging god rule) (4 votes)
Monumnet (SUPER relice) (6 votes)

Break the chains is the least popular - but still over half the people voted for it.

9. Society Progression
Ap action of society --> Nation --> organization (3 vote)
Ap action of society --> Nation. Organization seperate action. (1.5 votes)
Age type system (2.5 votes)
Other. (1 Vote)

*elemental split his vote
** I used my tie breaking vote to vote for society --> Nation --> organization

10. Upkeep system
None (2 vote)
pay upkeep on organization (2.5 votes)
pay upkeep on nation (3.5 Vote)

*counting ArcturusV maintance suggestion as a half vote for upkeeps
** on fires suggestion was sort of what i had in mind for upkeep of nations. . . so thats what im coutning that vote as.
*** I used my tie breaking vote to vote for nation Upkeep.

But this is really contested. . .

11..Races/Concept System
Variable (6 votes)
1 cost for anything (1 Vote

12. Divine abilities.
No thanks (1 Vote)
No vote (3 nonvotes) which effectively count as NO Thanks!
Yes, but tied to domains (2 votes)
Yes, like in Omnigenesis? (1 votes)

13.Banning gods from the mortal realm
Anyone above fledgeling (3 Votes)
Anyone above Lesser (2 Votes)
No vote (1 vote)
No gods banned (1 vote)

* this winning was contingent on keeping Break the chains which is also the least popular infusion.

RCR system/ RCR lose results votes are so varied that they are useless

NichG

2013-05-28, 12:56 PM

I'd like to point out that genre accuracy does not equate to a fun or stable game.

That is to say, just because classic mythology has gods killing eachother does not mean that emulating that would necessarily make for the best forum-based god-game. Just because classic mythology has gods that walk the earth does not mean that such an aspect is necessarily ideal.

It may turn out that such things are good ideas, but it shouldn't be 'because its that way in mythology'. It should be because that form of gameplay is attractive.

If there is a problem with the gameplay generated by those ideas interpreted literally, then it falls to the system to have OOC mechanics that somehow correct for that if you still want to try to preserve mythological accuracy. E.g. 'you can kill a god whose player has left' allows you to have stories about gods that get killed, while avoiding actual PvP.

For the record I think the most elegant way to handle things that are at the face of it negative for one player and positive for another is to have a (hidden, metagame) reimbursement system that rewards a player for allowing bad things to happen to their character/their creations/etc. With something like that, you don't need a strong-arming system of roll-offs and the like, because those who don't participate will effectively be penalized (e.g. the guy who never lets anything bad happen to his stuff is going to be far behind the guy who lets his stuff get destroyed, rebuilds, gets destroyed again, makes something new, gets killed, and brings in a new deity). It also means that there isn't a sort of 'you'd better gang up on the war/death gods before they get big enough to cause problems' thing going on either - those gods are useful and necessary to the overall ecology of generating divine resources.

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-28, 01:42 PM

@mystic: I have to object to you counting non votes as nay votes. Abstaining from voting on a topic is not the same thing as voting against it.

mystic1110

2013-05-28, 01:50 PM

@mystic: I have to object to you counting non votes as nay votes. Abstaining from voting on a topic is not the same thing as voting against it.

Well I gave notice on each vote i did that for.

so it would affect the following votes:

Doom system vote - which would still go against because of tie breaking power (I would vote against personally)

Divine abilities which would now have "Divine ability tied to domain!"

====

On that note - want to come up with a list of divine abilities tied to domain? I like that actually a lot. I'll include it my proposal - at the same time this means it would take longer.

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-28, 02:46 PM

Well I gave notice on each vote i did that for.

so it would affect the following votes:

Doom system vote - which would still go against because of tie breaking power (I would vote against personally)

Divine abilities which would now have "Divine ability tied to domain!"

====

On that note - want to come up with a list of divine abilities tied to domain? I like that actually a lot. I'll include it my proposal - at the same time this means it would take longer.

I'm pretty sure I already did in here somewhere but I can dress it up and make it look fancy for you. I'll have it ready by Wednesday 11:59 PM GMT -4

mystic1110

2013-05-28, 03:00 PM

Thanks!

Also one of the problem with varriable ranks is this problem described by Draken (who I miss very much :smallfrown:)

Ah, I remember those rules! They changed the problem from "charging my invincible-ultra-curse-lazer" to "nobody knows what size to use (other than Everyone, Everywhere)".

How about to address this problem we do this:

Magnitude Ranks (For the Bless and Curse actions)

1 AP: From a single person to an average-sized town's worth of people. A section of an army. An exceedingly sparsely populated area (i.e., a non-magical forest)

3 AP: Anywhere from a large city's worth of people. A small army in its entirety. A rural, but settled are to a large nation or kingdom, and all within it, including settlements of any size. Anyone matching a SPECIFIC descriptor (I.e., Arcane Spellcasters, Commoners, those who worship a certain god)

5 AP: THIS IS A DIVINE DECREE AND REQUIRES EXPENDITURE OF AN INFUSION:

If you want to effect A super-massive continent (such as Pangaea), or several smaller ones (such as Europe and Asia). A world-spanning empire. The population of the western hemisphere. A massively generalized group of people (i.e., Casters, Militaries, those who worship any god on a certain pantheon) to Everyone. Everywhere.

mystic1110

2013-05-28, 03:02 PM

Preaplanes

2013-05-28, 03:07 PM

Grinner

2013-05-28, 03:22 PM

Geez. You all are still on this discussion? Okay. There's two options here: Worldbuilding game or God game.

The Worldbuilding option focuses on communally generating a verisimilitudinous history, complete with the rise and fall of empires, heroes, sages, prophets, etc. As an Italian once said, blood alone moves the wheels of history.

The God option focuses more on playing as a deity. Everyone's creations are more or less protected, leaving them to tinker and expand them.

In light of our inability to agree on anything, may I propose a schism? The God Game people can keep the Lords of Creation name, fittingly enough. Everyone else can hop into another thread.

I'd agree with the proposed solution. Though that's kinda what we have already. I think it's less that people want IC murder gods, otherwise they'd have their fill of that from players that go inactive. I think it's that people want to grief other players.

Killing is fine, but I refuse to play anything that supports griefers. If you want to? Go ahead, not every game is for everybody and that includes me, but don't expect me to do anything but decry such a system.

Just stop, will you? You've repeatedly shown that you haven't the slightest clue of anyone's intentions.

Want to defeat your enemy without them coming right back? maybe add in a possible consequence that the god is imprisoned for a time. Like a week realtime or the end of an event, whichever comes second.

I'm not yet sure of the consequences of this rule, but it has merit.

Want to make it so that somebody doesn't just come right back and smash your stuff? Maybe add a rule of the universe that a defeated god must obey one command of the other god, with a condition you set.

God moding, indeed. What's wrong with smashing things? That's what happens when you poke the hornets' nest.

rweird

2013-05-28, 03:24 PM

Killing inactive gods is fine with me, though not active gods without the other's permission, trapping is a good idea though.

For the mythology argument: How many times has a god been killed in any mythology? Once, twice, maybe three times? None of those are really "walk up and stab", they are massive events, I'd think they're things that the player is leaving and is willing to die, played by a Mod or a player that intended for him to die.

Gods could engage in RCR, agreeing that the loser dies, though I don't think it should be forcible.

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-28, 03:31 PM

I think divine decrees should be more than 5 AP. They should be the most expensive single action a god can undertake and they should be divorced from the bless/curse system. No curse or bless should be able to affect everyone everywhere.

Oh, here's my lovely idea for Domain based abilities:

I think that abilities should be tied to domains, that way people actually remember/use their domains. Rough idea:

Each time you select a domain (nature for example) you gain one of the following benefits:

1) A free 1 AP action per rollover that can be used to create something tied to your domain. Each subsequent time you take this, you gain another free 1 AP action. These free actions cannot be combined to make higher powered actions.

2) You know when someone else is using an action tied to your domain. You can make an RCR roll to determine the location or deity performing the action. Each subsequent time you take this you gain a +1 bonus to the roll.

3) You gain resistance to attacks (mundane and divine) that utilize your domain. You gain a +1 bonus to resist RCR attacks OR curses that affect you Cost 1 AP more provided they are tied to your domain. Each (more than 1) times you take this ability the bonus increases by +1.

4) Your attacks through this domain are more powerful. You gain a +1 bonus to RCR attacks OR curses that you cast Cost 1 AP more provided they are tied to your domain. Each (more than 1) times you take this ability the bonus increases by +1.

5) Mortals who worship you gain a +1 bonus to anything tied to your chosen domain. Each (more than 1) times you take this ability the bonus increases by +1.

There's a couple clarifications that need to be made though for this system to work properly:

1) You don't have to pay AP to get these abilities, they come with your domain. Yes, that includes your first two domains.

2) When you pick up a new Domain/Portfolio, you pick ONE of these, not all five.

3) If you pick up the same Domain again i.e. Fire(Burninating) and Fire(Forge) you can pick a new ability to apply to the Fire Domain, or increase the bonus of your current ability.

4) The fluff of the abilities is up to you. I tried to keep them as general as possible so that they could be tailored to fit each god's needs.

5) In order for ability #2 to work, the "gods are not omniscient" rule must be heavily enforced. Gods might get a "feeling" that something is happening that should be under their purview, but not be able to pinpoint it without the expenditure of AP (through a bless action). I also propose a slightly different version of how that ability should work if people don't want it tied to RCR directly.

Domain Awareness: Whenever a Deity spends AP on an action that is tied to your domain (must be justified in OOC Thread) you may roll a 1d6. If you roll higher than the target's Divine Rank you successfully identify either where the event occured or who spent the AP. Each subsequent time you take this ability, you gain a +1 bonus to your roll.
Special: Any god may spend 1 or more AP to disguise their actions from any other gods trying to determine their actions. Each AP spent this way increases their effective Divine Rank by 1, and can increase their effective Divine Rank over the maximum for purposes of this roll only.
Normal: Gods must spend 1 AP to search for other gods and to spy on their actions. When spending AP this way, the God is allowed to roll 1d6 but cannot add any bonuses to their roll.

I think that kind of does it, although it'll probably need some tweaking if we use Preaplane's RCR system since it uses multiplicatives and I'm not that good at probability statistics.

EDIT
Look, I found my reworked Curse/Bless system too!

Curse Progression

{table]AP Cost|Maximum Targets|Maximum Effect
1 |100 people or 100 square miles of land| Debilitating Roleplaying Effect (endless thirst or drought, sudden storm or blizzard, etc)
2 |1000 people or 500 square miles of land| Deadly Roleplaying Effect (virulent plague, angels descend to claim all firstborn sons, crops wither and die for a century, heroic characters are immune)
3 |1 nation or organization| Wrath of the Gods is clear (plagues spread until stopped, massive destruction of land and property, heroic mortals suffer Debilitating Roleplaying Effects
4 |All organizations belonging to a specific god, Entire Continents| Utter Devastation (swathes of endless fire rage across the land, cities sink into the ocean, Heroic Mortals suffer mechanical and roleplaying drawbacks)
5 |An Entire Plane of Existence, All nonheroic mortals tied to a specific god or pantheon| Apocalypse (entire races are wiped from existence, Immortal souls are put in danger, Heroic Mortals may be killed outright)
6+ |No additional targets or range beyond 5 AP| No additional effects save the increased cost to dispel or counter[/table]

Bless Progression

{table]AP Cost|Maximum Targets|Maximum Effect
1 |100 people or 100 square miles of land| Powerful Roleplaying Enhancement (agelessness, superhuman abilities, designates a single Mortal as protected by the god)
2 |1000 people or 500 square miles of land| Grand Roleplaying Effect (Seasons of plentiful harvests, discoveries of new and advanced technologies, evolutionary enhancement, significant environmental change)
3 |1 Nation or Organization| Blessings of the Gods is Clear (Mass Environmental change, Heroic Mortals gain Significant Roleplaying Benefit, Powerful Magics at work)
4 |All Organizations or Nations belonging to a specific god, Entire Continents| Deific Favoritism (Heroic Mortals gain Mechanical and Roleplaying Benefits, Nations and Organizations gain Mechanical benefits, Lands and People are suffused with divine essence for various Roleplaying Effects)
5 |An Entire Plane of Existence, All nonheroic mortals tied to a specific god or pantheon| Apotheosis (Heroic Mortals become favored champions of the gods, Nations and Organizations gain significant divine influence, Lands become planar in nature
6+ |No additional targets or range beyond 5 AP| No additional effects save the increased cost to dispel or counter[/table]

When using these charts, the maximum number of targets or maximum effect determines the AP cost, you add the AP cost for the number of targets with the AP cost for the effect to determine the total cost of the blessing/curse. For example: A blessing that Affects an Entire Nation (3 AP) with Agelessness (1 AP) is a 4 AP blessing, while a curse that affects one person with the loss of their Immortal Soul is a 6 AP curse, this means that the minimum cost for a curse or blessing is 2 AP, and the "maximum" is 12 AP. However the maximum can be higher if you are attempting to counter a specific curse or blessing.

EDIT: There is one notable exception, you can spend 1 AP on a Bless action to make a single character protected by the gods. This protection saves them from non-targeted curse effects (plagues and such). It is intended to be used to designate significant characters that may become leaders, heroes, legends or seekers later in life. As such, this particular blessing cannot be countered.

