@Kho, reading your draft OP for Divinus Lite, I have some feedback:

• I quite like the idea of all unspent Might being lost at each Turn change. This encourages people to spend, which is what we want in Divinus Lite.
• However, if we have such a mechanic, then requiring that people spend all their Might the previous Turn to be allowed to Level up might be redundant and onerous. Also, Might spent on Levelling Up would count for Might spent, so it doesn't fix too much except for finding a way to get rid of the loose change. (But if you want to keep it, that's fine too. It does ensure that only active players get to level up.)
• TiPis are not necessary (unless you allow them to be stockpiled, but that would cause confusion). They are really just 0.25 Might which can't be used for Might-only actions. They may as well be omitted from Divinus Lite, and you just replace their function with fractional Might expenditure (like we have been doing anyway). Having a single currency is far simpler than having two.
• Avatar costs have been changed. Current costs go 1-2-4-8-12-16-20-etc, not simply doubling. This is because we decided that the benefit provided by more Avatars is far closer to linear than exponential.
• I've always found the wording of the worshipper mechanics for Demigods a little cumbersome and somewhat vague, especially with the scaling ratios. A simpler phrasing would be: Demigods get 1 Might Recuperation for every 1000 Worshippers, up to a cap of 4 Might Recuperation.
• If we want to ever do a cross-over between Divinus Mk.2 and Divinus Lite, then I suggest that we keep the Primordials the same between the two.
• Do we want to reduce the Khookie cost for levelling up Heroes, to be in line with the reduced Khookies per post?
• More details on quests. Quests could be set by GMs. Gods could also spend Might to create a quest which some Heroes could complete. The prize for the quest should be more efficient than simply spending Might to Level Up the Heroes. Unless you want to allow Gods to create quests for free, in which case we would have to specify a limit such as only one active quest per God, and you can only create one quest per Turn. We would have to ensure that quests meet some minimum standard of difficulty, so they cannot be abused to rapidly level up Heroes. We can permit a quest to be completed multiple times if that is within the parameters of the quest, although each Hero can only claim the prize once. Multiple Heroes working together to complete a quest all gain the full prize. It must be specified that all Heroes have the opportunity to learn of the existence of a quest (via rumours, legends, proclamations, visions, etc.); no secret/private quests allowed.

Right, so the suggested alterations (if I missed any please say):
--1 Khookie per Hero Post System
--Potential 'Divine Quests' for additional Khookie earning
--Holy Sites maintained by worshippers as infrastructure for channelling mortal piety (losing influence with worshippers can lead to another god supplanting you etc.)
--Cap of 3 Holy Sites rather than 5
--Get rid of Freepoints/Turnpoints (NOT THE TIPIS, noooo) [since we're agreed that might can be broken down into 0.25 etc. the main reason for keeping Freepoints is gone. I still like 'em, but up to y'all]
--Make gods weaker, closer to demigods [expand on this - is it necessary? Weaker how?]

Edit: ninjad

While brooding over Holy Sites as a structure like Ilu, Tek, Jvan and others use, I came up with another proto-idea. What if there were two types of Holy Site? One that gives might (temples for worshipers and such) and one that gives free actions / 0 might actions, so say, as the god of plants, you would always need to spend might creating plants (unlike the current system where plant creation can be justified as a free action if you have the plants domain) unless you spend some might creating the Gardens of Somewheria which would give you the free actions.

Do we want to conflate Holy Sites with portfolios though? I feel like the portfolio system is fairly robust, moreso even than the actual levelling system. I'd rather keep it and Holy Sites separate.

Also, if its a quick play sort of thing with "jump-in" mechanics, just ditch free points in their current form.

nuuuhh uh. Free points aren't good because they're free, they're good because they're fractional Might, for smaller actions. They can quantify say, multiple branches of spells going into one magical revelation, or multiple techs going into a tech revolution, or multiple species going into an ecosystem.

We just need a better name for them than '0.25 Might'.

No need for a strong god/demi-god division too, tbh, the level catch-up is already such a large gap.

True.

