Oops - mouth zipping shut. Will say no more. :) OK, maybe I should. We're not DMing here, so I'll say that it comes to you from Faceus himself. Only those who are currently played in the active group (or those who replace them) will be eligible for godhood. That knowledge may resolve much of the convolution problem - the group can be structured as you (the players) see fit. I want to resist saying why this is so; even party members who are dead will still be eligible if they meet one particular criteria - and everyone you played in the fight last night already meets it. So far, everyone else doesn't. > > Nadan doesn't want to be a god, but I don't care if he becomes one. > It would certainly get the guy out of the way. :) > I assume you mean just the characters we are currently playing? > > jimkaren@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > Hopefully, next week should serve to > > shed some light on where things are > > headed. Believe it or not, the road to > > godhood is already being paved - for > > better or for worse. > > > > Let me take this opportunity to ask an > > important question: does anyone have a > > character in the current group that > > they do not want to see become a god? > > (Important: I'm not saying this in > > terms of what the character wants, but > > in terms of what the player wants). > > > > In the end, instead of failing, the > > characters might find a divine destiny > > to be unavoidable. > > > > > > > > In the end, what will really > > disappoint or upset me is an ending > > > that doesn't allow us a chance to > > retire these characters. Do I hope > > > that they will become gods? Yes I > > do. I am so excited about writing > > > these guys and girls up as deities! > > I can't wait! However, if it > > > doesn't happen, it doesn't happen. > > As long as it doesn't end stupidly. > > > Let me put it another way. I > > don't want the end to be something > > > contrived. So far you have never > > gone in the direction I intended, yet > > > you have continued to do things that > > made sense and were lots of fun. I > > > have faith you will keep doing that. > > > > > > jimkaren@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > > > > > 1. I had to chuckle when you > > brought > > > > up the fact that NPCs give such > > > > constant abuse to characters. I > > hadn't > > > > thought of that, and had to respond > > > > without reading the rest. Very good > > > > point! As for Elminster, he had a > > lot > > > > on his mind: powerful wizards > > seeking > > > > godhood, vast sources of power > > leaking > > > > into the realms, etc etc. A bit > > harsh, > > > > but in line for him (at least from > > what > > > > I've read over the years). I'll now > > > > read the next section: > > > > > > > > 2. I'm getting a sense of relief > > from > > > > reading section 2 as well. For some > > > > reason, I just don't have a problem > > > > with Baish! I should, and I > > remember > > > > the character giving you tremendous > > > > headaches as a DM. I think I've > > hit on > > > > a "aha!" moment here: I'm really > > > > overwhelmed by roleplaying > > spellcasters > > > > in 3rd edition, not by character > > > > personalities. It was reeeallly > > tough > > > > running both Amrikals and not having > > > > them annihilate everyone and > > everything > > > > around them. I just don't have a > > firm > > > > enough grasp of 3rd edition magic. > > > > > > > > 3. Yes, it does make sense. I left > > > > last night mentioning two things to > > > > Matt and Damon: (1) How to DM your > > > > powerful characters (which we > > discussed > > > > today), and (2) how terrified I am > > of > > > > this plot. > > > > > > > > I'm loving it, and I'm glad everyone > > > > else is having fun, but there's > > bound > > > > to be some controversy from what > > > > happens next! As each week > > progresses, > > > > the danger level is going to go up. > > > > > > > > Some of that "controversy" concern > > > > comes from my knowledge of things to > > > > come that won't necessarily be > > popular > > > > with the players - the events might > > > > even come across as a "wet blanket" > > of > > > > sorts. > > > > > > > > For example, Gadget and Faceus > > weren't > > > > captured by Mylena - Tyr sent them. > > > > They both have a specific mission: > > > > Faceus to prevent the group from > > > > succeeding, and Gadget to deal with > > > > Klaw. > > > > > > > > For an example of what concerns me, > > > > I'll mention one idea now that I > > won't > > > > use in play: I considered having > > the > > > > gods send a messenger to the Riders > > in > > > > Sigil. They could return of their > > own > > > > volition, or sacrifice all godly > > aid. > > > > That would mean no spells or > > abilities > > > > for any of the priests, among other > > > > things. But I've thought of a > > > > different, more democratic way that > > > > they will handle the problem, and it > > > > ain't going to be pretty either! :) > > > > > > > > That's why I feel like taking these > > > > things to their logical conclusions > > is > > > > going to make me as much a dreaded > > DM > > > > as Dan Robinetti. > > > > :) > > > > > > > > > > > >