Curse Wars

Curse Wars are when two players engage in an extended bout of cursing/blessing each others creations to counter a specific curse or bless action. Countering a Curse/Bless costs a number of AP equal to the original Curse/Bless +2, this additional AP cost is doubled for each subsequent counter-curse, so it becomes +2, then +4, then +8 etc.

mystic1110

2013-05-28, 03:40 PM

I think divine decrees should be more than 5 AP. They should be the most expensive single action a god can undertake and they should be divorced from the bless/curse system. No curse or bless should be able to affect everyone everywhere.
.

Why should they be divorced? A divine decree is basically and always has been a super bless/curse/omen/word/whatever. This way putting them in context of the bless/curse/omen/word/whatever you make clear the limits of the bless/curse/omen/word/whatever.

the most powerful bless/curse/omen/word/whatever would take 3 AP, while a divine decree would take a bless/curse/omen/word/whatever and an infusion (of which you only have 3 total! EVER!). That clearly shows that even a 3 AP bless/curse/omen/word/whatever can only affect a nation - not an empire, or a specific type of people (AKA druids/elves/rich people) and not a general description (AKA people who dream/have souls)

(I saw your reworked system - but I also noted the criticism for it, found a scant 2 posts down :smallwink:)

Grinner

2013-05-28, 03:40 PM

Killing inactive gods is fine with me, though not active gods without the other's permission, trapping is a good idea though.

But how interesting is that? Think about it:

'And Agramar raised up his mighty sword and declared,"Today, Palenor, is the day you die!"

And Palenor simply killed over.'

For the mythology argument: How many times has a god been killed in any mythology? Once, twice, maybe three times? None of those are really "walk up and stab", they are massive events, I'd think they're things that the player is leaving and is willing to die, played by a Mod or a player that intended for him to die.

Gods could engage in RCR, agreeing that the loser dies, though I don't think it should be forcible.

I agree that it should be a rather rare event, but not completely out of the realm of possibility.

One thing I liked about the Lords of Destruction rules was the fact that a deity could render itself almost invulnerable to the attacks of one deity through a couple defense bonuses.

Preaplanes

2013-05-28, 03:41 PM

Did you seriously just quote Mussolini? As in "Insane Dictator #3"? Yeah, THERE'S a guy you should be taking advice from.

I'm more in it for the worldbuilding. Thing is, things DO last. Look at China and Egypt. Mongolia as well, to a degree. England is doing well for itself. Scotland more so (heck, they've got the whole "pissed at the occupying forces" thing down to a science. Tell me the NRA don't make good rebels/terrorists).

So no, I don't really approve of things spontaneously blowing up around me like we just kicked off World War 3 with an LGM-30 Minuteman salvo.

And the winning condition would have to be from a list, like a Command spell. Hell, we could call it a Divine Command. Then we give the villains a loophole to look for and play up some enmity rather than just "Rawr I smash you".

Killing inactive gods is fine with me, though not active gods without the other's permission, trapping is a good idea though.

For the mythology argument: How many times has a god been killed in any mythology? Once, twice, maybe three times? None of those are really "walk up and stab", they are massive events, I'd think they're things that the player is leaving and is willing to die, played by a Mod or a player that intended for him to die.

Gods could engage in RCR, agreeing that the loser dies, though I don't think it should be forcible. Case in point! Nice, Rweird.

But how interesting is that? Think about it:

'And Agramar raised up his mighty sword and declared,"Today, Palenor, is the day you die!"'

And Palenor simply killed over.

That doesn't happen if you use a modicum of writing and try to write the character you're killing appropriately. A god of planar travel won't sit still, if he's losing and he knows it, he'll retreat and possibly pull a Leshrac vs Nicol Bolas.

It doesn't simply keel over if you don't want it to simply keel over. Forcing another player to die? They're not going to bloody cooperate with you, they're going to make your experience killing them as bloody miserable as humanly possible.

NichG

2013-05-28, 03:49 PM

How do you prevent favortism or fairness issues? This game in my mind does not have a DM per se. . . .

The reimbursement system wouldn't necessarily require a DM, so I'm not sure how favoritism comes into it (you could have spurious bully-alliances I suppose, where person 1 exclusively destroys things that belong to person 2 that they've agreed do not really matter to person 2, but thats by far not the worst system dysfunction...)

Anyhow, it'd be a standard set of payments/tokens/etc in exchange for standard modes of corruption/destruction. A simple form is: corrupting something worth X AP gives the victim 0.5*X AP to spend on something other than directly fixing the corruption; destroying something worth X AP gives the victim 1.5*X AP back to spend on something other than what was destroyed; killing the player's deity means they get a new deity with a big initial AP pool or a boost to AP income or something. The victim must agree to the 'transaction' for it to go through, but the rewards are standardized.

A more intricate form would have 'karma tokens'. You can only destroy something if you have a karma token from letting one of your things be destroyed or from the initial set. In this system it might not even have to have full consent, because someone cannot effectively grief a group of players who decide not to enable it. Basically 'destroyer' gods would need to have people fight back so they can go and destroy more things in the future. In order to use the 'destroy/corrupt/attack X' subsystems you yourself have to let it happen to your own things and in fact encourage it. If you're messing up stuff just to be a griefer then everyone can just ignore you. The end result is that griefers get to kick over one sandcastle but then they're done forever.

rweird

2013-05-28, 03:53 PM

Grinner

2013-05-28, 03:55 PM

Did you seriously just quote Mussolini? As in "Insane Dictator #3"? Yeah, THERE'S a guy you should be taking advice from.

Name all of the social upheavals that were without violence. Compare that list to all of the wars and revolutions in history.

I'm more in it for the worldbuilding. Thing is, things DO last. Look at China and Egypt. Mongolia as well, to a degree. England is doing well for itself. Scotland more so (heck, they've got the whole "pissed at the occupying forces" thing down to a science. Tell me the NRA don't make good rebels/terrorists).

So no, I don't really approve of things spontaneously blowing up around me like we just kicked off World War 3 with an LGM-30 Minuteman salvo.

In name only. Besides, as far as I know, nobody's suggested something that extreme, Lords of Destruction notwithstanding.

Edit:

That doesn't happen if you use a modicum of writing and try to write the character you're killing appropriately. A god of planar travel won't sit still, if he's losing and he knows it, he'll retreat and possibly pull a Leshrac vs Nicol Bolas.

It doesn't simply keel over if you don't want it to simply keel over. Forcing another player to die? They're not going to bloody cooperate with you, they're going to make your experience killing them as bloody miserable as humanly possible.

Well, there's the problem. If the player's inactive, then who's going to play out the other side of that struggle? Me? I'm busy trying to kill him, and given the option, there's a good chance that I'm not going to draw it out much. I do have other things to do, y'know.

Preaplanes

2013-05-28, 03:55 PM

Grinner: Not so interesting, though you could describe it as more interesting. Maybe finding some way to make it harder, not sure. Imagine if you are playing skyrim or whatever, you are about to beat the game, and then when the BBEG kills you (I am next to clueless about Skyrim), and that DELETES YOUR GAME. I agree it is interesting, though it isn't something I'd like to be able to happen to my character in a world-building game. I might care more than most about things I do, but I know I'd be pretty mad if that happens.

A game like is not something I'd really enjoy. Am I the only one who wouldn't like there character getting killed by someone else? That isn't the type of game I want LoC to be.

Again, you're not alone, Rweird.

Well, there's the problem. If the player's inactive, then who's going to play out the other side of that struggle? Me? I'm busy trying to kill him, and given the option, there's a good chance that I'm not going to draw it out much. I do have other things to do, y'know.

Well there's YOUR problem. If you don't want things to be bland, do something about it. If you decide not to, you lose the right to complain about it, or at least the ability to do so without being a giant hypocrite.

mystic1110

2013-05-28, 03:56 PM

Quick RCR proposal/ RCR Lose Proposal. (inspired by the lords of destruction rules)

QUICK RULES PROPOSAL

Everyone starts with 1d6 attack, 1d6 defense, 20 HP
Everyone starts with 1 domain. You can get more domains after X amount of AP (and after spending X amount of AP).
You advance in Rank whenever you gain a new domain.
Every odd numbered rank gives you a New infusion
Domains give you +2 to attack OR defense OR give you +2d6 extra HP, you choose what they give you when you get it or start with it.
When you start off with a domain or choose a new one you may reject the attack/defense/HP bonus in favor knowing when someone else is using an action tied to that specific domain
You can't heal HP lose unless you make get another domain and give yourself +2d6 HP
You can make artifacts to give you +1 to attack or defense or provide +1d6 HP
You can only make 2X RCR bonus artifacts where X is the amount of domains you have. You can make all the thematic artifacts you want. artifacts you gave away as gifts count.
You can give aid to another god by paying X AP. Aid to another god would effectively be adding your attack or defense roll to their attack or defense roll.
When you reach 0 HP, you are imprissoned till the next rollover OR choose to obey one command of the winning god. Your HP returns to 20 after obeying or after your imprissonment ends. (If you have any HP bonus artifacts they will still add to your HP)
You gain 2 AP per rollover PLUS how many domains you have. Once you are an over diety you may not gain domains

Also to reitireate:

People so far generally liked these Rules:

Pantheons

When you a born into the game - you automatically join a pantheon between your progenitor and yourself, unless your progenitor is already part of a pantheon and in that case you will join that pantheon. A god may only be a member of one pantheon at a time.

The pantheon is a sacred bond of fealty to the leader - gods in a pantheon aren't equals but instead sworn to the Leader.

Once per week the leader of a pantheon may ORDER a god in their pantheon to perform any action they are capable of performing OR may ORDER the pantheon as a whole into a cause - disobedience results in eviction from the pantheon. A god is never forced to use AP to fulfill an order.

But being a leader brings it's own responsibilities. The leader of any pantheon must obey these rule:

Pantheon leader cannot openly act against the good of the pantheon. If he does, any member may challenge him for the rulership.
Good of the pantheon is OBJECTIVE. Thus when you create a pantheon you must state a Pantheon GOAL. This rule does not apply to the automatically generated pantheons of family members. In that case GOOD is simply defending each other from non-family members.
Pantheon leader must defend members of his pantheon against attacks of other gods (that he knows of), either by himself or by sending other members of the pantheon.

Create Pantheon: 1 AP
Join a pantheon: 1 AP
Subordinate your pantheon to another pantheon: 1 AP.

Societies

When you make a race - in the beginning they live spread out - in a loose tribal system as the default. Use the create Society action to begin to form social connections and a collective history. Once you are ready to have your race progress into groups of more than a village of a hundred use the Form nation action to collect your race into a country or even an empire. Once you have a nation set up you may create guilds, religious groups or secret societies within with the form organization action.

Now all empires and civilizations have their golden ages, and their falls. During Rollover you must reuse the Form Oranization action, or your organization dissolves.

You may form nations of other people’s races – a god Never has complete control/ ownership over every single individual being of the race he or she creates. You may even form organizations in other nations.

1 AP Form Society
2 AP Create Nation
1 AP Form Organization

Land Actions

A big part of being a god is changing the landscape around you!

Alter Land 1 AP: Alter land allows a god to change already existing landscapes. It can be used to create mountain ranges, vast forests, lakes, swamps, or any other kind of "land type" you could think of. This includes razing and raising cities! Alter land can also be used to raise small chains of islands from the sea. These islands cannot be very big, but can be large enough to support a small kingdom. Think about the size of Hawaii. Alter land actions can also be used to change the layout of existing land, such changes can be the creation of the largest mountain in the world to the greatest forest.
Create Land 2 AP: allows a god to create land where there is none. It can be used to raise a small continent from the sea, or create large, floating islands in a plane where there is no planet. Land created by Create Land can be up to the size of Russia
Forge Astronomical Object 3AP: Use this action to create a celestial body such as a moon, planet, asteroid, or sun. If your astronomical object has special properties such as an empathic link to yourself, or can move contrary to the rules of gravity and physics – it is a Relic NOT an Astronomical Object
Form Nexus 2 AP: You may create a location of mystic and divine energy connected to a preexisting sanctum your god control/owns. A nexus may be a building, a door, a portion of a forest, a specific cave, but must be a specific location – it cannot be “the ocean.” Promoting mortals to higher rank of mortal can only occur in a Nexus.
Weave Sanctum 2 AP: You may create a location of divinity attuned to your god. This location may be anywhere not on the material plane. Your seat of power may be a layer of a plane, or a simple foreboding castle. Gods may only enter another God’s sanctum if they have permission or initiated combat.
Imagine Plane 5AP : Imagine Plane allows a god to create the fabric of their own reality. Planes are entire dimensions apart from the normal world, and can take any form a god can imagine. Hell, Heaven, or Limbo, are examples of planes. When weaving a plane, the creating god must decide on any special features it has, such as accelerated time, or empowered magic. A god may also decide how many layers there are initially. This can vary from one, to thousands, though most planes have less than three. Unlike a sanctum a god gets no special benefit for being within his or her own realm or plane. Your god does not "own" a plane he made - in fact other gods creating and living in a plane you made is encouraged!!
.

*****

I'll post the other proposals later.

Man on Fire

2013-05-28, 04:04 PM

Pantheon leader cannot openly act against the good of the pantheon. If he does, the strongest member may challenge him for the rulership.