Also, I'd like to posit that Holy Sites give some kind of sanctuary to mortals. That makes them important in both the maintaining and the capturing.

ed: Sanctuary specifically from gods. Again, creative destructive gods would be better off creating a mortal army or something similar (giant beast, hero, plague) to capture a mortal stronghold than just deitying their way in.

Though there should still be room for god duels.

Termite just hit the nail there with the contrivances about Logos and Xos; I brought that up on Discord with Kho, but he's a dummy with all the wrong opinions. You know what?

I'll just repost what I said to him in Discord in case anybody wants my two cents.



And now I'll be bowing out of this conversation because I think Kho was right when he said that I'm not even imagining a Divinus-lite so much as a Dominions RP anymore

"--Make gods weaker, closer to demigods [expand on this - is it necessary? Weaker how?]"

This goes a bit against what is necessary for the early game (Raising continents, creating magic, forming planets.) unless there is some sort of exception (Oh its early in the universe so your gods act like a Level 20 god or something until turn 3 starts) I don't see how it would work. Though I do like the idea of gods being more mundane.

And now I'll be bowing out of this conversation because I think Kho was right when he said that I'm not even imagining a Divinus-lite so much as a Dominions RP anymore

I think so long as there is Might, Domain (Portfolios), Holy Sites, and Heroes, it'll be Divinus at heart. Leaving behind Fate and the Right Hand is the only real departure from formula we've discussed so far.

@Double Capybara

Again, we need to skip the whole 'create the universe' montage. Start with a planet that has air and water* and the regular laws of physics, and then add things from there. It's what we're going to end up with anyway.

Doing stuff like moving moons should be either beyond the gods' limits completely, or something for which the GMs need to approve- see Might loans from Fate / Right Hand.

*and earth and vulcanism because for once the four classical elements actually work

Mystery Lady / ML

_{...her name is Mater Lei}

I concur that Gods have too much destructive potential as-is and their restraint is built upon contrivance and player consensus. We can not assume any of these things will be present in Divinus Lite. Even rules-as-written, a God can create a star for 2 MP in Divinus Lite, which would nuke a planet in a heart-beat.

It was suggested, and I agree with this, that Gods are to be far more creative beings than destructive beings. Specify explicitly that Might can only be used to create things, and that it cannot be directly used to destroy things; no nuking things, no dropping moons on people, no conjuring black holes next to planets, etc. This should help curb destructive behaviour and encourage creative solutions to conflicts.

How to handle powerful weapons is another matter though. Weapons are technically created, which means they are valid in a system where Might can only be used to create things, yet they can still be obscenely destructive if you invest enough Might into them. The no-MP-hoarding system helps mitigate the strength of weapons which can be created. We could set a hard limit on the power of divine weapons, such that they can't reach WMD power. We could specify that any uses of WMDs need to allow a response from the other players.

Or, alternatively, we could do away entirely with the concept of investing lots of Might into a single item (as Termite originally proposed). A divine weapon costs a flat 1 MP to build (as a blessed item). You could spend another 1 MP to add a different function to it, or build another divine weapon. But at no point would you be able to build a 25 MP death-ray.

Spending lots of MP on a single item was never in the rules-as-written, but we've house-ruled it in anyway. Divinus Lite should explicitly specify that you can't dump more Might on a single item/action to make it more powerful.

Another thing I should probably mention- I really prefer if a Right Hand is finite. I've mentioned it with the other GMs, but it would be cool if there's at least a possibility for a Primordial to fail or die.

aaaaand look at that I've started brainstorming





send help. we're not even twenty-four hours into this idea and I already can't decide

I completely agree with Termite's idea to start with some (a lot) of groundwork in place. Let there be some world already in existence, but let it be full of monsters and chaos and have no (or minimal) civilization to begin with.

I think so long as there is Might, Domain (Portfolios), Holy Sites, and Heroes, it'll be Divinus at heart. Leaving behind Fate and the Right Hand is the only real departure from formula we've discussed so far.

Yeah even those core things like Domain(Portfolio) are not beyond Cyclone's criticisms. If in the creation of this thinned Divinus all my wants were placated, there would be no resemblance.

I would get rid of domains and make it just portfolios as part of the effort to weaken gods, and I would also remove the arbitrary limits like the one that bars adopting two conflicting portfolios. In mythology there are examples of what we'd call contrasting portfolios; see Ishtar, the goddess of love and war.

