Pantheon 2.0 - Rules and Comments Thread

[I'm Murrin]

Well, my time is up. Back in an hour, to take up my agonising where I left off.

[O-gon-cho]

Well, my time is up. Back in an hour, to take up my agonising where I left off.

*glad to know I'm not the only one agonzing*

[Bel]

Patience is a virtue. Impatience leads to rashness. When your world ends and mine begins, we shall know.

[O-gon-cho]

..aaaarrrgh!!!!

[I'm Murrin]

Well, that's not much of a result. End the game now or keep playing is the option he gets? Ending it right in the middle of things with no kind of resolution just wouldn't seem right. I'd much rather play this through.

[Hedra Iren]

I dunno, I'm for it. The prophecy is fulfilled, Eiran is saved, and both sides can say they would've won if only...

[I'm Murrin]

"GM ends the game" isn't much of a conclusion. And I'm really not happy about the idea of ending the game right in the middle of an interesting bit, just to start it over again. If the game was completely stagnant or even just dying down I could see reason stopping it, but not when some big stuff has only just started.

Though I have been quite interested in the idea of the next version of the game, I've always thought that Xar would keep the current game going until it reached a more 'natural' end point. This turn is one of the ones that I would be least eager to stop at.

[O-gon-cho]

Well, that's not much of a result. End the game now or keep playing is the option he gets? Ending it right in the middle of things with no kind of resolution just wouldn't seem right. I'd much rather play this through.

*nodding*

But should that be chosen, will further guidance be given?

Nephirthos is a violator of the rules. Well yeah. But how so? How can we find out?

I dunno, I'm for it. The prophecy is fulfilled, Eiran is saved, and both sides can say they would've won if only...

No, I disagree.

Leaving the Game like this would really rankle. And I joined in late. I agree with Maeror...play it through.

"GM ends the game" isn't much of a conclusion. And I'm really not happy about the idea of ending the game right in the middle of an interesting bit, just to start it over again. If the game was completely stagnant or even just dying down I could see reason stopping it, but not when some big stuff has only just started.

Well said indeed.

[Xar]

Well, that's not much of a result. End the game now or keep playing is the option he gets? Ending it right in the middle of things with no kind of resolution just wouldn't seem right. I'd much rather play this through.

*nodding*

But should that be chosen, will further guidance be given?

Nephirthos is a violator of the rules. Well yeah. But how so? How can we find out?

I dunno, I'm for it. The prophecy is fulfilled, Eiran is saved, and both sides can say they would've won if only...

No, I disagree.

Leaving the Game like this would really rankle. And I joined in late. I agree with Maeror...play it through.

"GM ends the game" isn't much of a conclusion. And I'm really not happy about the idea of ending the game right in the middle of an interesting bit, just to start it over again. If the game was completely stagnant or even just dying down I could see reason stopping it, but not when some big stuff has only just started.

Well said indeed.

Although the choice is up to Vadhaka, should he choose the interdiction, remember that you were warned that someone entering the Mists could bring about the end of the world (and the interdiction would certainly be the end of Eiran's second age) - AND that despite this knowledge, none of you tried to stop Vadhaka from entering.

From my point of view, if I have to give my honest opinion, if Vadhaka thinks that his character would rather choose interdiction to save Eiran over refusing interdiction and fighting the World Breaker, it's something you knew could be coming the moment he decided to step into the Mists. So in the end I disagree, it wouldn't be "GM ends the game", it would be "all players indirectly give their assent to end the game by not preventing that which they were told could bring about said end".

[O-gon-cho]

From my point of view, if I have to give my honest opinion, if Vadhaka thinks that his character would rather choose interdiction to save Eiran over refusing interdiction and fighting the World Breaker, it's something you knew could be coming the moment he decided to step into the Mists. So in the end I disagree, it wouldn't be "GM ends the game", it would be "all players indirectly give their assent to end the game by not preventing that which they were told could bring about said end".

*humbled*

...yeah...I knew that...