We should explain what "strongest" means. The one with most APs? The one with highest rank? Both?

Now all empires and civilizations have their golden ages, and their falls. During Rollover you must reuse the Form Oranization action, or your organization dissolves.

As it's written now this doesn't apply to society or naton, I don't know if that's on purpose or a mistake.

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-28, 04:08 PM

I have to go back and do some replying because I was at work when some of this was posted.

I'd agree with the proposed solution. Though that's kinda what we have already. I think it's less that people want IC murder gods, otherwise they'd have their fill of that from players that go inactive. I think it's that people want to grief other players.

The current situation we have is nothing like that. I've made a couple Evil gods, specifically one of tyranny, and never even got around to rolling RCR because as soon as my god tried to take control of a situation the other players either whined or ignored what my character was doing because they didn't want him taking their special little toys away.

Killing is fine, but I refuse to play anything that supports griefers. If you want to? Go ahead, not every game is for everybody and that includes me, but don't expect me to do anything but decry such a system.

Nobody here is saying we should support griefers. I don't think killing another player's god should be in the rules (barring rulesets where people can have multiple deities of similar ranks). But toppling empires? Killing heroes? Kidnapping babies? Yes, yes and (creepy but) yes.

The system might theoretically allow these things, but the player base definitely doesn't, no matter how much they seem to indicate otherwise.

Want to defeat your enemy without them coming right back? maybe add in a possible consequence that the god is imprisoned for a time. Like a week realtime or the end of an event, whichever comes second.

There's a strong possibility that giving a player a time out for their character's failure would mean that they lose interest way too quickly.

Want to make it so that somebody doesn't just come right back and smash your stuff? Maybe add a rule of the universe that a defeated god must obey one command of the other god, with a condition you set.

You mean have win/lose conditions built into the rules? Like I and others have suggested multiple times?

Problem with the semi-related: deific rank is already determined by number of domains. Number of followers is abstract as all getout (and wouldn't make sense for gods like Ao (d&d), who don't give a damn about worshipers but are still boss). Relic stacking is also way too broken as it is, we don't need to encourage it.

Faerunian deities are atypical examples, Ao isn't a god, he's a MOD :smalltongue:. And LOC does have number of followers built into the rules, that's what nations/societies/organizations represent. They're abstracted so that people can have small groups of dedicated worshippers or billions of casual believers and still play effectively.

It gets way too silly. Imagine if Cupid built a few modifications to his bow and killed Oranos. Yeah, like that.

:smallconfused:You say this like I'm supposed to think its a bad thing. I'm pro combat, pro little guy beating up the big guy, anti-establishment. I don't see why Cupid shouldn't be able to peg Oranos in the eye and take his spot. It's Oranos's fault for not wearing a helmet and getting complacent. Especially after his son chopped his balls off.

The HP-based system? Even worse for the law of large numbers. Make a new god every time your god dies, make him just as evil with a slightly different theme (mad scientist, eldritch abomination, war god, murder god, extermination god, oblivion god, the list goes on). You could take down an Elder like this without any frustration of a poor chance of doing so. You spend a few throwaway fledgling gods taking the elder down, the elder is toast.

I'm not sure how to respond to this other than say "this is griefing" and thus should be handled by a MOD. Unless it's a system like Lords of Destruction where players already know and accept that they're going to lose characters before they sign up. In which case the Elder God should have spent points bumping up his HP to get healed.

The truth about systems is there is no perfect system. Why do you think global politics are so stupid? The best we can do is look at each RCR on a case by case basis, and yes that requires slightly more moding. You need to regulate players, people are always going to find a way to exploit things, especially if they can gain something or take something away from somebody else if they do so.

There's some stuff here that I don't want to touch with a 10 foot pole, but you're right when you say moderators shouldn't be afraid to exert their power to keep things from getting out of hand.

If you've got a problem player that contests your rulings? Kick his ass out, he's a problem player! The guy throws a hissyfit at the DM's rulings in a tabletop game, it's no different.

See above.

Why should they be divorced? A divine decree is basically and always has been a super bless/curse/omen/word/whatever. This way putting them in context of the bless/curse/omen/word/whatever you make clear the limits of the bless/curse/omen/word/whatever.

Because they are fundamentally different actions? Divine Decrees are the kind of thing that changes the LAWS OF THE UNIVERSE. If you want to do that much damage, your god should be utterly exhausted afterwards.

the most powerful bless/curse/omen/word/whatever would take 3 AP, while a divine decree would take a bless/curse/omen/word/whatever and an infusion (of which you only have 3 total! EVER!). That clearly shows that even a 3 AP bless/curse/omen/word/whatever can only affect a nation - not an empire, or a specific type of people (AKA druids/elves/rich people) and not a general description (AKA people who dream/have souls)

It doesn't clearly show anything. I could drop 15 AP on a curse that locks all deities from the mortal plane, (remember?) but it's not a divine decree.

Honestly, I think divine decrees are the real nukes of Lords of Creation, and I'm not sure they should even be allowed.

(I saw your reworked system - but I also noted the criticism for it, found a scant 2 posts down :smallwink:)

There wasn't any criticism beyond Rizban and Draken saying that they'd tried something similar before and nobody bothered to learn how to work the system. "Everything, Everywhere, All the Time" isn't a failure of the system, it's a failure of the players.

Right below Draken's post I even asked for examples of how the system had been abused/misused and never got a response.

mystic1110

2013-05-28, 04:09 PM

We should explain what "strongest" means. The one with most APs? The one with highest rank? Both?.

Corrected that to any. But that would probably lead to fights. Why not say

Strongest is Highest Rank. If more than one player is tied for highest rank it is the one with highest AP. A challenge is not an RCR challenge but a democratic vote between the pantheon members. The challenger and challengee do not get to vote (meaning that an effective change of command can only work in a pantheon with 3 or more members). This also means unpopular pantheon leaders can be displaced. The outsed leader will become a regular member of the pantheon.

As it's written now this doesn't apply to society or naton, I don't know if that's on purpose or a mistake.

It's not supposed to, the vote signaled that people were only ok with upkeep for organizations

mystic1110

2013-05-28, 04:12 PM

It doesn't clearly show anything. I could drop 15 AP on a curse that locks all deities from the mortal plane, (remember?) but it's not a divine decree.

.

And under the 1/3/Divine decree option that 15 AP "curse" should not have been allowed (Was i still playing when that happened :smallconfused:) and should have been a divine decree instead. Under the 1/3/divine decree formulation the 3 curse would only have been able to affect on the the many nations of that game, while the 1 curse only a small group or individual.

You should not be able to "stack" curses under the 1/3/Divine decree break down. .

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-28, 04:21 PM

And under the 1/3/Divine decree option that 15 AP "curse" should not have been allowed (Was is still playing when that happened :smallconfused:) and should have been a divine decree instead. Under the 1/3/divine decree formulation the 3 curse would only have been able to affect on the the many nations of that game, while the 1 curse only a small group or individual.

I think you were still playing. I was playing Nettal (after leaving Kiloasa to die alone and unloved) and you were some god of atheism, I think.

The system allowed me to do that, and the system you're proposing doesn't really change that. I could just as easily have spent 15 AP to affect all five nations that were on the map at that time and it would have had the same effect.

A Divine Decree ought to be something entirely separate, something that's used to fundamentally alter the nature of the universe across all planes. It shouldn't be counterable per se, because it ought to be the capstone of godly actions. And it needs approval by MODs before being deployed.

Grinner

2013-05-28, 04:23 PM

Well there's YOUR problem. If you don't want things to be bland, do something about it. If you decide not to, you lose the right to complain about it, or at least the ability to do so without being a giant hypocrite.

Great! So let's write it into the rules, yes, and not rely on something as unreliable as player creativity to do our own jobs as game designers.

mystic1110

2013-05-28, 04:28 PM

I think you were still playing. I was playing Nettal (after leaving Kiloasa to die alone and unloved) and you were some god of atheism, I think.
.

Ah yes :smallsmile: :smallfrown: :smallredface:

The system allowed me to do that, and the system you're proposing doesn't really change that. I could just as easily have spent 15 AP to affect all five nations that were on the map at that time and it would have had the same effect.
.

Wouldn't 5 3 AP curses be better than 1 15 AP curse? Yes it takes more to counter ALL of them, but they can be countered individually by the god of each "country" no problem really.

A Divine Decree ought to be something entirely separate, something that's used to fundamentally alter the nature of the universe across all planes. It shouldn't be counterable per se, because it ought to be the capstone of godly actions. And it needs approval by MODs before being deployed.

Wasn't the idea of divine decree thought up by us as dealing with my whole Karma thing?

Anyway Yeah. . . mod approval would always be a requirment for decrees, which just hammers home why they are so powerful and how relatively weak 3 AP curse should be.

Grinner

2013-05-28, 04:37 PM

An idea:

Minimalism. Things which serve no purpose have no place in life. Therefore, gods who are inactive or who create nothing are cosmically unimportant. To that effect, they waste away, perhaps through AP penalties.

Combined with the upkeep rule, I think this would minimize "griefing", as non-participating players would quickly run out of AP

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-28, 04:46 PM

Grinner

2013-05-28, 04:54 PM

That's already in the rules under deific apathy. And anything you don't pay upkeep on dies off. That's the point of upkeep.

Would you point me towards it? I can't find it through a keyword search for "apathy".

Rizban

2013-05-28, 05:00 PM

On Divine Combat

While it seems the conversation has moved away from that again, I have some things to say.

While I won't call anyone out specifically, there are some people who have obviously made up their minds against it and refuse to see any other position. I still feel like there are some things left unsaid. I will use the original rule set for reference, as that is the only set with which I have experience in which gods could actually be killed.

In LoCitP, the first LoC game on this site, gods could be killed. As I mentioned before, only ONE was ever killed despite quite a LOT of combat going on.

However, the only way to kill a god was to beat it in combat and reduce its Divine Rank to -1. All new gods started at DR6 and gained only 3AP per week. Attacking cost 3AP. Winning a combat allowed you to (as one option among several) reduce the loser's DR by 1 and only 1.

As one person has suggested, he would just attack and kill a character he opposes first thing. To actually kill the player, he would have to attack and win a minimum of seven combats. That's 21AP and the only action he gets to do for seven weeks. And that's assuming the other god doesn't spend AP to raise his own DR in those seven weeks and that he receives no allies at all and doesn't win any combats.

This is just highly unrealistic. It's possible to kill another god under those rules and using that particular silly mindset, but it's damned hard to do. In reality, it would take much longer than the minimum seven weeks mentioned above.

In every single combat instance I've ever seen in any LoC, allies always threw in their AP on both sides to affect the outcome of the battle, even characters who are not allied to either party at all but still have some stake in what's being fought over. And if one player decided to take the route suggested and focused solely on eliminating "enemies," then other gods always banded together to stop him.

The threat is there and definitely something to watch out for, but it isn't this big, scary, heinous thing that must be crushed at all costs that some people make it out to be.

On another note, the original combat rules had combat last for three rounds. The winner of each round got to do one free 1AP Mold Land action to represent the residual effects of divine combat echoing out across the planes. This resulted in some really, really cool things in LoCitP. One such event was when Lossethir plucked out Varr's eye and hurled it into the material plane so that he couldn't recover it. It took up orbit around the planet, becoming a small moon, and the tears falling from it formed an belt of ice around the planet that the mortals named The Tears of Varr and worshiped as a sign of the prowess of the gods. In another combat, a god was wounded, and a single drop of blood fell to earth, creating the Crimson Steppes, a badlands of red stone and dust that was later inhabited by a cool nomadic people. In another instance, an evil demigod who lived with her mortal slaves won one round of combat that she knew she would ultimately lose, so she sank her own island nation to prevent her enemies from capturing it.

I don't see how any of those outcomes were bad, heinous, or anything else. They ended up being great additions to the game that would never have occurred without the forced combat with the threat of permanent death. It was that very threat that prompted the majority of the combats in the first place.

And despite "warnings" to the contrary, such combat never gave griefers an edge. A griefer simply could not get enough players on his side to cause any problems or kill other gods. It wasn't a simple task, and the other players had a way to stop him, namely Combat. We had less need for moderators meddling in the game, because, guess what, we had options to rectify problems and settle issues ourselves within the rules of the game. Hell, just threatening to attack someone was often enough to get them to back off.

ShadowFireLance

2013-05-28, 05:07 PM

...Rizban. You have got to stop reading my mind on the peoples of this thread. I was literally about to post something like your Opening Paragraph.

And He has points people, Gods can be, But it represents a significant expenditure of Ap, Not unlike what it took to kill a god in Mythology.
I would personally back that statement up, If it was implemented with the new rules, I would back it up 100%.

Preaplanes

2013-05-28, 05:07 PM

Great! So let's write it into the rules, yes, and not rely on something as unreliable as player creativity to do our own jobs as game designers.

Nobody's forcing you to make it boring or interesting, but if you decide to play a murder god, and don't make your kills interesting, then you're a hypocrite if you complain about the kills not being interesting.

You can god-mod somebody who isn't considered playing anymore; at that point they're an NPC with no plot armor.

Rizban

2013-05-28, 05:10 PM

You can god-mod somebody who isn't considered playing anymore; at that point they're an NPC with no plot armor.I think this is awful. There shouldn't be any god modding at all.