In my view there's a few core features, without which I'd not be interested in the spinoff:
-Weaker gods, one par with some of the stronger demigods in this RP. Like, a particularly destructive god might be a huge dragon or something, but not a divine force capable of obliterating planets. The most powerful gods of creation should maybe raise mountains overnight, but not continents.
-A preexisting world
-More emphasis on mortals and worshipers; BBeast's idea about maintaining holy sites strikes a chord with me
-NO AMUL'SHARAR AND FATE, OR A RENAMED CLONE THAT'S THE SAME THING.

Everything else is negotiable.

In mythology there are examples of what we'd call contrasting portfolios; see Ishtar, the goddess of Passion (Love) and Passion (Violence).

fixed

I concur that Gods have too much destructive potential as-is and their restraint is built upon contrivance and player consensus. We can not assume any of these things will be present in Divinus Lite. Even rules-as-written, a God can create a star for 2 MP in Divinus Lite, which would nuke a planet in a heart-beat.

It was suggested, and I agree with this, that Gods are to be far more creative beings than destructive beings. Specify explicitly that Might can only be used to create things, and that it cannot be directly used to destroy things; no nuking things, no dropping moons on people, no conjuring black holes next to planets, etc. This should help curb destructive behaviour and encourage creative solutions to conflicts.

How to handle powerful weapons is another matter though. Weapons are technically created, which means they are valid in a system where Might can only be used to create things, yet they can still be obscenely destructive if you invest enough Might into them. The no-MP-hoarding system helps mitigate the strength of weapons which can be created. We could set a hard limit on the power of divine weapons, such that they can't reach WMD power. We could specify that any uses of WMDs need to allow a response from the other players.

Or, alternatively, we could do away entirely with the concept of investing lots of Might into a single item (as Termite originally proposed). A divine weapon costs a flat 1 MP to build (as a blessed item). You could spend another 1 MP to add a different function to it, or build another divine weapon. But at no point would you be able to build a 25 MP death-ray.

Spending lots of MP on a single item was never in the rules-as-written, but we've house-ruled it in anyway. Divinus Lite should explicitly specify that you can't dump more Might on a single item/action to make it more powerful.

I advocate to place no limits on how MP can be used (at least in terms of destruction vs creation; I actually sort of like discouraging the dumping of tons of MP into singular things, even as I am by far the worst offender of this in Divinus ).

The reasoning is because if we curb the power of gods down to a more reasonable level, where we have things more on par with demigods or the Maiar, this will sort itself out. A very destructive god would either just be a big dragon like Smaug (or some other cliche like a huge monster that wants to eat everything) that could destroy things directly but without being literally unstoppable, or they could sacrifice spending their energy and power on a physical form in order to be more like Sauron in that they corrupt and subjugate other beings to work their will. I'd like the variety between the two archetypes.

I don't see why to erase Fate, to be honest, its just backstory, backdrop, what is gained by removing it? I always kinda liked how all Divinus worlds were connected.

Yeah even those core things like Domain(Portfolio) are not beyond Cyclone's criticisms. If in the creation of this thinned Divinus all my wants were placated, there would be no resemblance.

I would get rid of domains and make it just portfolios as part of the effort to weaken gods, and I would also remove the arbitrary limits like the one that bars adopting two conflicting portfolios. In mythology there are examples of what we'd call contrasting portfolios; see Ishtar, the goddess of love and war.

I like Domains, it allows Portfolios to be more creative and adds some sort of cohesion to the god. I had legitimate fun thinking of alternate Portfolios to the classic ones with a Beauty spin to it, and I found the way other players did the same to be neat.

@Antarctic Termite

No Dominions are still stupid. What purpose do they serve? They only increase overlap when multiple gods fall under the same absurdly broad dominion and limit potential directions in which you'd expand upon your character.

Why can't I have a god of both fire and rain?

One vague conceptual god that I had instead of the 'Master of Change' archetype that would become Zephyrion was 'Lord of the Forest that Thirsts'. How would you have a god of dark magic, bloody sacrifices, and weird rituals that also held power over trees and nature? I couldn't contrive anything that made sense. And that there is the crux of it: I always found dominions to be really annoying things to work around. Getting a second dominion is also needlessly hard.

