I like the idea of Ages. The time window in Mk2 was a jury-rigged solution which was tacked on, although it has stopped people from getting too carried away and running off centuries ahead of everyone else. Implementing it from the start and giving it more mechanical and narrative weight should make it work better.

As for how it should work with technology, I have some thoughts. Ages describe what the general state of the world is, including the general level of technology which is widely available. However, we must consider how to determine what the next Age will be. The Ages should be able to be driven by player choices as with every other aspect of world-building in Divinus. Thus I propose this: Gods can spend Might to develop and share technologies (and social constructs) which are one step more advanced than the current Age. These advanced technologies stay relatively localised until the next Age. When the next Age comes about, the GM(s) will consider what has been invested in for the past Age to determine the theme for the next Age. These previously localised advanced technologies would then become widespread as the Age ticks over. The progression of an Age will also automatically fill in important technologies associated with the previous Age which have been overlooked by the gods (for instance, when we went from Stone Age to Bronze Age here in Mk 2, no one had bothered to explicitly invent agriculture despite it being very important for a sedentary lifestyle, yet it was generally assumed that towns just worked). This scheme allows for players to organically direct the progression of history and also allow for limited technological disparity between locations (which is historically common). Power and epoch gaps are controlled by only allowing civilisations to learn technologies which are no more than one step more advanced than the current Age.

As an example, consider game-play during the Stone Age. The widespread technologies involve stone tools, fire, pottery, crude fabrics such as hides, hunter-gatherer societies, and tribal social structures. A god (or group of gods) could decide to teach a particular tribe agriculture, bronze working and monarchy, allowing for the establishment of the first city. Another tribe might be blessed with simple shamanic magic. However, iron working or alchemy would be more than one step away from the Stone Age so are not valid to be taught to a civilisation during the Stone Age, even if that particular nation had already developed bronze working and cities. A god could still gift a mortal with a suit of steel armour or create a single individual able to create miraculous concoctions, but these would be singular and mighty individuals with techniques which could not be reproduced by mortals for generations to come. When it comes time for the next Age, the technologies which had been invested in during the Stone Age would become widespread, such that bronze working and city building becomes available everywhere. This does not mean that every location will use every technology, but those technologies become fair game. If the players had invested heavily in technologies we would associate with the Bronze Age, then we would declare the next Age to be the Bronze Age. But if the players invested more heavily in something else, such as magic for instance, then we might have the Age of Awakening, to reflect the 'awakening' of magical talent in many mortals across the globe. Although, really, the name for the Age is mostly arbitrary because the principle technologies associated with that Age have already been decided. When the Age advanced, we also fill in any gaps in the tech tree (so to speak), such as if we had developed towns and cities but forgotten agriculture or construction, or developed metal working but forgotten mining.

[hr]

Levels. I agree that levels are somewhat superfluous. We had identified issues with Mk 2's handling of levels when creating Godspeed. And as you observe, Godspeed's handling of levels led to everyone having fairly similar levels of power. I would support doing away with levels and instead having MP generation tied to the Age (plus generation from Holy Sites). Levels were a rather abstract concept. Front-loading Might into the first few turns also makes a lot of sense.

However, there are two functions of levels which cannot be so easily done away with. One function of levels was to provide a cap on the number of Domains and Portfolios you can have. Although you are changing the Portfolios system somewhat, you still spend Might to acquire them. One option is to have a cap which scales with the Turn number instead of level, which prevents people from gobbling up Portfolios too quickly as they are quite powerful. Another option is to remove the cap altogether and just hope that the Might cost of acquiring new Portfolios is enough to keep them in check.

The other function of levels is to provide some transition from being a demigod to being a fully-fledged god. Mk 2 has made ascension almost impossible within the lifetime of the RP for demigods by sticking the transition point at a level so high that not even the gods have approached it. To address this, Godspeed did away with the formal distinction altogether and just made a two-tiered power system with a transition at around level 3, which was much more manageable. However, if we have [i]no[/i] levels, then we have to find a new solution, one which gives new players a relatively brief probationary period as demigods while still allowing them to ascend without waiting too long.

This transition could be tied to Spheres. A new god/demigod introduced part way through the RP would not have a Sphere to call their own. A demigod would have the creative powers of a god, but not necessarily at the same strength, and they would not gain the benefits of Spheres or the ability to freely travel between Spheres.The mark of ascension to full godhood would be creating or binding to a Sphere. But they can only do this if the Architect of the Spheres, or maybe some of the existing gods, grant them this privilege. The demigod must prove themselves down on Galbar. On the meta level, if the player shows that they can play nice, we let their character ascend (picking either a suitable god or the Architect to sponsor them in-character). We could make the standard probationary period about one Turn- too long and they might get bored; too short and the character's entrance would be jarring (one Turn is just a suggestion and could need tweaking. Maybe two could be better. It depends on how the RP paces). The player may elect to stay a demigod for longer if they wish, but the option for them to ascend would be there. The process of appeasing potential divine sponsors (and gaining favours from demigods) would also add an interesting layer to the pantheon politics.

The other option is to do away with a probationary period altogether and make all players fully fledged gods from the moment they join, regardless of when they join. This significantly lowers the barrier for new players, making it easier for them to join. However, narratively this could be quite jarring, for gods shouldn't just appear out of thin air, and the children of gods shouldn't immediately equal their parents in power. And at the meta level it increases the disruption caused by a player who arrives, makes one or two posts, then leaves. With demigods, such a player would have only a minor impact on the global narrative in their first couple of posts so their lack of commitment won't cause too much trouble. If they started as fully fledged gods, they'd potentially create an entire Sphere and build half a civilisation before disappearing, leaving global plot threads dangling. A probationary period allows us to filter out those who aren't committed or who decide that Divinus isn't for them.

[hr]

I agree with Capy's sentiment that we should emphasise that all civilisations are fair game for all gods to interact with.

As for hot-spots, I believe these will develop naturally so we have no reason to codify such a concept.