Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.6.2.17 $; site uokvax.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!uokvax!lmaher From: lmaher@uokvax.UUCP Newsgroups: net.games.frp Subject: PCs vs. gods Message-ID: <2400079@uokvax.UUCP> Date: Sun, 23-Dec-84 23:44:00 EST Article-I.D.: uokvax.2400079 Posted: Sun Dec 23 23:44:00 1984 Date-Received: Thu, 27-Dec-84 04:00:09 EST Lines: 195 Nf-ID: #N:uokvax:2400079:000:10557 Nf-From: uokvax!lmaher Dec 23 22:44:00 1984 I'm back from Fermilab for a few days and have read all the submissions to net.games.frp for the last two months in a single sitting. Some of them were truly marvelous, and I'll try to get around to commenting on as many as I can. I'll be gone before this message propagates through the net, so if you want to reply you can reach me via USMail or BITNET (RIGNEY@FNALVX13). This is in response to Scott Turner's remarks that PCs should have no chance against gods. I certainly respect his position and admire his work in A&E, but in making a generalized statement he has erred seriously. [This is what happens to one's argument style when working for the DoE. :-)] As a matter of fact, my most recent fantasy campaign (using a Champions/Bushido hybrid rules system) involved character conflict against the gods. It's very easy to do, all you need are: a) good players b) gods with opposing interests (and I know of no mythology that doesn't have these) c) a basis for the gods' powers that provides limits. In the case of my campaign, c) was provided by the fairly widespread mechanism of having the gods' power come from their worshippers,and expended by miracles. If a god expends more power than he recieves from his worshippers (and intensity of worship is as important as numbers) he diminishes, and if he uses his power wisely he can gain many converts with the occasional well-placed miracles, and grow stronger. This system implies that gods are unwilling to directly confront each other, with one god throwing lightning bolts at a priest he doesn't like and another shielding him. In that situation both gods are expending massive amounts of energy, without doing anything to gain converts or benefit themselves. Direct intervention tion is very costly, and that's why gods have priests as middle-men. If a god meddles in mortal affairs too much without proportional benefit, he diminishes, and it's only natural that as a god grows weaker and less able to benefit his worshippers that they'll turn to other, more effective gods. Once a god has declined seriously it's very, very hard to make a comeback, especially if rival gods are there to stomp him when he tries. Stomping your equal is a no-win situation, but it's not too difficult to pick on old gods (although seldom worth the bother unless they show signs of revival, in which case it's a good idea to stop them while they're weak) or new gods. In fact, some gods make a habit of crushing newer gods as they arise in their sphere of interest, these are known as the nature of certain types of gods to scheme against their rivals (if there were a god of cooperation he could hardly do so, now could he? And how many gods of cooperation do you know of? See my point?) Gods of War and weather tend to be powerful because they're very good at conflict and tactics. Likewise they tend to be more ephemeral because a few big reverses (like having the empire that worships them get conquored by heathens) can cripple them seriously at which point they get shredded (figuratively speaking) by the others. What warrior wants to worship a Loser War God? On the other hand harvest deities are more durable if less flashy. As long as they keep the crops coming in they'll get all the prayers and sacrifices they can use. [But what about the PCs?! I hear you cry. It's coming, so hold on.] Matters are complicated more by pantheons, where a set of gods, often worshipped in common by a people, have similar interests. They all want their worshippers to prosper since it benefits them all, but they often have differences of opinion as to how to go about helping them. Conflicts of interest from overlapping areas of interest are less acute, but there can still be considerable intrigue, and since gods as a rule have natures compatible with their interests there can be considerable personality conflict. I could go into massive detail on this, but you can probably figure it out yourself, and anyone who's interested in corresponding about all this is certainly welcome to. [Keep in mind that I'm talking about the godsystem in *my* campaign, so if you handle things differently don't think I'm generalizing or saying it has to be this way. But as Hunter S. Thompson said, it works for me.] Now of all the things a god can do, manifesting an avatar is the most costly, and direct physical intervention on the material plane comes next. When a god manifests an avatar he can't expect to get much of that energy back when he recalls it to heaven (or wherever), a lot of it gets used up in miracles and just maintaining the Presence in the mortal realm (Magic Leaks), and if he puts too much free will and power in the avatar it can break away from him, causing a schism in his followers (there are obvious examples) and