Pantheon - Discussions on the Future

[Xar]

A disadvantage, because each godly realm will have one fixed portal in the world, which means that if enemies find that portal, they can invade it

Can a deity enter the realm of another deity? I'm thinking a being defined as one specific thing cannot enter a realm that's the very embodiment of a different specific thing. Therefore, a deity wanting to invade another deity's realm would have to have others do the invading.

Or am I making it too complicated?


Ah, another question!! Do we have to make this realm from scratch? Building and strengthening it as we go? Or do we start the game with it already in existence, as though we were just hanging out in our realms/homes, and this crazy portal somehow appears that opens into this world?

I guess Nergal is a little like that, he has his dark hall of Irkallas, which I've not quite managed to use or define fully just yet.

Yes, Nergal should be mentioned in the Pantheon footnotes.

At this stage I think a deity couldn't directly enter another deity's realm, so yes, you'd need to use mortals to invade it. In fact, I'm considering doing away with Manifesting altogether.

As for the other question - I think you'll begin with those realms already in existence but within certain parameters (i.e. despite how unearthly they would be, that wouldn't give them any special defenses against raids). So you'd basically be able to describe their appearance, and potentially while playing the game you might be able to fortify the realms if you so want, but at the start, each realm would be equally assailable regardless of its appearance.

[Fist and Faith]

If more than one player have the same domain, it would be interesting to see how similar and dissimilar their divine realms are.

[The Numen]

I like the idea of realms. Not manifesting would make things kinda tricky, though you could just summon your minions to the realm if you needed to fiddle with them in any way.

Some story worlds I've seen could have a realm exude into the "real" world. So while you couldn't manifest into the main universe, if your realm were to overlap a small part of the world, you could manifest there and have a very limited impact.

Or at least, mortals could migrate to and from your realm through the overlap zone.

[I'm Murrin]

Have my characters ever Manifested? I can't remember, but I don't think I've made use of it. Why appear in person when I can accomplish as much (and still give a few orders in other places) by just throwing power at it from outside? I find that creativity of thought accomplishes just as much as actual strength, sometimes.

I don't see lack of manifestation as a major issue. Though I can conceive of certain gods that might prefer a physical presence, it's not really necessary.

[Xar]

There's still the possibility that I change my mind about Manifesting - these ideas for P4 are still very much subject to change - but I'm thinking that if I do include rules for that, Manifesting will fundamentally make the deity vulnerable; I could imagine for example that if you manifest outside your realm, you won't know with certainty what the heck's going on inside your realm (although you may get general ideas), so an enemy might sneak raiders through your portal while you're elsewhere...

[The Numen]

Nod. I can see how, in certain situations, a low-powered deity (just starting out) could accomplish some growth-related things faster by manifesting to do them. If you only have 1 DRP to spend, you can be pretty sure that you'll only be having impact in one space. So you might as well manifest so that you get some extra oomph out of that 1 DRP. You're just as localized.

But after that brief period... yeah, I don't see manifesting as that critical.

In those stories I was thinking of, it was usually lesser beings who needed the dual-realm thing. They couldn't act at all, except in the realm. So having an overlap zone was the only way they could do... whatever it was they were trying to do. So... maybe not that applicable to P4... but the imagery still strikes a chord in me.

[The Numen]

At this stage I think a deity couldn't directly enter another deity's realm, so yes, you'd need to use mortals to invade it. In fact, I'm considering doing away with Manifesting altogether.

How about peaceful interaction between deities? Especially things like Bhakti Jr. / Jove marriages... they'd need to be able to both occupy the same realm, in order to both... erm... occupy the same space. <wink> <wink> <nudge> <nudge>

[Xar]

Nod. I can see how, in certain situations, a low-powered deity (just starting out) could accomplish some growth-related things faster by manifesting to do them. If you only have 1 DRP to spend, you can be pretty sure that you'll only be having impact in one space. So you might as well manifest so that you get some extra oomph out of that 1 DRP. You're just as localized.

But after that brief period... yeah, I don't see manifesting as that critical.

In those stories I was thinking of, it was usually lesser beings who needed the dual-realm thing. They couldn't act at all, except in the realm. So having an overlap zone was the only way they could do... whatever it was they were trying to do. So... maybe not that applicable to P4... but the imagery still strikes a chord in me.

Actually, it won't be a "brief period" anymore; I'm considering severely limiting the amount of raw divine power players would have, and "shift" most of their power into the realm of mortal influence, i.e. sending people to convert others, or influencing mortal politics. This way we would also reduce the likelihood of an evil deity easily trying to destroy the world out of sheer spite or boredom.

[I'm Murrin]

Numen, your comments on the whole divine realm thing are remarkably near to what my character in Aesir's been up to. It's funny, really, seeing all this now and thinking "hey, that's one of my ideas."

[[Syl]]

Heh. I manifest a lot. I like to get hands-on. I can see where it can get problematic, though (as evinced by my drastic limitations on it in Acropolis). I could live without it, though, especially with the addition of realms.