Preaplanes

2013-05-28, 05:14 PM

I think this is awful. There shouldn't be any god modding at all.

I think it's a better solution than "they simply stop moving forever" once they hit the no-post time limit. Gives the gods some flavor as they go.

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-28, 05:16 PM

Would you point me towards it? I can't find it through a keyword search for "apathy".

Its not usually under the general rules for LOC because each game handles the timeframe of it differently. Generally its two or three rollovers. I've never played in a game without it.

EDIT: I'm noticing a fair number of what I assume to be typos, which makes it kinda tough for me to follow what people are saying. Normally I wouldn't say anything but its not an isolated incident.

Grinner

2013-05-28, 05:17 PM

Nobody's forcing you to make it boring or interesting, but if you decide to play a murder god, and don't make your kills interesting, then you're a hypocrite if you complain about the kills not being interesting.

You can god-mod somebody who isn't considered playing anymore; at that point they're an NPC with no plot armor.

I don't think we're quite seeing eye to eye, though. When the player character is reduced to a mere NPC, killing it is like shooting a small, fuzzy, and altogether harmless animal (or maybe a fish in a barrel?). I can dress it up however I want, but at the end of the day, it still feels pointless. To that end, any player is going to tend to handwave the killing of an inactive god.

I'm trying to account for psychology here.

Edit: Killing an inactive god just isn't the same story as that of some cataclysmic war.

mystic1110

2013-05-28, 05:23 PM

I think it's a better solution than "they simply stop moving forever" once they hit the no-post time limit. Gives the gods some flavor as they go.

I usually PM the player and ask what they want to do with their god. Endless strife had the best example of that with the God plague - over 10 dead gods appeared as characters :smallsmile:. Still proud of that - too bad the ultimate bid bag of that arc never got his confrontation or anything

Rizban

2013-05-28, 05:25 PM

I'm 100% against the killing of inactive gods.

I'm in favor of having a maximum number of AP possible, after which a god no longer gains additional AP.

I believe there's room for a player going inactive and then coming back a month later, fluffing it as his god having been asleep, living amongst his mortals as one of them, or getting caught up trying to solve a particularly difficult rubik's cube (noticing only after a couple of centuries that someone switched two of the stickers, making it impossible to solve).

A person's character should never be killed off with a hand wave. I can't even fathom how the same person can be wholeheartedly against forced combat and being able to affect the creations of another player against their will and at the same time support the hand wave annihilation of everything a player has put into the game. That makes zero sense.

Preaplanes

2013-05-28, 05:26 PM

I don't think we're quite seeing eye to eye, though. When the player character is reduced to a mere NPC, killing it is like shooting a small, fuzzy, and altogether harmless animal. I can dress it up however I want, but at the end of the day, it still feels pointless. To that end, any player is going to tend to handwave the killing of an inactive god.

I'm trying to account for psychology here.

Considering you can simulate any level of competition using a sytem like the ATK/DEF/HP system, or the RCR dice-based system (that's extra easy if you don't see decimal multipliers, just use anydice), killing another god is never going to be interesting if you know your statistics.

There's a set chance you win, and a set chance you lose. It's all statistics. If I have the distinct advantage, I see no reason why I should bother to take your god seriously and do anything but dodge and no-sell your attacks.

Psychology says that if you know the odds are in your favor, aka you have the most power, you're probably going to throw your weight around. It's not as dangerous for you as it is for everybody else.

That god with 8d6 attack, 4d6 defense, and 80 hit points is going to mop the floor with that poor 7/1/2 every day. It won't even be a contest. If that god happens to be evil? Well, you're boned.

I'm 100% against the killing of inactive gods.

I'm in favor of having a maximum number of AP possible, after which a god no longer gains additional AP.

I believe there's room for a player going inactive and then coming back a month later, fluffing it as his god having been asleep, living amongst his mortals as one of them, or getting caught up trying to solve a particularly difficult rubik's cube (noticing only after a couple of centuries that someone switched two of the stickers, making it impossible to solve).

A person's character should never be killed off with a hand wave. I can't even fathom how the same person can be wholeheartedly against forced combat and being able to affect the creations of another player against their will and at the same time support the hand wave annihilation of everything a player has put into the game. That makes zero sense.

I'm against killing of active players, yes. Inactive ones, though, are taking up portfolios and concepts that could be used by others.

It makes perfect sense.

Rizban

2013-05-28, 05:29 PM

Considering you can simulate any level of competition using a sytem like the ATK/DEF/HP system, or the RCR dice-based system (that's extra easy if you don't see decimal multipliers, just use anydice), killing another god is never going to be interesting if you know your statistics.

There's a set chance you win, and a set chance you lose. It's all statistics. If I have the distinct advantage, I see no reason why I should bother to take your god seriously and do anything but dodge and no-sell your attacks.

Psychology says that if you know the odds are in your favor, aka you have the most power, you're probably going to throw your weight around. It's not as dangerous for you as it is for everybody else.

That god with 8d6 attack, 4d6 defense, and 80 hit points is going to mop the floor with that poor 7/1/2 every day. It won't even be a contest. If that god happens to be evil? Well, you're boned.

And you're assuming it's always a straight 1v1 fight. Unless it was a pre-arranged duel, I've never seen a fight where at least one other player didn't jump in on one side or the other.

Since you seem to have missed my long post above, I'll reiterate. In every game I've played in which combat and death were possible, people always jumped in to offer aid. Anyone who tried to throw their weight around, no matter how strong, was always opposed by a group of gods who managed to overcome them every single time.

rweird

2013-05-28, 05:31 PM

Rizban: I think that might be okay, though I have seen no method that makes something like what you proposed possible under the current rules.

Does anyone have a proposed system to do this? I kind of understand what the god-killers mean, and I might be okay with it, not sure though. I know it'd be different.

Preaplanes

2013-05-28, 05:32 PM

And you're assuming it's always a straight 1v1 fight. Unless it was a pre-arranged duel, I've never seen a fight where at least one other player didn't jump in on one side or the other.

Since you seem to have missed my long post above, I'll reiterate. In every game I've played in which combat and death were possible, people always jumped in to offer aid. Anyone who tried to throw their weight around, no matter how strong, was always opposed by a group of gods who managed to overcome them every single time.

So exactly how did they find out about this fight? I smell metagaming.

Man on Fire

2013-05-28, 05:33 PM

Corrected that to any. But that would probably lead to fights. Why not say

Strongest is Highest Rank. If more than one player is tied for highest rank it is the one with highest AP. A challenge is not an RCR challenge but a democratic vote between the pantheon members. The challenger and challengee do not get to vote (meaning that an effective change of command can only work in a pantheon with 3 or more members). This also means unpopular pantheon leaders can be displaced. The outsed leader will become a regular member of the pantheon.

I like that.

It's not supposed to, the vote signaled that people were only ok with upkeep for organizations

Thanks, now I get it.

Rizban

2013-05-28, 05:35 PM

So exactly how did they find out about this fight? I smell metagaming.You smell a lot of things. :smallannoyed:

Because god fights are usually pretty big deals. The players almost always announced their intentions openly before attacking, or the defending god yelled for help before making his combat roll. And even when they didn't, the reverberations and changes to the world (remember the free Mold Land action at the end of each round? See above) after the 1st round of the 3 rounds should be sufficient to draw the attention of other gods.

Not everyone is a griefer, and not everyone who wants combat has a griefer's mindset, as you keep trying to imply.

Rabidmuskrat

2013-05-28, 05:36 PM

Crazy left field idea from someone who hasn't actually played the game. Who knows, maybe I've got some objectivity or something?

Killing a god isn't possible by default. It can only become possible through a divine decree by one of the gods. This decree must include the method used to kill a god and what happens to the 'remains' of the god (do they simply vanish? do they get eaten by the victor? does their corpse float through the astral plane for all eternity?). Decree subject to mod approval, of course.

Of course, every divine decree requires an infusion, so what happens if the god who made the decree dies himself? Then the decree disappears and the gods regain their immortality! So making gods vulnerable paints a giant bullseye on your back. I know decrees don't usually disappear if their god dies, but this one may have a special clause, mods choice.

For a less drastic option, defeated gods (reduced to 0 hp) may be imprisoned in a location of the victor's choice through a condemn action (3ap curse). The 3ap must be paid at the moment of the victory, but can be countered by the defeated god paying 4ap, counter-countered by paying 5ap, etc, as normal. The imprisoned god regains ap as normal but becomes unable to perform any actions besides break his curse (curse +1 ap) at which point he becomes free (and full hp?). His breakout can be countered as normal. The imprisoned god's followers, seekers, legends, etc can still act as normal while their god is imprisoned.

Summary:
Silly idea.
Defeated gods can be imprisoned for AP.
Only a divine decree can allow a god to be permanently killed.

mystic1110

2013-05-28, 05:38 PM

That god with 8d6 attack, 4d6 defense, and 80 hit points is going to mop the floor with that poor 7/1/2 every day. It won't even be a contest. If that god happens to be evil? Well, you're boned.

Well considering my proposal the limit would be (over deity being 5 domains for the sake of argument)

Maximum attack 1d6+(10)[ from domains]+(10)[ from 10! attack artifacts]
Maximum defense 1d6+(10)[ from domains]+(10)[ from 10! defense artifacts]
Maximum HP 20+(120)[maximum roll plus from domains]+[60 from maximum roll artifacts]

considering you have 6 domains, an "average" god would have at maximum around

1d6+7
1d6+7
43 HP

and 1 artifact somewhere.

Nothing too crazy number wise

Rizban

2013-05-28, 05:38 PM

For a less drastic option, defeated gods (reduced to 0 hp) may be imprisoned in a location of the victor's choice through a condemn action (3ap curse). The 3ap must be paid at the moment of the victory, but can be countered by the defeated god paying 4ap, counter-countered by paying 5ap, etc, as normal. The imprisoned god regains ap as normal but becomes unable to perform any actions besides break his curse (curse +1 ap) at which point he becomes free (and full hp?). His breakout can be countered as normal. The imprisoned god's followers, seekers, legends, etc can still act as normal while their god is imprisoned.Something similar to this also happened in LoCitP. A defeated war god was imprisoned in an unmelting ice cube that the winning god used to chill his martini glass.

Preaplanes

2013-05-28, 05:40 PM

Grinner

2013-05-28, 05:42 PM

Considering you can simulate any level of competition using a sytem like the ATK/DEF/HP system, or the RCR dice-based system (that's extra easy if you don't see decimal multipliers, just use anydice), killing another god is never going to be interesting if you know your statistics.

There's a set chance you win, and a set chance you lose. It's all statistics. If I have the distinct advantage, I see no reason why I should bother to take your god seriously and do anything but dodge and no-sell your attacks.

That's true. In the end, numbers are numbers, but that's not what games are about, are they? Games, singleplayer or multiplayer, are about decisions and interaction, moderated by rules. Which brings me to my next point...

Psychology says that if you know the odds are in your favor, aka you have the most power, you're probably going to throw your weight around. It's not as dangerous for you as it is for everybody else.

That god with 8d6 attack, 4d6 defense, and 80 hit points is going to mop the floor with that poor 7/1/2 every day. It won't even be a contest. If that god happens to be evil? Well, you're boned.

This hypothetical murder god, what's his motivation? As Rizban's post on divine combat illustrates, most people just don't care enough, so long as the act of killing represents a significant investment.

Sure, he could kill just about anyone in the game, but what's the point? What reward is there in killing some no-name deity? There's more to psychology than ability. Even sociopaths understand the concept of reward.

mystic1110

2013-05-28, 05:43 PM

Is that what I proposed with

When you reach 0 HP, you are imprissoned till the next rollover OR choose to obey one command of the winning god. Your HP returns to 20 after obeying or after your imprissonment ends. (If you have any HP bonus artifacts they will still add to your HP)

But the proposal of

Of course, every divine decree requires an infusion, so what happens if the god who made the decree dies himself? Then the decree disappears and the gods regain their immortality! So making gods vulnerable paints a giant bullseye on your back. I know decrees don't usually disappear if their god dies, but this one may have a special clause, mods choice.

For a less drastic option, defeated gods (reduced to 0 hp) may be imprisoned in a location of the victor's choice through a condemn action (3ap curse). The 3ap must be paid at the moment of the victory, but can be countered by the defeated god paying 4ap, counter-countered by paying 5ap, etc, as normal. The imprisoned god regains ap as normal but becomes unable to perform any actions besides break his curse (curse +1 ap) at which point he becomes free (and full hp?). His breakout can be countered as normal. The imprisoned god's followers, seekers, legends, etc can still act as normal while their god is imprisoned.

looks interesting ?

Preaplanes

2013-05-28, 05:47 PM

That's true. In the end, numbers are numbers, but that's not what games are about, are they? Games, singleplayer or multiplayer, are about decisions and interaction, moderated by rules. Which brings me to my next point...

This hypothetical murder god, what's his motivation? As Rizban's post on divine combat illustrates, most people just don't care enough, so long as the act of killing represents a significant investment.

Sure, he could kill just about anyone in the game, but what's the point? What reward is there in killing some no-name deity? There's more to psychology than ability. Even sociopaths understand the concept of reward.

