Pantheon 2.0 - Rules and Comments Thread

[Loredoctor]

This is the major difference in your outlook on the Game and mine, cousin. I do not view playing the Game to "win." I understand the need to dominate and score over other deities, but to so overwhelm others in DRP is unneccesary IMO.

Same with me. I see it less like a boardgame, more as a roleplaying game. I stated at the start of the game to two friends here, that I always intended for Nor Yekith to lose. I just wanted to have fun along the way.

[Astavyastataa Kadna]

... I stated at the start of the game to two friends here, that I always intended for Nor Yekith to lose.

Hmmmm .... perhaps some evil misdirection!!

[Bhakti]

Well, yes. That's one of the more common ways laws are made.

Actually, I think reason is.

You're not an American.

She says it is not against the Law to make threats, even specific, horrific ones. But she tells us it is against the Law to act against one who makes such threats.

There's a world of a difference between making threats and acting out those threats. If we're going to play a game where threats are reason enough to retaliate, then the consequence is that all conversations will become 'politcally-correct', loving and caring (to use an extreme example).

It is illegal in the USA to threaten someone. You get arrested, and you pay some just penalty. A fine; community service; whatever. And you have a criminal record. I feel this is a good law. You think if someone tells me they will kill my child, they should be able to walk away. I disagree. If it was not against the law - if I could not take legal action against that person for the threat - I would have not have the slightest problem killing that person to prevent my child's death.

I really think what is at heart is that Bhakti believes Nor will carry out his threats and that he's not prepared. Well, that's life. But he has no reason to break a law.

There is no way to prepare for what Yek is going to do. Nothing can give complete protection.

Heck, before she ascended it wasn't even against the Law for Yek to invade Bhakti's lands and forcibly kidnap some children. Meaning there were no unpleasant consequences for doing so.

That's not my problem. I did what I did knowing there would be consequences, but if you chose not to act because Bhakti would rather hug his enemies, so be it. But it's not my concern what you do.

That's what I said. And that's how I wish it could remain. But that's not the case.

It wasn't. I didn't like it, but was not willing to go to all out war over it, so I let it go. It was a personal matter between two deities.

In this situation, you made a decision - or we both did. I don't think gods should have laws 'hovering around' with consequences for their breaking. I think it's up to the gods involved to take issue, not act by default. And really, it's more interesting politically for things to go that way than invoking clauses.

Again, I agree. But now we have a deity of Law. I would prefer we be allowed to act as we want without Legal repercussions. But that is not the case. And since there are now Laws, and there will be more revealed, I would like a hand in making them.

Everyone has a say, but why should the majority dictate? I don't think any of us play this game to experience a simulation of courts or society. We are here to play Gods.

Everyone does not have a say. Hedra is telling us what the Laws are, and we're stuck with them.

[Mistress Cathy]

Lore said:

In this situation, you made a decision - or we both did. I don't think gods should have laws 'hovering around' with consequences for their breaking. I think it's up to the gods involved to take issue, not act by default. And really, it's more interesting politically for things to go that way than invoking clauses.

I agree with this entirely.

Everyone has a say, but why should the majority dictate? I don't think any of us play this game to experience a simulation of courts or society. We are here to play Gods.

Agreed but apparently not everyone has a say. You yourself have stated that the laws benefit Nor but they benefit no one else. That tips the scales in your favor and the game is no longer fair. Hedra has the only say and like Bhakti pointed out, that pretty much makes her the 'ruler' of the Pantheon.

If we must have laws (which frankly I would prefer not to have such bindings), then I think we should all have a hand in developing them and voting for them.

Personally, I think we should let the dice fall where they may.

[Mistress Cathy]

Bhakti and I were posting at the same time. eheh

[Bhakti]

Heh.

Anyway, yeah, I'd rather there were no Laws at all. But that's no longer an option. And since we do and will have Laws, what is their purpose/function?

[I'm Murrin]

I've started working on my contest entry. It's a creature from real-world myth--though reimagined to some extent--and I'm ripping heavily from the physiology and characteristics of real animals, but I'm hoping it won't seem too unoriginal...

[O-gon-cho]

Heh.