@Double Capybara
If you still want to adopt a bunch of related portfolios as if you had a dominion there would be nothing stopping it, but I've always loathed the limits they imposed.

edit: responded to Capy's ninja and fixed a typo

Why can't I have a god of both fire and rain?

Elements (Fire) (Water)
Nature (Wildfire) (Rain)
Cycles (Rejuvenation)
Change (Earth)

One vague conceptual god that I had instead of the 'Master of Change' archetype that would become Zephyrion was 'Lord of the Forest that Thirsts'. How would you have a god of dark magic, bloody sacrifices, and weird rituals that also held power over trees and nature? I couldn't contrive anything that made sense.

Mystery (Forests) (Occult)
Forests (Groves) (Shadows)
Magic (Phytomancy) (Ritual)
Fear (Wilderness) (Blood)

<Snipped quote by Cyclone>
<Snipped quote by Cyclone>

Mystery (Forests) (Occult)
Forests (Groves) (Shadows)
Magic (Phytomancy) (Ritual)
Fear (Wilderness) (Blood)

I'd call them all contrivances, for a start. This feeds into my feeling that the domain system has always been something to bend, break, and work around rather than a mechanic that was enjoyable by any means. Your response there also doesn't address my distaste for how they force you to lump added portfolios in with the same general theme instead of truly branching out.

Why shouldn't a newly created god simply be allowed to have 1-3 portfolios that could be closely related, unrelated, or even in opposition with one another?

I'd call them all contrivances, for a start. This feeds into my feeling that the domain system has always been something to bend, break, and work around rather than a mechanic that was enjoyable by any means. Your response there also doesn't address my distaste for how they force you to lump added portfolios in with the same general theme instead of truly branching out.

Why shouldn't a newly created god simply be allowed to have 1-3 portfolios that could be closely related, unrelated, or even in opposition with one another?

No reason at all, tbh.

I've just never seen it as a big deal. Look at Jvan- she has a vaguely beauty-related ideology, and then... almost exclusively flesh powers. Her current additions are space travel and mathematics, and her future ones will be psychokinesis, unarmed combat, and memetics. So nothing she does bar maths and memetics really have anything to do with her domain, and even then it's tangential. Beauty's just an overall theme for her personality.

ed: Over time I've come to think of ports as predominantly a mechanic that lets you specify anything your god doesn't need Might for.

I quite like the idea of all unspent Might being lost at each Turn change. This encourages people to spend, which is what we want in Divinus Lite.
However, if we have such a mechanic, then requiring that people spend all their Might the previous Turn to be allowed to Level up might be redundant and onerous. Also, Might spent on Levelling Up would count for Might spent, so it doesn't fix too much except for finding a way to get rid of the loose change. (But if you want to keep it, that's fine too. It does ensure that only active players get to level up.)

I think we should choose one or the other - either Might is lost at Turn change and one can level up regardless, or Might is kept at Turn change but to level up it needs to have all been spent.

TiPis are not necessary (unless you allow them to be stockpiled, but that would cause confusion). They are really just 0.25 Might which can't be used for Might-only actions. They may as well be omitted from Divinus Lite, and you just replace their function with fractional Might expenditure (like we have been doing anyway). Having a single currency is far simpler than having two.

Unless I misunderstood Termite's above response to Capy, I think we're all generally in agreement that Frerpoints/TiPis can be done away with. SO MUCH FOR REBRANDING xD

Avatar costs have been changed. Current costs go 1-2-4-8-12-16-20-etc, not simply doubling. This is because we decided that the benefit provided by more Avatars is far closer to linear than exponential.

I've always found the wording of the worshipper mechanics for Demigods a little cumbersome and somewhat vague, especially with the scaling ratios. A simpler phrasing would be: Demigods get 1 Might Recuperation for every 1000 Worshippers, up to a cap of 4 Might Recuperation.

Done!

If we want to ever do a cross-over between Divinus Mk.2 and Divinus Lite, then I suggest that we keep the Primordials the same between the two.