Something like this. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griefer) You don't need any reward aside from schadenfreude. If stealth is utterly impossible, like it would be with the free Alter Lands, then I could see why people would hesitate to attack. If not, then a quick kill is all too easy. And since gods aren't omniscient, they won't know what happened to poor Osirus.

You know what the best solution is? Two players or more OOC decide to have a good old fasioned God brawl, and ask the moderator to provide something to compensate for the one who decided to allow himself/herself to die. After all, like Rweird said, who the hell wants to lose their save game after dying to Alduin? If I played 60+ hours and then found all my saves gone, I'd be PISSED.

Rabidmuskrat

2013-05-28, 05:50 PM

Is that what I proposed with

But the proposal of
.

looks interesting ?

That is what gave me the idea, to be honest. But 'imprisoned until next rollover' seemed such an arbitrary time. Imprisoned until you break out seemed a much more realistic (and fun!) option.
Yes, you can immediately blow your 4 ap you got from rollover to try to escape, but your captor had then also just received his rollover and could possibly pay the counter cost. Now it would cost you 6ap to attempt to escape.
If, instead, you wait until your captor got distracted and spent his rollover ap on something else, escape becomes easy. And you've had a chance to recover in your prison, while he has been out, picking more fights...

Grinner

2013-05-28, 05:55 PM

Something like this. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griefer) You don't need any reward aside from schadenfreude. If stealth is utterly impossible, like it would be with the free Alter Lands, then I could see why people would hesitate to attack. If not, then a quick kill is all too easy. And since gods aren't omniscient, they won't know what happened to poor Osirus.

There was a condition on that, however.

The act has to represent a significant investment. You know Newton's third law, "For every action, there is an equal but opposite reaction."? That same logic applies here. For every cost, there must be a proportionately valuable reward. If killing someone took seven weeks for one tiny kick, would you still do it?

You know what the best solution is? Two players or more OOC decide to have a good old fasioned God brawl, and ask the moderator to provide something to compensate for the one who decided to allow himself/herself to die. After all, like Rweird said, who the hell wants to lose their save game after dying to Alduin? If I played 60+ hours and then found all my saves gone, I'd be PISSED.

That's acceptable. I also like Rabidmuskrat's first proposal, though it's reliant upon a game-wide mutual assured destruction policy.

Deadlykire

2013-05-28, 05:58 PM

Preaplanes

2013-05-28, 06:00 PM

There was a condition on that, however.

The act has to represent a significant investment. You know Newton's third law, "For every action, there is an equal but opposite reaction."? That same logic applies here. For every cost, there must be a proportionately valuable reward. If killing someone took seven weeks for one tiny kick, would you still do it?

I now direct you to the MMO term "Camping your corpse". People have been known to spend hours doing nothing but killing the same low-level person over and over, not letting them run away or respawn for more than a few seconds, with no way to read the opponent's emotion due to scrambled cross-faction chat, just for the thought of the other guy getting more and more frustrated.

So, yeah, people would still do it. Jerks, yes, but you're not exactly a nice guy if you're killing another person's character without asking.

Rizban

2013-05-28, 06:01 PM

You know what the best solution is? Two players or more OOC decide to have a good old fasioned God brawl, and ask the moderator to provide something to compensate for the one who decided to allow himself/herself to die. After all, like Rweird said, who the hell wants to lose their save game after dying to Alduin? If I played 60+ hours and then found all my saves gone, I'd be PISSED.Two things.
1. A moderator shouldn't be required to play the game. A Moderator's only role should be to approve new player submissions, explain rules misunderstandings, ask for clarification on questionable actions, and try to arbitrate disagreements. They should NOT be required to merely PLAY the game.

2. A moderator should NEVER give something to someone for any reason. Moderators should not be able to create new things, destroy things, or transfer ownership of things. That is far too much power to give anyone in this game, especially someone who has their own character and their own vested interests in the game.

Grinner

2013-05-28, 06:01 PM

So I'll admit I didn't read all 11 pages of this... but I'm interested in this system. Who is "voting" on the things on the first page? Is it the community, or a set group of creators?

Community.

I applaud the amount of work and thought that has apparently gone into this. Odd question, have you ever considered or does the system have mortal champions (aka players that play mortals)? I feel it might over complicate things, but with a once/3week posting rate you might be able to run a d&d style game within the system, it could lead to unplanned actions by the gods as mortals often do.

That's an interesting idea, but it does get at the heart of the game's focus. Are we trying to create a game of gods and heroes, or a way of generating settings for later games?

Rabidmuskrat

2013-05-28, 06:03 PM

You know what the best solution is? Two players or more OOC decide to have a good old fasioned God brawl, and ask the moderator to provide something to compensate for the one who decided to allow himself/herself to die. After all, like Rweird said, who the hell wants to lose their save game after dying to Alduin? If I played 60+ hours and then found all my saves gone, I'd be PISSED.

Yes! Yes yes yes! The best solution is ALWAYS to sort these things out OOC and then run through them IC with a predetermined result in mind. No rolls needed, just some awesome storytelling.

But there needs to be rules in place to deal with when people cannot reach an agreement OOC. I think combat (as in the RCR rolls, not the activity) should only occur when the players seek two different results and are unwilling to compromise.

Yes, nobody likes dying and losing everything, but the possibility of dying should exist. It makes everything you accomplish that much sweeter.

Question: Can gods hide from one another? If god A is wailing on god B, can god B just go hide from god A until he gets tired of looking? I mean crunch-wise, not fluff-wise.

Preaplanes

2013-05-28, 06:03 PM

Two things.
1. A moderator shouldn't be required to play the game. A Moderator's only role should be to approve new player submissions, explain rules misunderstandings, ask for clarification on questionable actions, and try to arbitrate disagreements. They should NOT be required to merely PLAY the game.

2. A moderator should NEVER give something to someone for any reason. Moderators should not be able to create new things, destroy things, or transfer ownership of things. That is far too much power to give anyone in this game, especially someone who has their own character and their own vested interests in the game.

So let me get this straight: You're against killing inactive players, but you're for killing active players without their permission? I'm pretty sure you've got your priorities mixed up there.

Grinner

2013-05-28, 06:05 PM

2. A moderator should NEVER give something to someone for any reason. Moderators should not be able to create new things, destroy things, or transfer ownership of things. That is far too much power to give anyone in this game, especially someone who has their own character and their own vested interests in the game.

That's true, there is a conflict of interest there...

Wasn't there a proposal a few pages back for something about AP refunds?

mystic1110

2013-05-28, 06:06 PM

So I'll admit I didn't read all 11 pages of this... but I'm interested in this system. Who is "voting" on the things on the first page? Is it the community, or a set group of creators?

I applaud the amount of work and thought that has apparently gone into this. Odd question, have you ever considered or does the system have mortal champions (aka players that play mortals)? I feel it might over complicate things, but with a once/3week posting rate you might be able to run a d&d style game within the system, it could lead to unplanned actions by the gods as mortals often do.

LoC is sort of an old game on these boards that has been through many alterations. The system can be voted on through the community - outside perspective is very welcome :smallsmile:

The original goal of LoC was to create a setting through God actions and then perhaps play in it. But i don't think having mortal players would work well while the god game is ongoing

Preaplanes

2013-05-28, 06:07 PM

That's true, there is a conflict of interest there...

Wasn't there a proposal a few pages back for something about AP refunds?

Yeah, but it was rough and patchy. Felt like giving a five dollar bill to somebody you just put in the hospital. Yeah it helps, but that sure as hell ain't gonna cover the costs.

rweird

2013-05-28, 06:08 PM

Two things.
1. A moderator shouldn't be required to play the game. A Moderator's only role should be to approve new player submissions, explain rules misunderstandings, ask for clarification on questionable actions, and try to arbitrate disagreements. They should NOT be required to merely PLAY the game.

2. A moderator should NEVER give something to someone for any reason. Moderators should not be able to create new things, destroy things, or transfer ownership of things. That is far too much power to give anyone in this game, especially someone who has their own character and their own vested interests in the game.

I agree about the mod not having IC powers. If a refund system is adopted, it should involve AP spent following some formula.

I agree with Rabidmuskrat about how those things should resolve if they happen.

mystic1110

2013-05-28, 06:10 PM

Yes! Yes yes yes! The best solution is ALWAYS to sort these things out OOC and then run through them IC with a predetermined result in mind. No rolls needed, just some awesome storytelling.

But there needs to be rules in place to deal with when people cannot reach an agreement OOC. I think combat (as in the RCR rolls, not the activity) should only occur when the players seek two different results and are unwilling to compromise.

Yes, nobody likes dying and losing everything, but the possibility of dying should exist. It makes everything you accomplish that much sweeter.

Question: Can gods hide from one another? If god A is wailing on god B, can god B just go hide from god A until he gets tired of looking? I mean crunch-wise, not fluff-wise.

Rabidmuskrat winning the thread recently :smallbiggrin:

Rabidmuskrat

2013-05-28, 06:13 PM

And I don't even play the game! (yet)

Preaplanes

2013-05-28, 06:14 PM

And I don't even play the game! (yet)

Hey, just makes you a neutral voice. Means you aren't saying "But I liked it that way" or "yeah, but that didn't happen... well, not yet... more than once..."

Grinner

2013-05-28, 06:18 PM

I agree about the mod not having IC powers. If a refund system is adopted, it should involve AP spent following some formula.

I agree with Rabidmuskrat about how those things should resolve if they happen.

I haven't got it quite worked out yet, but how about an OOC bidding mechanic, followed by RCR as suggested in Rizban's Divine Combat post? That provides a way to resolve conflict peaceably, and if one player feels outright combat to the death must ensue, it's sufficiently costly as to make him think twice.

Deadlykire

2013-05-28, 06:21 PM

I'll draw up a longer post addressing each of the items under "voting". First though... gods should be able to die. Other gods should be able to pay AP to raise them. The raised god should suffer a step down of 1 level (unless already at the lowest level) and be immune to combat, complete participation block. For 1 week(or 3 weeks, however the combat rounds work).

This means another sympathetic god can raise a friend from the dead. It should be at a significant cost to the god raising. Think of it as basically one god imparting a portion of their power into the other god to raise him.

You should not be allowed to extinguish a god as a moderator. No "god" modding. The players are gods as is, there is no RP way to kill said god off. I like the idea of just letting the sit at max AP.

Preaplanes

2013-05-28, 06:26 PM

Rabidmuskrat

2013-05-28, 06:28 PM

Hey, just makes you a neutral voice. Means you aren't saying "But I liked it that way" or "yeah, but that didn't happen... well, not yet... more than once..."

It also means that I have no experience as to whether anything I suggest is even remotely applicable or starry-eyed idealism.

Final nugget of wisdom, at the risk of losing the thread again.

If you are playing a multiplayer game and consider what you created in the game as your biggest accomplishments, then you're playing the wrong game. There are plenty single player games out there.
It is your interactions with other players that are of real value, especially in a game like this where your only creations are words, and even if your character is slain, those interactions still happened. They are immortalized in the very thread that your character died in.

The question isn't 'should we allow gods to die?', but rather, 'how can we make gods dying EPIC fun for all involved?'.

Rizban

2013-05-28, 06:34 PM

Just wanted to post this list again, though I've edited a few jargon things for clarity and added comments, both marked in red.

Divine Injuries

A 1 point reduction in the loser's DR.
The winner gains one of the loser's portfolio elements. Any domains related to it are lost if the loser does not gain a new element to accompany them within two Divine Months weeks.
The winner may Contest one of the loser's Domains. (Winner gains the Domain on his list. More than one god has it, making it "Contested.")
If the combatants had a Contested Domain, the winner can officially claim the domain as his own. The loser no longer has the Domain. (If both gods hold the same domain, the winner makes the loser lose it.)
Steal artifact and reform it (Take control of artifact and alter the fluff, e.g. sword reforged, temple rebuilt, etc.)
Break one of the loser's artifacts and gain 1 AP
Reduce enemies AP by 2d6. If they don't have enough, they loose half of their weekly AP until the debt is paid off. (This option was a bit high and was changed later to be based on the loser's DR, with higher DR losing more AP.)
Some other penalty that both parties can agree upon, such as a roleplaying requirement which must be followed, e.g., never directly attempt to influence the winner's followers in a certain region, support the winner as an Ally in future combats, give up being patron deity of a specific city (And this right here seems to be the thing that Preaplanes has been arguing for. Gasp! It existed in the rules from the beginning as one of the options.)

Remember also that combat takes three rounds, winner is best two out of three.
The winner of each round get a free 1 AP Mold Land action to represent the echoes of divine combat affecting the multiverse.

The winner gets to choose which divine injury the loser must endure; however, there was also a way for the loser to mitigate that with a successful roll and choose his own injury.

Combat itself was based off of a number of things and fairly in depth (with four classes, special abilities, equipment, and such). While not perfectly balanced, it was pretty decently done. Yes, the stronger gods were stronger, which is as it should be, but even with spending everything on combat optimization, they weren't unbeatable, even in a one on one combat.

Rizban

2013-05-28, 06:36 PM

If you are playing a multiplayer game and consider what you created in the game as your biggest accomplishments, then you're playing the wrong game. There are plenty single player games out there.
It is your interactions with other players that are of real value, especially in a game like this where your only creations are words, and even if your character is slain, those interactions still happened. They are immortalized in the very thread that your character died in.