I was stating from the POV of if Vadhaka even asks for our opinion.

Now we have to wait until at least Monday before we'll hear from him.

...argh...weekends...

[I'm Murrin]

'End of the world' and 'end of the game' have clear differences. This is the latter, not the former, and so I had no expectation that this would be the outcome. Yes, I knew that his action could bring about the end of the game, but the particular way in which it might do so is just a little disappointing.

And yes, it's not my place to criticise your creative decisions, and I know most of my reaction is just because I've gotten attached to the characters and things in the game and feel they deserve closure, and there's not really much difference either way. It's just that it doesn't feel right, after everyone's gone to all this effort, to just stick the whole thing in some kind of limbo from which we'll never know the outcome. The 'end of the world' would have been some kind of closure.


Note: I'll get over it. Easily. Just with it running for so long and with the last couple of turns so close behind us, I'm quite attached at the moment.

[Mistress Cathy]

I agree with Xar on this point. It leaves the choice of the game up to the one bravest to enter the mists. We all knew this would/could happen.

I really don't see it as "GM ends the game" necessarily. Surely, there is more that I could have done with the character I have been playing but I figured that I could always adopt the ideas that I didn't have time to do in version 2 to version 3.

Eiran is indeed saved and that is the ultimate victory, isn't it? If it doesn't end then we still have war and we have to battle the world breaker and that worm thingy coming after us. That could end things as well and destroy all of Eiran.

So, the questions is not whether or not GM ends the game but whether we want to end the game with Eiran saved or risk the possibility of Eiran destroyed.

[I'm Murrin]

As I've said, my problem is not with the game ending, it's with the lack of closure. I'd rather see the world destroyed than leave things hanging.

[stonemaybe]

I see both sides of this argument, but i think I'm with Murrin, in that now things are really getting interesting, we are actively making moves against each other - and i think in the rules feedback thread Xar says that is what he wants more of! So why stop the game at this point?

[I'm Murrin]

Xar's answer to that, Stonemaybe, is that it was Avatar, not Xar, who chose this point to do it, and we allowed him to do so.
My response to that is that a) I didn't really have much chance of opposing him, with the situation Maeror's in, did I? and b) I think the destruction of Eiran counts as satisfying closure, and he made it seem like that was a possibility when it is (apparently) not.

[balon!]

I'm all for battling it out to the end. A more fitting end to the story, I think. And, in the larger sense, that's what this game is; a story. So I'd rather finish it using the characters we've all brought to the table. Just my

Although, I think it should be clear, we need to bring our cases to VC, not to Xar. He's the one who's making the decision.

[Hedra Iren]

This may sound weird, but I am not willing to get closure at the cost of the end of the world for one reason: I like my followers. I like this world that we've all helped build. I really don't want to see them maimed, killed, widowed, or orphaned. Losing a god is bad enough, but at least what I had built had a chance to move forward.

[I'm Murrin]

I can understand that.

Perhaps we might as well just end it and start something fresh. It does bother me that I've just started certain things--two turns ago, I put a creative idea I was very happy about into play, I'd had it in mind for months before I finally got it worked out--and I won't get to see them turn into anything. But in the end, it doesn't matter much.

[Xar]

Xar's answer to that, Stonemaybe, is that it was Avatar, not Xar, who chose this point to do it, and we allowed him to do so.
My response to that is that a) I didn't really have much chance of opposing him, with the situation Maeror's in, did I? and b) I think the destruction of Eiran counts as satisfying closure, and he made it seem like that was a possibility when it is (apparently) not.

Well, my response to this would be that a) Not many of you even tried to talk him out of entering (at least that's what I know, I'm not sure whether something went on through PM), and b) the destruction of Eiran is still a possibility - it's up to Vadhaka to choose if he wants to save Eiran at the cost of ejecting all deities from the world for a time, or if he prefers for all of you to take your chances fighting the World Breaker and the other threats...

[balon!]

Option B! OPTION B!