providing an instant rival. If he's forced to crush his own avatar he's expended immense amounts of power, possibly shaken his priesthood seriously, and in effect destroyed a portion of himself, as well as suffering the ridicule of his peers (no small thing, since he may need their aid sometime - Pantheons are something of a mutual aid society - and be refused because he's considered not worth the risk of power). But if he limits the avatar's self-will he has to spend much of his time directing it, taking time away from his other interests, or risks it falling under wrong influences or acting without restraint. And if he gives it too little power it could fail, which is utterly disastrous. If a god manifests an avatar, the ultimate expression of his power, and it fails, he is usually doomed. Worshippers fall away, priests have their faith shaken, champions are unwilling to come to the aid of a god who fails, and he has already suffered the loss of the energy used to create the avatar. And once a god is on the downward slope, it's very hard to arrest the fall (positive feedback, for you metaphysical engineers out there). So you can see that avatars are excruciatingly dangerous to use. Therefore most gods prefer to act through priests and champions. A little touch of power here and there when the champions needs it most, and otherwise let the hero do his own dirty work. A truly great champion or priest is an immensely valuable tool for a god - he's invested a lot of energy and time in building the tool, and a person with the potential to be such a champions is very rare - they must be exceptional individuals. So if a god directly strikes at another's champion, the other isis has little choice except to defend, and then both gods either have to back off or are likely to diminish themselves in their struggle, most likely while a third god makes off with many of both's followers. So gods are very relunctant to strike directly at another's champion, but if they can kill or impede that champion with their own temporal forces (e.g. priests, followers, and champions) they can strike a considerable blow. So you see from all the above that the gods are playing a very delicate game of survival among themselves, in which their mortal pawns enjoy a limited form of immunity. Of course if a champion is *too* successful a rival god may decide to risk eliminating him in the hopes his patron will not consider the loss major enough to risk retaliating. Direct intervention against a major champion is something like limited tactical nuclear war - a very tricky business indeed. There is another reason a god may wish to use a minimum of power: the gods aren't omniscient, but most are sensitive to the use of power, especially in their own sphere of interest. Larger amounts of power are more likely to be noticed and traced. Frying the Paladin Gwinnel is certainly going to be noticed, but infecting a wild animal with rabies in the hopes that Gwinnel will be bitten and die is far less likely to be noticed. The example is a very bad one, since Gwinnel's patron could just heal him (or request the healing god of his pantheon to do so for a consideration) anyway. You'll notice that most Paladins are immune to disease for this very reason. I could go on and on, but I'm sure you get the idea. This system gives me everything I want in a godsystem, and I can use it to figure the results of interactions with the gods instead of just being arbitrary. Note that the moves and countermoves I've mentioned above can be over a period of centuries, and the Game of the Gods is too subtle for most mortals to realize, far less comprehend. Note that most Champions have a patron god, but there are a very few that free-lance. Such people are very powerful and very dangerous, and have done so many favors for so many gods that they can call upon a number of different deities for aid. Or in some cases he's proved so useful that no god wants to destroy him, since he might want to use the free-lancer himself at some future date. An example of this kind of person would be Taira of the Thousand Names, the Evil NPC I posted two or three months ago. She has no patron (except temporarily when on a mission for some goddess or other), but she's proved so useful to most Cthonic goddesses that she's effectively shielded. A very blatant example of a champion would be Stalker (a DC fantasy comic which only ran 4 issues, alas) who as a young boy pledged his soul to a war god in return for mastery of all weapons and the chance to serve the god. The god accepted the offer, and took the soul as immediate payment (the large print giveth, and the small print taketh away :-) ). More common examples are of course the D&D Paladin, although anyone sufficiently devout and useful could be a champion. This article is long enough already, but if anyone has any questions or rebuttals I'd be delighted to discuss all this in as much detail as you can stand. Since I'll be back off USENET shortly, you can reach me at: Carl Rigney USMAIL: Dorm 4, Room 45/ Fermilab/ Box 500/ Batavia, IL 60510 BITNET: RIGNEY@FNALVX13 (send a short test message first to make sure it works) SLAC DECNET: FNAL::RIGNEY (if you can reach the node FNAL)