The question isn't 'should we allow gods to die?', but rather, 'how can we make gods dying EPIC fun for all involved?'.This right here is what I've said several times over and keep getting shouted down about. :smallannoyed:

Deadlykire

2013-05-28, 06:41 PM

Doubt it will be, sorry if this is a double post:

1) Variable power is the way to go especially if you have RP heavy gods. A very simple curse could be devastating if used correctly. I could curse a society with the black plague, this should be expensive. Or I could infect non-sentient life such as rats, with the black plague. This should be inexpensive. Another god can spend a small amount of AP to then counter this by blessing the populace to realize their cleanliness is the issue. This then moves into outright just cursing the population. Which is where the "original" curse started.

2) I like the family system. But a family may not be a pantheon (Hades would not be in Zues' pantheon). In the strict case of a pantheon in combat, I'd go with as the system is.

3) No themes. Maybe name your ages, but if it is the "golden age" an evil god may be doing all he can to destroy said golden age. Themes restrict the players. If a Pantheon elects for a theme fine. Might even be the way to go.

Might include another option: Societies exist in an age. The powerful societies during this age increase their Pantheons AP generation by 1. This clearly has ways it could get out of hand, but reading these posts leads me to believe other "gods" would help to bring this in check.

4-6) Is apparently going to require a lot more reading.

7) Relics grant only thematic bonuses.

8) This is the perfect spot in my opinion to add players into your god mod game as mortals if you want them to be there. They may even have a separate thread, and hey look the gods they pray to are present to answer/ignore/deny their desires. This is even reflected by a god spending AP to do so.

Add a stat to your standard player to indicate how well known/great their feats are. Once they hit a set level they can achieve demi-god or deity status themselves. Interesting way to garner new deities.

9-10) Yet more reading to do!

11) Age type system. Nations/societies rise and fall. All nations together may experience the same thing. The dark age in Europe may not be the dark age in Australia

12) No upkeep. Once a society/organization/nation is setup it should run itself. I should expend AP as normal to increase their prosperity or hurt them.

13) Variable power. If humans and orcs already exist, it should be cheaper to create half-orcs. If only humans exist, it should cost more to create orcs/elves/etc. Higher LA adjustment creatures/beings should cost more. They are more powerful.

Additional thoughts:
Variable AP or bonus AP from nations. A nation of 100 should grant their deities less AP than a nation of 1000 or even 10000. This helps with "afk" gods as well. It'll decrease their AP generation to a grinding halt as other gods take over leadership of their societies. Have a cap on the amount of AP generated from this (no god should get 100 AP in a round).

Grinner

2013-05-28, 06:44 PM

This right here is what I've said several times over and keep getting shouted down about. :smallannoyed:

I think what's important is that we're at least agreeing on something now.

Preaplanes

2013-05-28, 06:52 PM

I think what's important is that we're at least agreeing on something now.

In such a case it should still bet a little better than a booby prize.

If your god dies, then you're back to square one. You've just wasted weeks or months on a character that was summed up with nothing more than a few easily ignored or destroyed trinkets here and there. All because some jerk(s) decided for you that they wanted your god to die.

Sure, you might be able to make it fun for everybody else, but if you weren't done with your god yet, where's the fun for you?

Rizban

2013-05-28, 06:56 PM

In such a case it should still bet a little better than a booby prize.

If your god dies, then you're back to square one. You've just wasted weeks or months on a character that was summed up with nothing more than a few easily ignored or destroyed trinkets here and there. All because some jerk(s) decided for you that they wanted your god to die.

Sure, you might be able to make it fun for everybody else, but if you weren't done with your god yet, where's the fun for you?And if you're so antisocial or such a jerk yourself that you tick everyone off and can't get any allies to help defend you, then what does that say about your character? Maybe it was you who was ruining things for everyone else and why they all teamed up against you.

You keep assuming that the dying god is a victim here when that's not always or even usually the case, at least not in the exceedingly rare cases of combat that I've actually seen in actual games where such a system actually existed and was actually used.

Deadlykire

2013-05-28, 06:58 PM

In such a case it should still bet a little better than a booby prize.

If your god dies, then you're back to square one. You've just wasted weeks or months on a character that was summed up with nothing more than a few easily ignored or destroyed trinkets here and there. All because some jerk(s) decided for you that they wanted your god to die.

Sure, you might be able to make it fun for everybody else, but if you weren't done with your god yet, where's the fun for you?

You ever play a game of D&D where the DM has no problem watching characters die? I've played a game and had a character die off in combat after 3 months of playing. We played for a few hours every week, it sucks. It is very much a part of the game. I think establishing rules for the death of a god is good. If you, as a mod, do not like such rules then tweaking the rules just slightly to avoid "character deaths" shouldn't be much.

It is the idea of actions have consequences. If you are the player going around killing off gods for the sake of killing gods, you might get one. The next time you attempt it you'll probably be met with more resistance.

Preaplanes

2013-05-28, 07:00 PM

And if you're so antisocial or such a jerk yourself that you tick everyone off and can't get any allies to help defend you, then what does that say about your character? Maybe it was you who was ruining things for everyone else and why they all teamed up against you.

You keep assuming that there's a victim here when that's not always or even usually the case.

If there aren't victims, then why not do away with RCR/divine combat rules altogether and just decide out of combat? Oh yeah, it was something along the lines of "It prevents the mods from having to settle arguments".

There are victims in that kind of system. Consider me Neutral: I like guidelines, hate laws. Laws are too easy to exploit.

You ever play a game of D&D where the DM has no problem watching characters die? I've played a game and had a character die off in combat after 3 months of playing. We played for a few hours every week, it sucks. It is very much a part of the game. I think establishing rules for the death of a god is good. If you, as a mod, do not like such rules then tweaking the rules just slightly to avoid "character deaths" shouldn't be much.

Yes. I've played that. Those kinds of games never tend to flourish. Hell, I walked out on a game like that just a few weeks ago.

Terrible company. One of them wanted to play a... well, an overly promiscuous 40 year old elf lady (that's chronological age, not elf years). And because the DM was one of the "do what you want" types who refused to actually put some limits on us, it was almost allowed until I played Rules Lawyer with the minimum age charts.

Grinner

2013-05-28, 07:00 PM

In such a case it should still bet a little better than a booby prize.

If your god dies, then you're back to square one. You've just wasted weeks or months on a character that was summed up with nothing more than a few easily ignored or destroyed trinkets here and there. All because some jerk(s) decided for you that they wanted your god to die.

Sure, you might be able to make it fun for everybody else, but if you weren't done with your god yet, where's the fun for you?

Speaking of square one, we're now there again. :smallsigh:

So, I think the real question here is, Is the game about the player or the setting? Is it an RPG or a worldbuilding game? Is the threat of death in either case great enough to warrant banning combat outright?

I say it's about the setting; it's a worldbuilding game; and the threat of death is negligible and requires so much effort that any death would make for the beginnings of an epic.

Edit: Also, the numerous refund mechanics suggested 6-8 pages back? Those are still there.

Rizban

2013-05-28, 07:01 PM

If there aren't victims, then why not do away with RCR/divine combat rules altogether and just decide out of combat? Oh yeah, it was something along the lines of "It prevents the mods from having to settle arguments".

There are victims in that kind of system. Consider me Neutral: I like guidelines, hate laws. Laws are too easy to exploit.Such as the law of "You can't touch my stuff without my explicit permission"?

Note that I also edited my post before you replied to clarify my final statement.

Preaplanes

2013-05-28, 07:05 PM

Such as the law of "You can't touch my stuff without my explicit permission"?

Note that I also edited my post before you replied to clarify my final statement.

I'm also not chaotic, jerk. I'm not for the kind of anarchistic BS you seem to be for :smallannoyed:.

Grinner

2013-05-28, 07:06 PM

If there aren't victims, then why not do away with RCR/divine combat rules altogether and just decide out of combat? Oh yeah, it was something along the lines of "It prevents the mods from having to settle arguments".

Mods can't settle arguments, because they have their own characters, who may or may not be involved in pantheon politics.

There are victims in that kind of system. Consider me Neutral: I like guidelines, hate laws. Laws are too easy to exploit.
How so? The fact that you're actively butting heads without conceding any points doesn't indicate neutrality.

Preaplanes

2013-05-28, 07:09 PM

Mods can't settle arguments, because they have their own characters, who may or may not be involved in pantheon politics.

So the mod can't be impartial? What, are we our characters now? For crying out loud...

Deadlykire

2013-05-28, 07:09 PM

It sounds like an RPG world building game. Meaning that if you were just industrial and uninspired it could be "done" rather quickly. I'd prefer a group of players that have an imagination and add fluff.

Assuming you allow combat, and like fluff. And it seems 1 week ~1month for mortals? A 7 week war is 7 months. Imagine that from the mortal's perspective.

"Son, do not anger the gods. I remember a time when we began to not believe. The god's wrath was so furious the sky was darkened for a year. The earth seemed to tear itself apart as fissures in the ground came from no where. The seas were in turmoil, thousands were lost to the flooding. Then the lava came, it wiped out entire countries. We began to believe again and prayed feverishly, but our prayers went unanswered. We despaired, and then as quickly as it started the time of turmoil ceased. Our prayers were answered, it was as if the gods had finally returned after a long absence."

mystic1110

2013-05-28, 07:11 PM

Not a mod in this thread but. . . I'm imposing: time out time.

I'm seeing a lot of frowny faces . . . so lets take a short break everyone.

:smallsmile:

Rizban

2013-05-28, 07:14 PM

Not a mod in this thread but. . . I'm imposing: time out time.

I'm seeing a lot of frowny faces . . . so lets take a short break everyone.

:smallsmile:

I agree.

I really don't understand why some people are so confrontational and so easily offended by views that differ from their own or the personal attacks being made.

Preaplanes

2013-05-28, 07:16 PM

I agree.

I really don't understand why some people are so confrontational and so easily offended by views that differ from their own or the personal attacks being made.

No real room to talk there, Rizban.

Last shot. Dropping it now.

Grinner

2013-05-28, 07:16 PM

So the mod can't be impartial? What, are we our characters now? For crying out loud...

You're forgetting that the mod is as human as anyone else, complete with human biases. I especially wouldn't trust such a critical component to human whim.

Elemental

2013-05-28, 07:17 PM

Not a mod in this thread but. . . I'm imposing: time out time.

I'm seeing a lot of frowny faces . . . so lets take a short break everyone.

:smallsmile:

Damn it... I was just going to post something... Because I spent the better part of half an hour on it, I'll just put it in a spoiler.

How about to address this problem we do this:

Magnitude Ranks (For the Bless and Curse actions)

1 AP: From a single person to an average-sized town's worth of people. A section of an army. An exceedingly sparsely populated area (i.e., a non-magical forest)

3 AP: Anywhere from a large city's worth of people. A small army in its entirety. A rural, but settled are to a large nation or kingdom, and all within it, including settlements of any size. Anyone matching a SPECIFIC descriptor (I.e., Arcane Spellcasters, Commoners, those who worship a certain god)

5 AP: THIS IS A DIVINE DECREE AND REQUIRES EXPENDITURE OF AN INFUSION:

If you want to effect A super-massive continent (such as Pangaea), or several smaller ones (such as Europe and Asia). A world-spanning empire. The population of the western hemisphere. A massively generalized group of people (i.e., Casters, Militaries, those who worship any god on a certain pantheon) to Everyone. Everywhere.

Sounds good to me. It's a simple system with power variance that fits into what we have now.

Pantheons

When you a born into the game - you automatically join a pantheon between your progenitor and yourself, unless your progenitor is already part of a pantheon and in that case you will join that pantheon. A god may only be a member of one pantheon at a time.

The pantheon is a sacred bond of fealty to the leader - gods in a pantheon aren't equals but instead sworn to the Leader.

Once per week the leader of a pantheon may ORDER a god in their pantheon to perform any action they are capable of performing OR may ORDER the pantheon as a whole into a cause - disobedience results in eviction from the pantheon. A god is never forced to use AP to fulfill an order.

But being a leader brings it's own responsibilities. The leader of any pantheon must obey these rule:

Pantheon leader cannot openly act against the good of the pantheon. If he does, any member may challenge him for the rulership.
Good of the pantheon is OBJECTIVE. Thus when you create a pantheon you must state a Pantheon GOAL. This rule does not apply to the automatically generated pantheons of family members. In that case GOOD is simply defending each other from non-family members.
Pantheon leader must defend members of his pantheon against attacks of other gods (that he knows of), either by himself or by sending other members of the pantheon.

Create Pantheon: 1 AP
Join a pantheon: 1 AP
Subordinate your pantheon to another pantheon: 1 AP.

That should work.

It's not supposed to, the vote signaled that people were only ok with upkeep for organizations

Umm... Check again. We voted for upkeep on Nations.

And on RCR. You know I have no opinion because I avoid it like the plague.

On Divine Combat

On another note, the original combat rules had combat last for three rounds. The winner of each round got to do one free 1AP Mold Land action to represent the residual effects of divine combat echoing out across the planes. This resulted in some really, really cool things in LoCitP. One such event was when Lossethir plucked out Varr's eye and hurled it into the material plane so that he couldn't recover it. It took up orbit around the planet, becoming a small moon, and the tears falling from it formed an belt of ice around the planet that the mortals named The Tears of Varr and worshiped as a sign of the prowess of the gods. In another combat, a god was wounded, and a single drop of blood fell to earth, creating the Crimson Steppes, a badlands of red stone and dust that was later inhabited by a cool nomadic people. In another instance, an evil demigod who lived with her mortal slaves won one round of combat that she knew she would ultimately lose, so she sank her own island nation to prevent her enemies from capturing it.

