[@Holy Soldier]

I think it's insofar as, these Gods have domains within their grasp that are among the ones they have majority of control in. Ra is the God of the Sun, therefore his main domain is within that area. Horus' eyes are the sun and the moon, but that's a small tidbit - a factoid. It's like saying that Freyja, because she resides over half of the warriors brought in from the battlefield by her valkyrie is currently the 100% domain rule of the dead and death. You have to account for subcategories within these domains and how a power would fit within them, given their children have just a modicum of godly wrath.

What you've done with this power is that you've amped it up more than you necessarily should have. You've essentially taken these rather strong powers associated with Solar and Lunar manipulation and attributed to a God of the Sky who has only his foot in the door, so to speak, in both of these domains. We had this issue with Apple's Apollo child in that he interpreted powers and certain domains in a way that shies too far from the God itself. You've done that in a different way, though. You've taken something minor and amplified it as if Horus was both God of the Sun and God of the Moon. If we're basing his own domain, his own powers off a modicum of what his children potentially know, we can assume that Horus is just as powerful as both Ra and Khonsu in domains they feature quite heavily in - and in Khonsu's regard, one he [i]only[/i] features in.

There can be overlap. That's going to happen no matter what and in no matter which pantheon you're in. It's just the fact of how you treat that overlap, and whether it truly personifies the God and their perceived personalities. It's more in line with how they ruled over their domain, rather than just what their patronage was known for. For instance you have Freyja, a Vanir who's essentially queen of the Valkyries, among many other gods, she also resides over death. However, unlike Hel, she presides over the death of warriors she chooses - half and half with Odin, essentially. She's still a goddess of death, but her domain is interpreted differently in a way that it's not [i]just[/i] death, it's a subset of it.

Thanatos - bringer of death. He's essentially the Greek's grim reaper. Hermes delivers the dead. Hades presides over the dead. There's overlap, yes, but they're all [i]different[/i] even between each other. You have to be aware of that prior to making your character."

[hr]

Now to get to the point of taking care of each of your points.

1. Cool, as long as you know Horus wouldn't reveal himself to her, would likely have not told her any of his past, etc. She can construe stories about him, have a notion of him, or he can just be the general, "My father said he was heading out for smokes. He's been out for smokes for about 18 years now." Kinda of deal. That would put a lot of that resentment you seem to tie closely to your character.

2. Yes, we'd definitely love for that not to be included in his actual CS. It's a tricky concept, fusing with anyone's characters because it removes control, gets too complex, and just gets generally too sticky. When it's two of your own characters, it's easier to deal with, but when it's someone else's or an NPC, it gets... too complicated.

3. I already touched upon this. We're not looking to suck out your originality, we're looking out for anything that can be considered too over powered. This entire section of your CS is too overpowered and has the issues I've touched on prior. You've got an assortment of powers in this one section that you've labeled one solo power. There's a difference between having various uses of a power, like being psychic, having telepathy, etc. and then there's having sub-powers hidden beneath one umbrella term for a power. I mean, most things like solar manipulation, darkness manipulation, light manipulation, etc. have sub-categories within themselves, but those are essentially built upon a foundation. Adom's Sun and Moon just mesh all of these multiple powers that have too much variation. I can see the connection between each, but there's too much going on for this power to be anywhere near an acceptable level.

4. This is difficult to analyze from any standpoint without harshly critiquing it. This is acceptable in an environment where this character is the main character, definitely. When you're writing your own story, usually the main character has a charisma about him/her. Commander Shepard, Harry Potter - my mind is currently drawing a blank regarding literary figures, but you get the gist of it. They're great to use in an environment in which you can shape everything yourself. In this setting? Not so much.

There's also that good adage: "Show, don't tell." You're all telling us, "This character is a born leader. He can draw people toward him. Be decisive. Lead by example. Take responsibility." However, that's a very, very, very good way to ultimately kill your character preemptively, especially when you're surrounded by amazing writers like this. You're staking your claim on the leadership role in this group without anyone's consent. You're making your character [i]charismatic[/i] and that's a dangerous personality trait to use in Roleplaying where you reply on the interaction and the consent of 6+ other people. You're very much assuming we're okay with this by including this. I'm not. In fact, anytime I see someone put: Charismatic, Manipulative, Intelligent, Perceptive, etc. I immediately want all of my characters to refute those claims. It makes me want the exact opposite of what you do and immediately creates conflict right off the bat.

These traits, these specific traits, rely far too much on other players' consent. You see where I'm going with it? I could rant for days on this. But, you have to think, "Does this personality trait I'm giving my character absolutely require another's compliance to work?" and if it's solely dependent on another player, or all players' consent, it's not a trait you should use in a Roleplay. The only things I can think of you can get away with something like that is if you absolutely plan on making people hate your character, but again, that's a very cheap way to get people to loathe who you're making. It's more rewarding when your character's actions speak a lot louder than what you've told us.

But, yeah, the reason we don't particularly want traits or powers like this is how much it relies on utter manipulation of other characters. You can be manipulative, you can be conniving, you can be backhanded ICly, we aren't barring you from that, but simply stating that your character is in such a manner as that particular power has portrayed doesn't really fly. There are certain traits that you can simply state: generous, malicious, kind, capricious. And then there are those that have to specifically be shown and built upon and require not only your knowledge of the character, but your knowledge and skill in writing.

In essence, it's very difficult to be manipulative. It's very easy to say your character is manipulative. In this particular case, it's very difficult to be a good leader. It's extremely easy to say your character's a good leader. Simply saying your character are these things with the language and the word choice and the context being used, as it is now, totes the line of Godmodding very, very precariously. So, no, you can't just tell us, "My character has innate charisma. He's a natural born leader." You have to specifically show this to us in the IC. In written word. In plot and character development. You can tell us your plans and what you want out of the character, but you just can't state it the way you did with, "Blood of the King." When it comes to something like this, we want to see it shown to us. Having it spelled out leaves out the fun of it and creates unnecessary conflict from the assumption that every player is okay with this.

(I mean, even if you were to go around asking everyone here, "Are you okay with my character having X Trait?" it's still... it's still not going to fly. Because then this entire thing just went over everyone's heads. [i]We don't want these traits explicitly stated as fact and truth; we want things of this nature to be developed in a way that gives everyone a choice to accept it.[/i] Where's the challenge and intrigue if you can just say, "My character is charismatic and intelligent and a leader"? I see CSes as a base format. A kind of "Begin Here" thing and if we start at the beginning with not enough room to branch out the plot and our characters, then what's the point? These things severely stifle growth, especially concerning growth between characters.)