I don't think that's necessay. Divinus-lite will be its own World-Universe, separate from that of Mk.II. Amul DOES oversee many universes, so retaining him is entirely possible, but I REALLY like Mater Lei. I was telling Cyclone that just her pose speaks 'interventionism'. I imagine she'll be far more involved in the plot, which Amul - due to his character or whatever - isn't.

Do we want to reduce the Khookie cost for levelling up Heroes, to be in line with the reduced Khookies per post?

I don't think it's necessary - heroes will be earning 2 khookies per post, and posts will probably be far more frequent, which balances things out overall. So while a 14,000 character post in Mk.II earned one 10 khookies, five posts which probably won't amount, all together, to more than 500 characters will do the same in Divinus lite. Many of these posts will probably be just to-and-fro responses, if my understanding of free RPs is right.

More details on quests. Quests could be set by GMs. Gods could also spend Might to create a quest which some Heroes could complete. The prize for the quest should be more efficient than simply spending Might to Level Up the Heroes. Unless you want to allow Gods to create quests for free, in which case we would have to specify a limit such as only one active quest per God, and you can only create one quest per Turn. We would have to ensure that quests meet some minimum standard of difficulty, so they cannot be abused to rapidly level up Heroes. We can permit a quest to be completed multiple times if that is within the parameters of the quest, although each Hero can only claim the prize once. Multiple Heroes working together to complete a quest all gain the full prize. It must be specified that all Heroes have the opportunity to learn of the existence of a quest (via rumours, legends, proclamations, visions, etc.); no secret/private quests allowed.

I think quests created by gods for free would be fine, with the limits you specify. Perhaps we can also limit each Hero to one quest per turn, in case we get someone who goes off completing a-quest-a-post or multiple quests in a single post.

With regards to weakening gods to Smaug or Sauron levels; I reiterate that Divinus isn't a superheroes RP. Gods need to be powerful, semi-transcendent beings with tremendous power. If that creates perceived issues with characters not being destructive enough due to plot purposes, then that is where beings like the Primordials come into play - either to stop it directly, or to act as a force that dissuades gods from being overly destructive for fear of punishment.

With regards to limiting powerful weapons; I concur with the proposition that Divine weapons should cost a flat amount of MP (maybe 2 rather than 1, to differentiate between 'Hero' weapons and 'Divine' weapons) and that we encourage the building of components and systems rather than straight-out 10/20/30 Might stuff.

As for skipping the creation montage; I think for a Divinus-lite that's reasonable. We can have the Primordials create the universe, laws, etc. and just bring the world into being above a planet already thriving with basic life.

As for Domains being useless; it's meant to be a way to prevent characters from stepping on each other's toes, and delineating exactly where one god's sovereignty beings and another's ends. When we have two gods of Water, the portfolios help us to manage where exactly within that Domain each has absolute sovereignty. If the whole 'you cannot take up Domains/portfolio that are your natural opposite' is problematic, we can remove that. But the Domain(Portfolio) system itself provides a good framework and I see no reason to get rid of it completely.

<Snipped quote by Antarctic Termite>

I'd call them all contrivances, for a start. This feeds into my feeling that the domain system has always been something to bend, break, and work around rather than a mechanic that was enjoyable by any means. Your response there also doesn't address my distaste for how they force you to lump added portfolios in with the same general theme instead of truly branching out.

Why shouldn't a newly created god simply be allowed to have 1-3 portfolios that could be closely related, unrelated, or even in opposition with one another?

Just because something forces bending, breaking and working around it does not mean it is bad, especially in something where there is more fun in the journey than in the destination. The use of Domain + Portfolio is one of the key factors that differentiates Divinus from other Divine RPs, I also particularly think its one of the things that helped us to have such a unique pantheon vs the overall genericness you can see in similar systems.

It allows enough mutability so the characters are not stuck with their initial concepts, but it places enough limits to encourage creative thinking and close the easy path to commonplace concepts that other RPs are filled with.

@Cyclone

I disagree that gods need to be broadly weaker. One of the things I like about Divinus is the sheer power you wield. The reason we want Gods to be weaker, if I'm not mistaken, is to avoid abuses where we nuke planets and the like. If we lessened their creative powers to do this, I feel like it would be detracting from Divinus. However, limiting their destructive power without altering their creative power allows players to retain the feeling of god-like power without risking wanton destruction.