I don't see how any of those outcomes were bad, heinous, or anything else. They ended up being great additions to the game that would never have occurred without the forced combat with the threat of permanent death. It was that very threat that prompted the majority of the combats in the first place.

I like this. I like this a lot. We should so make combat a three round system and grant the winner of each round a free curse or alter land to show the thematic fallout of cosmic war.

I believe there's room for a player going inactive and then coming back a month later, fluffing it as his god having been asleep, living amongst his mortals as one of them, or getting caught up trying to solve a particularly difficult rubik's cube (noticing only after a couple of centuries that someone switched two of the stickers, making it impossible to solve).

A person's character should never be killed off with a hand wave. I can't even fathom how the same person can be wholeheartedly against forced combat and being able to affect the creations of another player against their will and at the same time support the hand wave annihilation of everything a player has put into the game. That makes zero sense.

I like this as well. Heavens... You're good at this...
However, the difficulty is will they come back or not? My suggestion is that a moderator PM when apathy sets in to see what they want done. Whether they're gone permanently or returning.

For a less drastic option, defeated gods (reduced to 0 hp) may be imprisoned in a location of the victor's choice through a condemn action (3ap curse). The 3ap must be paid at the moment of the victory, but can be countered by the defeated god paying 4ap, counter-countered by paying 5ap, etc, as normal. The imprisoned god regains ap as normal but becomes unable to perform any actions besides break his curse (curse +1 ap) at which point he becomes free (and full hp?). His breakout can be countered as normal. The imprisoned god's followers, seekers, legends, etc can still act as normal while their god is imprisoned.

Summary:
Silly idea.
Defeated gods can be imprisoned for AP.
Only a divine decree can allow a god to be permanently killed.

This is good. I love imprisonment as an idea. I enjoyed the binding of Belsheroth in chains of his own forging, his blinding and being forced to be mortal. It was so good.

That is what gave me the idea, to be honest. But 'imprisoned until next rollover' seemed such an arbitrary time. Imprisoned until you break out seemed a much more realistic (and fun!) option.
Yes, you can immediately blow your 4 ap you got from rollover to try to escape, but your captor had then also just received his rollover and could possibly pay the counter cost. Now it would cost you 6ap to attempt to escape.
If, instead, you wait until your captor got distracted and spent his rollover ap on something else, escape becomes easy. And you've had a chance to recover in your prison, while he has been out, picking more fights...

And your idea just gets better.

Now I have an opinion on RCR. Death should be avoided if possible, rather imprisonment for the divine spark of the loser should be a valid option. This encourages the sealing away of evil in temples and behind the stars and such. Velharan defeats Arlom and seals it away in a pocket of reality such that it can't steal people, Elune banishes the King of Hell such that he cannot manifest on the mortal world, Geth vanquishes Sathogen and seals him beneath the Labyrinth Eternal on Helidor, etc.

I also enjoy the idea of thematic fallout in the form of free alter lands or curses for each round's winner. For example, Chronamus spars with Ethridas and unleashes a hail of meteorites that scar the land, Nurgle battles Avacyn and his foul breath causes plague, Belsheroth and Kiloasa try to kill each other and fracture the Rings of Geasa, etc.

And people... Remember, when it comes to divine combat, calling out for help is a free action. Literally. I mean... Some systems running around had sending a message as an actual action and it costed no AP.
Now, of course, we have no such action in these rules, so it's safe to assume that you can call backup whenever and from whomever you want. So don't go picking fights without allies. If you have no backup if attacked: Flee, go into hiding, and try to forge alliances, etc. No one can be expected to fight a war on their own.
I cannot stress this enough, there are always options. When Belsheroth went mad and tried to force his will upon reality, half the Gods of Creation joined together in a glorious moment or four of harmony to bring him down and sought out what to do with the rampant Lord of Death.

Speaking of square one, we're now there again. :smallsigh:

So, I think the real question here is, Is the game about the player or the setting? Is it an RPG or a worldbuilding game? Is the threat of death in either case great enough to warrant banning combat outright?

I say it's about the setting; it's a worldbuilding game; and the threat of death is negligible and requires so much effort that any death would make for the beginnings of an epic.

Why can't it be both?

Deadlykire

2013-05-28, 07:20 PM

So the mod can't be impartial? What, are we our characters now? For crying out loud...

It is usually human nature to not be impartial when your own interests are concerned. This is why many things IRL that require impartiality require you not to have a conflict of interest, or it must be stated outright before hand. I work on research, if I have a financial stake in the outcome of the research, I must disclose this. My research is also then heavily scrutinized and watched over, because it requires as much impartiality as possible.

This conversation seems to be delving into a rather lively "discussion". Might I suggest that a combat/death system be fleshed out, with an option provided for those that do not wish death to be a part of their game. This could be as simple as instead of death imprisonment is used. A death system that allows reincarnation for an "infusion" (is that right?) could easily be adopted by someone such as preplanes who wishes for characters to not die.

I'm not saying don't limit things. Your example is a good example of when limits and quality modding/dming are required. But my actions should also carry with them some risk. As rizban has stated, if you are a jerk throughout the game and someone decides to kill you off, and you have no "friends" to aid you... then maybe your actions overall did warrant your "removal" from the game.

I'll be honest it may be a personal opinion thing. I play games such as XCOM on ironman mode and don't load saves. I become very attached to my characters. I'm devastated when they die, but I feel certain games should have this risk involved. This is one of those games.

Rizban

2013-05-28, 07:24 PM

It is usually human nature to not be impartial when your own interests are concerned. This is why many things IRL that require impartiality require you not to have a conflict of interest, or it must be stated outright before hand. I work on research, if I have a financial stake in the outcome of the research, I must disclose this. My research is also then heavily scrutinized and watched over, because it requires as much impartiality as possible.Having worked in a similar background myself, I can verify this.

This conversation seems to be delving into a rather lively "discussion". Might I suggest that a combat/death system be fleshed out, with an option provided for those that do not wish death to be a part of their game. This could be as simple as instead of death imprisonment is used. A death system that allows reincarnation for an "infusion" (is that right?) could easily be adopted by someone such as preplanes who wishes for characters to not die.I would say that, unfortunately, such a system has to be the last thing included. The only way to make such a system fair and balanced is to have the rest of the game in place first so that we know what is reasonable and meaningful for both combat and the benefits/penalties thereof.

I'm not saying don't limit things. Your example is a good example of when limits and quality modding/dming are required. But my actions should also carry with them some risk. As rizban has stated, if you are a jerk throughout the game and someone decides to kill you off, and you have no "friends" to aid you... then maybe your actions overall did warrant your "removal" from the game.

I'll be honest it may be a personal opinion thing. I play games such as XCOM on ironman mode and don't load saves. I become very attached to my characters. I'm devastated when they die, but I feel certain games should have this risk involved. This is one of those games.Agreed.

Deadlykire

2013-05-28, 08:43 PM

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-28, 10:20 PM

So I've taken the time to look all this over, seems cool. Also seems to try and do too much. While I've not played a game myself it seems that the system is TOO expansive. There are a ton of d20 games, for just about anything you could want to do. I'd suggest on creating a core set of rules/actions and allow the DM/Mod/Players to determine the setting. I'm getting this from the callouts of sci-fi in the rules as well as other posts I've seen about robots.

In essence a better approach may be to create a set of world builder/god rules that you simply "load" a theme into. If I want robots I'll use more of a d20 Modern theme. If I want magic/etc I'll use a d&d theme. This brings with it some restrictions. In trying to keep your theme in cannon, you somewhat limit what players can do, but allowing some exceptions works. Half-orcs require both orcs and humans to be present. Warforged require high level arcane magics. Undead requires aracana, and necromancy before they should be viable.

edit 2: Limit your domains. If you look at d&d no god has more than 5 domains. I believe they also only have 2, maybe 3 preferred weapons. Domains should match portfolios or the domains should help followers (eventual ones at least) further the god's goals in the mortal realm.

Soooooo.... This is basically circling us back around to the beginning of the thread, and has a raised up a number of things I'd hoped were more or less settled. I guess I ought to break it down.

So I've taken the time to look all this over, seems cool. Also seems to try and do too much. While I've not played a game myself it seems that the system is TOO expansive. There are a ton of d20 games, for just about anything you could want to do.

The system needs to be expansive because we are playing with characters that embody universal concepts and could (theoretically) embody entire universes. So the system has to be flexible and broad enough to cover as many possible permutations as it can.

Also, this system isn't too expansive in my opinion. It's about 10 pages of rules in Microsoft word, whereas Core D&D is three 300+ page books of rules.

I'd suggest on creating a core set of rules/actions and allow the DM/Mod/Players to determine the setting. I'm getting this from the callouts of sci-fi in the rules as well as other posts I've seen about robots.

That is the purpose of this thread. To create a single set of rules that people can use for nearly any god game. The issues with SF is just player opinions.

In essence a better approach may be to create a set of world builder/god rules that you simply "load" a theme into. If I want robots I'll use more of a d20 Modern theme. If I want magic/etc I'll use a d&d theme. This brings with it some restrictions. In trying to keep your theme in cannon, you somewhat limit what players can do, but allowing some exceptions works. Half-orcs require both orcs and humans to be present. Warforged require high level arcane magics. Undead requires aracana, and necromancy before they should be viable.

There was a Theme system suggested earlier in the thread, it's one of the voting topics. And now for my pet peeve:

1) Half-Orcs require Orcs, not humans. You need Orcs + Other Race to make half orcs and that other race doesn't need to be humans.
2) Warforged only require high level arcane magics in Eberron. As a god, I could make my Warforged divne, psionic, incarnum or even just have them be entirely mundane self replicating androids.
3) Undead doesn't require anything other than death and the ability to come back from it. There could be a world where the return of the dead is entirely, completely natural. In fact, that's the goal of my current LOC character. Undeath becomes just as much a part of the process of life as the rest of it.

In a god game, nothing is a must have other than gods and a way for them to create. Falling back on the old standard tropes is fine, but never tell me that something has to be done a certain way. As long as there is internal consistency in a fantasy story anything goes.

edit 2: Limit your domains. If you look at d&d no god has more than 5 domains. I believe they also only have 2, maybe 3 preferred weapons. Domains should match portfolios or the domains should help followers (eventual ones at least) further the god's goals in the mortal realm.

Limiting domains doesn't really do anything to balance or improve the play and Favored Weapons are just fluff under the current rules, many gods don't even have them.

2 domains or 100 domains doesn't really change anything.

=================

And now I think I'm going to have a lie down, because this thread is stressing me out.

mystic1110

2013-05-28, 10:27 PM

Elricaltovilla, Deadlykire is new to LOC and is trying to help out don't get stressed out. Also Deadlykire don't get stressed out. This thread got a little heated today, so people are. . . well stressed. ANYWAY

I'll see you all tomorrow. Have a good night, and hopefully we all wake up refreshed and happy :smallsmile:.

NichG

2013-05-28, 10:28 PM

Yeah, but it was rough and patchy. Felt like giving a five dollar bill to somebody you just put in the hospital. Yeah it helps, but that sure as hell ain't gonna cover the costs.

So lets work on this idea. What sort of reimbursement would be necessary to motivate you to accept various scales of defeat? Basically, how much of a bribe do you need to let someone:

- Publically defeat you with no other lasting consequences?
- Corrupt something you created?
- Outright destroy something you created?
- Imprison you for X amount of time?
- Permanently modify your character aesthetically (e.g. put out an eye)?
- Permanently modify your character mechanically (e.g. steal a domain)?
- Kill your deity?

Rizban

2013-05-28, 10:40 PM

- Publically defeat you with no other lasting consequences?
Nothing, provided he paid AP to start the combat.
- Corrupt something you created?
Nothing, provided he paid AP to start the combat.
- Outright destroy something you created?
Nothing, provided he paid AP to start the combat. There should be certain limits and constraints to ths.
- Imprison you for X amount of time?
Depends on the limitations of the imprisonment.
- Permanently modify your character aesthetically (e.g. put out an eye)?
Nothing, provided he paid AP to start the combat.
- Permanently modify your character mechanically (e.g. steal a domain)?
Nothing, provided he paid AP to start the combat.
- Kill your deity?
Nothing, provided he paid AP to start the combat. Should not be easy and require multiple combats to work them down to death.

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-28, 10:47 PM

- Publically defeat you with no other lasting consequences?
Nothing, provided he Opponent paid AP to start the combat.
- Corrupt something you created?
Nothing, provided he Opponent paid AP to start the combat.
- Outright destroy something you created?
Nothing, provided he Opponent paid AP to start the combat, plus There should be certain limits and constraints to ths(to be determined later).
- Imprison you for X amount of time?
Depends on the limitations of the imprisonment.
- Permanently modify your character aesthetically (e.g. put out an eye)?
Nothing, provided he Opponent paid AP to start the combat.
- Permanently modify your character mechanically (e.g. steal a domain)?
Nothing, provided he Opponent paid AP to start the combat.
- Kill your deity?
Nothing, provided he Opponent paid AP to start the combat. Should not be easy and require multiple combats to work them down to death.