Anyway, yeah, I'd rather there were no Laws at all. But that's no longer an option. And since we do and will have Laws, what is their purpose/function?

I am sorry for returning to the same question over and over but...

Hasn't Pantheon always been played from the launch of version 1.0 with rules and Laws in place, even before the ascension of Hedra Iren? Didn't the AllFather always inform a deity, usually in private, of actions s/he could and could not do, or suffer the consequences from other deities?

Hedra Iren's Law, as far as I can tell, is still only enforcible by the fellow deities or the AllFather's discretion, correct? She has warned Adomorn of the consequences of launching an unjustified attack, namely that other deities may see it as such and turn against his nature of Justice, as he is not acting in a Just way? He may suffer a Crises of the Faith for the same reason, but that has always been at the AllFather's discretion; publicly acknowledged Law or not? I understand deities wishing to be able to act as they will, but even from when I was within the shell, I never had the impression that was totally the case. There were always limits and consequences in place. It just always struck me that without knowing what those were, that Nor Yekith always benefitted from deities not knowing what those limitations are. By discussing and having these rules and Laws recorded, then all deities will be able to take advantage of them as they may.

:::concerned I am still not making any sense to anyone else:::

[Menolly]

I've started working on my contest entry.

Me too.

It's a creature from real-world myth--though reimagined to some extent--and I'm ripping heavily from the physiology and characteristics of real animals, but I'm hoping it won't seem too unoriginal...

Ah well, I think I am known for being derivative. But I hope to at least submit an entry this time...

[Mistress Cathy]

I also have an idea for a creature.

However, mine seems more related to my domain. Is that ok?

Or, is it better to have it non-domain oriented?

[O-gon-cho]

I also have an idea for a creature.

However, mine seems more related to my domain. Is that ok?

Or, is it better to have it non-domain oriented?

Mine are definitely related to my race domain of dragons!!

[I'm Murrin]

Ah, on that subject... Though the creatures I want to submit for the Bestiary are not related to dragons, there are some superficial similarities... (Indeed, my description contains the line: "Though often mistaken for distant relatives of..."--then goes on to point out the difference.)
I hope you don't mind...

I'm still not entirely sure that this is the one I want to submit as a contest entry. I might still come up with something better.

[O-gon-cho]

Ah, on that subject... Though the creatures I want to submit for the Bestiary are not related to dragons, there are some superficial similarities... (Indeed, my description contains the line: "Though often mistaken for distant relatives of..."--then goes on to point out the difference.)
I hope you don't mind...

:sly grin:

As I have been told time and again, while I may be G-ddess of Dragons, other deities have dragons as well, and there are other types of dragons on Eiran besides the ones I know best in Zandarar. While said creature of your entry may not even be related to dragons, perhaps they would be most comfortable converting to the worship of a deity who may better understand them then others, should your entry see them introduced into the bestiary of Eiran.

[I'm Murrin]

I doubt they'll do much worshipping; they have the intelligence of a yorkshire terrier.

[O-gon-cho]

I doubt they'll do much worshipping; they have the intelligence of a yorkshire terrier.

Ooo, devotion without questioning...



Seriously, I have no problems with the concept.

[I'm Murrin]

Posted. A piece in the style of one of Eiran's many (ha) academics, probably excerpted from some larger book on the unusual wildlife of Eiran. Also, I hope it's alright that I made them quite common--in Eiran they're just another part of the wildlife, rather than something rare or magical.
I didn't intend anything by placing them in Landir--I just wanted the right environment, while keeping them a far removed from O-gon-cho's dragons as I could.

[Loredoctor]

You yourself have stated that the laws benefit Nor but they benefit no one else.

I don't recall making that part of the statement.

[Loredoctor]

It is illegal in the USA to threaten someone. You get arrested, and you pay some just penalty. A fine; community service; whatever. And you have a criminal record.

And we all know that America's laws are perfect.

I feel this is a good law.

Feeling that it is a good law is different from it actually being a good law. But your metaphor doesn't apply here: the situation we are facing is a law, that when broken, has much greater penalties - possibly war.