(P.S. In Kho's words: "Gods need to be powerful, semi-transcendent beings with tremendous power." I feel this is a core part of Divinus.)

I agree that a pre-existing planet would be useful for Divinus Lite. While creating the universe from scratch really allowed us to personalise our universe, and thus should be kept in full versions of Divinus, it is probably excessive for Divinus Lite. The initial planet, I think, should have basic continents and oceans and a good atmosphere and stuff like that, but no life (or only mundane life. Nothing sentient or magical or monstrous); allow the players to invent whatever sentient races and monsters they like without the GMs imposing it upon them. Customising the world around us is, I feel, an important part of Divinus.

What is gained by discarding Fate and Amul? Lore-wise, they provide coherency within the Divinus multiverse. They can also be used to give direction to the gods, even as simple as a quick speech at the opening. And it gives the gods something greater than themselves to potentially interact with, and call upon for help if need be. Mechanically, they give the GMs a ready-to-use tool for intervening with IC affairs if necessary without having to contrive something ex nihilio or bend their own characters to do it.

On Domains and Portfolios: Conceivably, you could get rid of Domains. I'll see if I can explore some of the consequences of that.

Without Domains, we will have to permit Portfolios to be potentially as broad as Domains (or almost as broad). Otherwise, the gods would be very good at a very small number of things and completely equal at everything else, which is dull. Maintaining themes would emerge naturally from the way Portfolios must be acquired. A Fire god could get the Rain portfolio, but they still have to spend 3 Might on rain-related actions first. Also, we reduce overlap between gods, because they cannot have anything in common any more, not even a Domain, because those have been turned into Portfolios. However, by changing Domains into Portfolios, we also have a mixed hierarchy of Portfolios. If you have a God of Water, can you also have a God of Rain? Rain would normally be a subset of Water, but here we have an interesting clash of specialisations; the Water God is equally good at all water things, but the Rain God is very good at rain but no good at any other water things.

I'll explain what role Domains do have: they provide a description of what your god is broadly good at, without laying exclusive claim to it. It maintains the division between being broadly good at something (Domain) and being highly specialised in something (Portfolio). Discarding Domains removes this division. You could get away with it. Doing so would allow for gods with more diverse skill sets. But you'd very much change the dynamic of how Divinus Gods work.

For instance, having the Crafting Domain means I am broadly good at crafting, and I then claim Portfolios which indicate areas in which I am extremely skilled. Without Domains, I would have had to choose the Crafting Portfolio, then picked what are essentially sub-Portfolios, or else I would have lacked the breadth of skill I had otherwise.

As a compromise: new Domains should be easier to acquire. Kho's current version of Divinus Lite says you can get your second Domain at Level 10, third at Level 15, and so on. I propose that instead you should be able to get your second Domain at Level 5, third at Level 10, and so on. The wait to acquire new Domains even here is too long.

As for conflicting Domains/Portfolios and allowing Portfolios outside your thematic reach: it depends how much we want to build in niche protection. The current system protects each God's area of specialty. I don't have to worry about Jvan getting better at building robots than Teknall; Jvan doesn't have to worry about Teknall getting better at making life than her; Astarte doesn't have to worry about Ilunabar getting better at magic than her; and so on. Portfolios are acquired on a first-come first-served basis during the course of the game, so dropping all restrictions (including Domains) turns the game into a free-for-all Portfolio land grab.

P.S. While I was writing this, Kho also commented on Domains, and got to my point much more succinctly. It gives gods a broad region of sovereignty, and prevents them from stepping on each other's toes.


This is interesting discussion, though. It is worth critically examining the system to see what works and what doesn't. I will note that a lot of the consequences I have listed for these possible changes are not all necessarily "bad", although they do all constitute considerable changes.

I think we should choose one or the other - either Might is lost at Turn change and one can level up regardless, or Might is kept at Turn change but to level up it needs to have all been spent.

I think having Might lost at Turn change is simpler, and directly prevents problems which can be caused by stockpiling Might.