Fixed that for you. Your bribe is that it costs your opponent AP to perform harmful actions against your god.

NichG

2013-05-28, 10:48 PM

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-28, 11:02 PM

I'm asking what reimbursement would convince you to allow this to happen without resisting it mechanically. What would it take to make you agree to forego RCR.

What would it take to make me forego RCR? Nothing. At this point I wouldn't do it. I flat out trust the dice more than I do other players because other players have screwed me over too many times.

Sometimes it works out that you and another player can agree on winning or losing a fight. Most of the time it doesn't. I'd rather just skip past the 15+ PMs, two pages of OOC discussion, and possible MOD intervention and go ahead and settle things, whether I win or lose.

RCR is impartial. It's not perfect, but it serves as a decent representation of my god's/society's power and capability.

Rizban

2013-05-28, 11:10 PM

I'm asking what reimbursement would convince you to allow this to happen without resisting it mechanically. What would it take to make you agree to forego RCR.

Yeah, what Elricaltovilla edited it to is accurate. The only "bribe" I require is that someone pays AP to do the combat; however, nothing would convince me to not use RCR or alternative system in combat. I wouldn't accept anything but roleplaying penalties from a strictly roleplaying fight.

NichG

2013-05-28, 11:33 PM

Elricaltovilla

2013-05-28, 11:45 PM

I think I'm failing to communicate my idea here. The interaction in this proposed system would go something like this:

God of Tyranny: Hey God of Flowers, I'm going to wipe your peace plants from the mortal plane!
Tyranny's Player to Peace's Player: This action is a 3AP curse for me. Based on the rules, if you accept outright you will get 5AP, and I will pay 3AP to enact the curse. If you refuse, I don't have to spend any AP but we can narrate my curse failing; of course you get nothing either.

God of Peace: My peace flowers will not bow to the will of tyrants! Give it your best shot!
Peace's Player to Tyranny's Player: I accept the conditions, go and narrate as you will.

... or alternately ...

God of Peace: My peace flowers will not bow to the will of tyrants! Give it your best shot!
Peace's Player to Tyranny's Player: Offer rejected, but I'm fine if you want to attack the Mopey Daisies instead.

You're doing a fine enough job of explaining yourself, I just have no interest in supporting a system like this.

In your example above, what happens when Tyranny's player doesn't WANT to attack the mopey daisies? Tyrrany wants to end the peace flowers, the daisies are no threat to him. Is he just **** outta luck?

That's what RCR is for. I just prefer to use it to settle all combats because I've learned that most players prefer to just no sell any attacks on their creations.

Rizban

2013-05-29, 12:08 AM

That's what RCR is for. I just prefer to use it to settle all combats because I've learned that most players prefer to just no sell any attacks on their creations.Yes, exactly. You can see for yourself in this thread the kind of violent opposition that arises in some people when you want to play with their toys.

Having an open combat system is the only realistic way around that obstacle. Anyone who doesn't want to play along with the "MINE! MINE! MINE!" attitude has no real options. He can either do as he's told, beg, waste lots of time on failed plots in an attempt to find someone willing to actually play with him, or just quit playing. None of those are very appealing options.

Now, I'm not saying that the defender should have no options for recourse, and I've done my best to present concepts and ideas that make it reasonably fair for all parties involved. In the rules I've referenced, it effectively take a week's worth of AP to start a combat and is incredibly difficult to actually do anything with any lasting harm to an enemy without spending multiple weeks worth of AP on it. If you're going to spend that much AP, then it has actually cost you something (time and AP) and should create substantive results.

ScionoftheVoid

2013-05-29, 12:50 AM

I haven't actually played before, but I am interested in this.

I think Preaplanes' concern is that anything that allows non-consensually destroying people's creations opens up the system to griefing. Ideally that wouldn't be a problem and people just wouldn't do it, but equally people being totally unwilling to ever have their creations destroyed ideally wouldn't be a problem either.
In particular, someone intending to cause grief isn't going to value the AP and time they're spending to destroy things or kill characters as the person resisting is going to value the time and AP they spend on their creations. It's no more valid to handwave that than to handwave the apparent unwillingness to allow one's creations to be destroyed.

AP spent on things can be refunded, but not the time or the creative effort used on them. And that doesn't go into people other than the creator adding to something. That suggestion is therefore not great as a consequence to having something destroyed without consent, but might be a good motivation to willingly allow things to be destroyed more often.

I have read through the whole thread, but may I ask for some more detail on why destruction of things made by people who have left the game was not acceptable to avoid stagnation or endless expansion? Surely if the player has left then they don't care as much about their creations as much as the people who have stuck around (excepting cases where they are actually unable to post for some reason), which should provide open targets for people wanting to destroy things in games where people generally aren't willing to compromise about it.

And Rizban, you're being really quite rude to the people you're arguing with. It's one thing to disagree with someone, it's quite another to make them out to be "violent", "confrontational" or "easily offended" in ways that you imply you aren't. :smallannoyed: It's probably a large part of why other people are having better success in communicating what you suggest that you've tried to say. (I'm pretty sure no one else has done this quite as badly, but I could be wrong. Rizban's examples certainly stood out.)

EDIT: Preaplanes' post about "anarchic BS" was also pretty bad form, but at least he doesn't try to pretend that he's not making personal attacks.

Lady Tialait

2013-05-29, 01:00 AM

Wow, even without the rules being in use, LoC still gets the fire into people's blood.

Seeing as I played in LoCitp, and ran two LoC games back when they were fairly young. I have a few things to say around here. You have a list of options and I can tell you want I think from experience, and conjecture.

WARNING: RANT RIDDEN

1. Bless/Curse (Omen/Word) System

Variable power; OR
1 AP for anytype of Bless/Curse

This one I have found works well either way, depending on what mechanically effect a bless/curse has. In LoCitp, Bless/Curse was used maining by the Goddess of Good (An eldrich Horror from another realm), and the God of Uncreation (A champion of the status quo, and a really the people's champion). The Bless/Curse mechanics allowed you to do pretty much anything you wanted with them, and allowed bursts of wonderful flavor into the world at a low price of 1 AP. The game was young, and nobody new exactly what to do with Bless/Curse, so it was often ignored, or used to do silly things.

As for LoC2, my first LoC that I ran, Bless/Curse was part of the overall interconnect cluster known as the 'Divine bidding' system. It was variable, and was almost the only action to do. It was part of the major Divine Arms race we had going on, and a great story where the First God was destroyed by a Mortal, and the God of Tyranny was marching against everyone else...and they were greeting him with open arms.

I'd say both ways can be interesting, but the first one allows for more storytelling and world building, a double win in my book.

2. Pantheon System

The family type system with no AP, no combat ;
family type system with AP, no combat ; OR
Keep system as is, no combat bonuses, but rules of shared alignment.

Oh Pantheons! They were always so fun to watch the alliances of the Gods get forged and broken, and reformed. I personally love the idea of the great congresses of Gods working to common goals. Hence, I like the idea of no limitations of WHO can join a Pantheon. I like the idea of the Pantheon acting like a machine, generating AP and doing it's own action.

The idea goes like this: each pantheon is opened with a purpose, giving the Pantheon 1 action it does per week. It gains 1 AP a week per 2 members, and does the action that fit it's purpose. Such as, "Our Pantheon will lay blessings upon the Fey +1 Blessing upon the Fey a week" the only maintenance is to have the Pantheon come up with a new blessing each week.

Also, if you have Pantheons, make it so you can leave them with ease. Enimga joined some odd clubs in his youth, and by the end, had no idea what they stood for anymore.

3. Theme system

Choose theme at the beggining of the game;
Choose theme at the beggining of each "age"; OR
None

I choose to say 'none' if I go off on a rant, I may say things that could be misconstrued as insults to certain people.

4. Doom System;

As proposed by Electrivilla;
similar to the one in the game "gods of mortals"; Or
None

Mortals rules? Is that what we are talking about here? I tried those in LoC2, and they caused no end of trouble. Ditch them, they are nothing but trouble and distract from worldbuilding and storytelling.

5. RCR System;

A "fixed" version of the one in "Blankest Slate"
As in original system as in "Originators of Divine Law;" OR
Other/compromise

LoCitp had a great combat system...well once it had a combat system. My God at the time Engima was built fully on flavor, and when the system was enacted, it went all weird. I bet Rizban can pull him up and show you.

We did some great things with it, and the 1 AP mold lands per divine combat round was brilliant.

I also think the Death of a God should be allowed to happen, with great effort. However, there should be a death throes for any such event. One last blast of brilliance for the defeated. You are done, your God is dead, and you won't be able to play them anymore. So many plans left unfinished, so many wrongs meant to be righted. My suggestion would be give a dying God a power boost representing his divine essence draining away, give him a sizable amount of AP (rough estimate 5-10) and one post allow this incarnation of ideas and cosmic norms spill into the world, before vanishing forever into the aether that spawned it.

Just what I think.

6. RCR Lose System;

As in original system as in "Originators of Divine Law;"
"Can't Counter Only;" OR
Other/compromise

What should be lost if you lose a divine combat?

That really depends on the reason for the combat, if someone is divine combating you to kill you? You need to lose your character if they win. If they are envious of your lands/toys/mortals and want to gain control of them? They win, they get that. It's pretty simple really.

I say this as a person who has played in at least 7 LoC games, and been in combat in all of them, only winning once. I've lost almost anything that has ever been mentioned. There is only once I was mad about the outcome and that is when I had come into the game, and spent my starting AP on outfitting my God with an artifact to help him in his future plans, and as soon as I finished, a Divine Combat was started against him for it, and when I said I would like to use the Divine Combat system to decide it, the Mods turned on me, and fiated that I lost. Gave my Artifact to the other person, costing me all my starting AP.

The time I won, was a sad pathetic loss of a win. In that LoC you could create DemiGods, and sacrifice them for a sizable combat boost. I was a Mothering God in that game, and a Shark God was assulting my children, so I sent my DemiGod into combat against him along with my Mothering God, and sacrificed her to win the divine combat. After a bunch of OOC whining about it, the outcome of the divine combat came to this: The Shark God had to regrow his Teeth, for the cost of no AP.

What I am trying to say here is, make it fair, make it cool, and make sure the costs of Divine Combat are equal to the effects of Divine Combat.

7. Relics/Artifacts;

Relics can only grant RCR bonus or thematic bonus;
Relics can grant RCR bonus or AP reduction of sometype;OR
Relics can only grant thematic bonus

Scrap them, they are nothing but trouble. If you want your God to have a golden sword, have at it hoss. As far as I am concerned, your personal image is your own problem not mine.

8. Hero Progession

Hero --> Legend Progression as in my last draft; OR
Hero/Leader --> Seeker --> Legend progression as in first draft.

Create concept......was kind of a sham that didn't work right in the original. From what I saw as I kept playing, people used it to create 'logic' in the game. So you wouldn't have elves who were born before the first flames of the sun. (LoCitp did, they worshiped the moon God, and the Sun was the son of the Knowledge God.) The thing is, it also creates really annoying limiters, I want to use my AP to make cool things happen, I don't want to get bogged down in what concepts exist or not.

Not a fan, I would scrap the whole create concept thing, the first chance I got.

9. Infusions

1 Infusion per divine level; OR
1 Infusion per ever odd divine level

This is interesting, reminds me of Divine Evolution from LoCitp, only better. I would say 1 per divine level looks good. Not much else to say there.

10. What can infusions do (AKA which actions do you want to be in the game)

Evolve Physically (extra 1 AP per rollover)
Divine Decree (basically a SUPER curse/bless (word/omen))
Break the Chains (break the material plane only for fledging god rule)
Monumnet (SUPER relice)
Any mix of the above
NONE of the above

Evolve Physically, but name it something else. I always hated having to reshape my image to fit the power increase.

Divine Decree is something we REALLY needed back in LoCitp, and I think once per Infusion sounds about right.

Break the Chains is silly, and should be removed.

Monument.....I don't like it, as an action.

I would also like to suggest infusions being required to create shards. I think that would allow you to give them more power.

11. Society Progression

Age type system;
Ap action of society. Nation separate action. organization separate action;
Ap action of society --> Nation --> organization; OR
Ap action of society --> Nation. Organization separate

Nation separate action. Organization separate action. The best way to do that.

12. Upkeep System
Pay upkeep on society
Pay upkeep on nation
pay upkeep on organization
any mix of the above
None of the above
action.

None. Upkeeps are just taxing your ability to move on and make even bigger and better things. We are looking to have a wonderful setting by the end of the game, and if you have to pay AP to keep stuff going, you can't do anything.

13. Races/Concept System

Variable power; OR
X AP for anytype of Races/Concept

Concept shouldn't really be something you have to pay for, if I use a Bless action, to bless the deer with magic, I should only pay 1. If I curse them with necromancy, I should only pay 1. Bless/Curse overrides Create Concept in my head, otherwise you are simply paying an extra tax and the world is going to get bogged down.

As for different prices for different types of life, I am for this. You see, the more AP you have to spend in something the more likely you are to spend more time with it. If I can make a Race for 2 AP, I will do so quickly, and forget just as quickly. So, Variable prices for different life, based on how much it should be focused on.

That was just my 2cp.