If I could offer one suggestion, though - perhaps still allow a more 'metaphysical' manifestation? Like last turn in Aesir, I manifested to battle the God of Winter (no such player, even NPC). It wasn't meant to be literal, and I could've just said I was spending the DRP on the same thing, but it worked metaphorically much better for me. I think without the possibility of this interpretation, we're really just master magicians, casting spells from afar.

[Fist and Faith]

Well, I wrote a very nice chunk of my P4 Revelation today! Not easy to do with my cell's notepad, either, I'll tell you!! But now I've written it down, and I'll finish it this weekend.

[The Numen]

Numen, your comments on the whole divine realm thing are remarkably near to what my character in Aesir's been up to. It's funny, really, seeing all this now and thinking "hey, that's one of my ideas."

You're character's been marrying Jove, in Aesir? She's only had like one turn, dude. Way to go, playah! You must be the Mack Daddy, with game like that.

[Xar]

Heh. I manifest a lot. I like to get hands-on. I can see where it can get problematic, though (as evinced by my drastic limitations on it in Acropolis). I could live without it, though, especially with the addition of realms.

If I could offer one suggestion, though - perhaps still allow a more 'metaphysical' manifestation? Like last turn in Aesir, I manifested to battle the God of Winter (no such player, even NPC). It wasn't meant to be literal, and I could've just said I was spending the DRP on the same thing, but it worked metaphorically much better for me. I think without the possibility of this interpretation, we're really just master magicians, casting spells from afar.

Metaphysical manifestations would likely make it into the game regardless of whether a physical manifestation is possible or not. That's mostly a matter of flavour - however you wish to describe the events you influence with your power. Whether they be omens, dreams or visions sent to a follower, or a ghostly apparition in the night sky fighting another being. It is also possible that I might allow physical Manifestation (I can imagine some concepts for gods might be heavily dependent on such a thing), but in that case I would try to make it uniquely advantageous and disadvantageous at the same time. One example of advantage one could have when Manifested would be a temporary spike of Influence in the place where he or she is Manifested, lasting for as long as he or she is Manifested; at the expense of not being in touch with what's going on in his realm or in remote areas of the world.

[Xar]

Here's another idea that I found intriguing but I'm curious to know what other players think of.

I already decided that P4 would be played in two Phases. Phase 1 would be a "prologue" of sorts, and Phase 2 would be the core of the game. I was thinking of giving players who participate in Phase 1, depending on their actions, one of several monikers or titles which would carry a minor bonus and a minor penalty during Phase 2. So for example you might end up having a deity like Etzlicoatl who would end up with the moniker "the Supremacist" due to his focus on his own race, giving him additional influence with his race at the expense of others; another one might be "the Nurturing" and gain different kinds of bonuses. This way, even two deities with the same domain who go about it in different ways might get different monikers and therefore get different nuances for the rest of the game. Players wouldn't know what monikers are available and what bonuses and penalties they would offer.

What do you think?

[Arcadia]

I like that idea a lot!

[Menolly]

Yeah, me too.
Strikes me as sort of World of Darkness influenced...
Similar to clan Disciplines and Weaknesses in Requiem.

[stonemaybe]

Sounds good to me, Xar!

[Goatkiller666]

It almost seems like we're divorcing purpose from mechanism. So, a defensive war god who uses earth is different from an offensive one who uses fire, or water. A healing based war god, a martial arts based god of peace, etc. (These are all just off the top of muly head, so sorry for the war slant. I'm sure other nuances can exist.)

I like the ability to have nuance, with overlap in domains, where it's possible (even encouraged) to have different interpretations of things.

[Menolly]

It almost seems like we're divorcing purpose from mechanism. So, a defensive war god who uses earth is different from an offensive one who uses fire, or water. A healing based war god, a martial arts based god of peace, etc. (These are all just off the top of muly head, so sorry for the war slant. I'm sure other nuances can exist.)

I like the ability to have nuance, with overlap in domains, where it's possible (even encouraged) to have different interpretations of things.

ack.

But part of all of this discussion is finding ways to make processing easier and less time consuming for Xar. Is it possible this modification would put additional work back in?

[Xar]

It almost seems like we're divorcing purpose from mechanism. So, a defensive war god who uses earth is different from an offensive one who uses fire, or water. A healing based war god, a martial arts based god of peace, etc. (These are all just off the top of muly head, so sorry for the war slant. I'm sure other nuances can exist.)

I like the ability to have nuance, with overlap in domains, where it's possible (even encouraged) to have different interpretations of things.

If you're referring to the moniker idea, keep in mind I haven't explained what Phase 1 is like yet The way I see it, however, the moniker would be partly influenced by how you portray the deity already when you create him or her, and partly by how you play Phase 1. Basically it wouldn't produce odd or meaningless results, especially since - unlike video games - there's actually a gamemaster keeping an eye on the consistency of the results