You think if someone tells me they will kill my child, they should be able to walk away. I disagree. If it was not against the law - if I could not take legal action against that person for the threat - I would have not have the slightest problem killing that person to prevent my child's death.

One should only ever kill in self defence. Look, this is a game, and I'm not going to have Xar split this thread into the Think Tank. So I'll cut through the debate on morals and laws: repurcussions need match the actions. War, or some serious penalty, should not be the result of war. It's not great effort of imagination to see that all pantheon arguments will become politically correct, because it's too easy for someone to act aggrieved. Further, some deities will always be morally ambiguous - must we chase after them?

Nor has made many threats, but as Hedra Iren pointed out all the deities here have done some bad things. I don't see anyone getting upset at our resident assassin's actions (or his existence, for that matter).

There is no way to prepare for what Yek is going to do. Nothing can give complete protection.

I can think of lots of ways, least of which is inventing a law that can be twisted to suit the person. Heck, that oath we uttered to get extra power - I found a way to circumvent the restrictions and actually abused the use of all that power.

Again, I agree. But now we have a deity of Law. I would prefer we be allowed to act as we want without Legal repercussions. But that is not the case. And since there are now Laws, and there will be more revealed, I would like a hand in making them.

I wasn't aware we were playing Law and Order the roleplaying game. You'd like a hand in creating them, which I have no problem. Of course, Nor Yekith cant.

Everyone does not have a say. Hedra is telling us what the Laws are, and we're stuck with them.

I've only been discussing Adamorn's idea of creating a law; I don't like that it's down to a vote. So we do have a say.

Cheers.

LM

[Bhakti]

And we all know that America's laws are perfect.

My point from before that was that America is absolute proof that "reason" is not one of the more common ways laws are made. For most of our history, they were made by tyrants, and designed to keep them in power. In the USA, they're made pretty much the same way. The lawmakers often pass laws that they think will keep them in power. Either because the people absolutely demand them, or powerful groups insist, or whatever.

I feel this is a good law.

Feeling that it is a good law is different from it actually being a good law.

Maybe so. But what I feel is a good law is just as valid as what anybody else feels is a good law.

One should only ever kill in self defence. Look, this is a game, and I'm not going to have Xar split this thread into the Think Tank.

I'm not as concerned. If I believe someone intends to kill my child, there is a MUCH MUCH greater chance of preventing it by killing that person first than by waiting for them to be in front of my child with a gun and hoping to stop the bullet from hitting him/her.

So I'll cut through the debate on morals and laws: repurcussions need match the actions. War, or some serious penalty, should not be the result of war. It's not great effort of imagination to see that all pantheon arguments will become politically correct, because it's too easy for someone to act aggrieved. Further, some deities will always be morally ambiguous - must we chase after them?

Only if I am convinced they are going to try to kill me or mine.

Nor has made many threats, but as Hedra Iren pointed out all the deities here have done some bad things. I don't see anyone getting upset at our resident assassin's actions (or his existence, for that matter).

I'm not aware of any of my followers having been assassinated. Knowing that Bhakti will not act against anyone who has not acted against him, Vadhaka has, to my knowledge, kept out of my affairs. Laws are made by those who see a need for them. I have not had a need to make Laws that inhibit Vadhaka. Yek is quite another matter.

I wasn't aware we were playing Law and Order the roleplaying game. You'd like a hand in creating them, which I have no problem. Of course, Nor Yekith cant.

He is free to participate in the process. But if he tries to pass a law that makes genocide legal, I'm going to speak in opposition. Murderers and other ne'er do wells in society don't ever want to see laws that prevent them from murdering. But without those laws, there's no society. Only anarchy. Survival of the fittest. If that's what we want for the Pantheon, I have no problem. But if we must have Laws, and Hedra's existence means we must, I'd like a say in them.

Everyone does not have a say. Hedra is telling us what the Laws are, and we're stuck with them.

I've only been discussing Adamorn's idea of creating a law; I don't like that it's down to a vote. So we do have a say.

As I've said, I'd like a say in the Laws we have no choice but to live by.

[Mistress Cathy]

I don't recall making that part of the statement.

I'm sorry. I didn't mean to infer that you did. You had just said that the law benefits Nor.