BBeast

Mid/High Casual - Divinus: The Deity Roleplay Mk.II

Without accounting for Holy Sites, a player receives Level+3 Might per Turn. Over two Turns they gain 2*Level+6 Might. If we are encouraging spending in Divinus Lite, then they should spend most of that. Since it takes 2*Level Might spent to Level up, a player should reliably level up every 2 Turns or less unless they save for a Holy Site (after which they'll Level up faster).

Also, I've devised a system for determining the rewards from Hero quests. A quest starts out granting zero Khookies/Prestige. You then add to the reward some amount based on the risks faced by the Hero and consequences suffered. You also add amounts based on time taken and roleplaying elements such as collaboration. These criteria need to be as close to objective as reasonably possible, to minimise GM oversight.

For example:

The amount of Khookies/Prestige granted for completing a quest is increased by the following factors.
Risk factor
(Risk factors do not stack; take the highest value one only if multiple apply.)
- The Hero risked mild harm. (1 Khookies)
- The Hero suffered mild harm. (2 Khookies)
- The Hero risked moderate harm. (4 Khookies)
- The Hero suffered moderate harm. (8 Khookies)
- The Hero risked severe harm. (6 Khookies)
- The Hero suffered severe harm. (12 Khookies)
<<Definitions of mild, moderate and severe harm here. 'Harm' is to be defined quite broadly. Severity is to be judged by how much of a setback it is and what the probability of that setback is. Mild would probably be things the Hero could easily recover from. Severe would be permanent (or potentially permanent) and significant losses.>>
If no risk factors apply, a Hero can not gain any Khookies from the quest.

Other factors
- The Hero collaborated with characters from other players to complete the quest. (+5 Khookies)
- The quest took more than one post of continued effort to complete. (+2 Khookies)
- The quest took more than one Turn of continued effort to complete. (+8 Khookies)


Costs can be adjusted and new factors added. This is just a sample.

Note that this system will likely provide different rewards for different Heroes. If the quest is to 'Protect a village from a horde of Ashlings', then a powerful combat Hero like Ventus might receive little or no reward from such a quest, while a less strong Hero like Belvast could receive significant rewards for the quest.

Also, where we say that a quest can be completed multiple times, add in the phrase "if it makes sense to do so." Quests such as 'Protect a village from a horde of Ashlings' or 'Convert a group of people to Chirality' makes sense to be repeated. A quest like 'Kill Grot' or 'Gather Death's Shards under the World Mountain' can only be completed once.

Also, I support the idea raised by Termite of changing the name of Khookies to Prestige. With the quest system, this makes extra sense. Of course, if Kho is running the place, he might be inclined to keep the pun.

P.S. I have been assuming that Might spent carries over Turns when it comes to levelling up. It would be counter-productive not to.

Also, remember in your expenditure tables that gaining Portfolios and Domains also does not count. I think we should also omit Might spent to Level Up Heroes from the list of activities which contribute to your Level.

Mid/High Casual - Divinus: The Deity Roleplay Mk.II

I just crunched some numbers. Having cost to Level up equal to your Level allows for really regular levelling (i.e. every Turn). Since in this system, players would passively Level Up without investing Might into it, this is quite fast. I would agree with Termite that the 'cost' should be twice your current Level. This would mean levelling on average once every two Turns.

Mid/High Casual - Divinus: The Deity Roleplay Mk.II

Also, for levelling up, how about you can Level Up only if you have spent at least 1 MP Might equal to your current level on something else since your last Level Up (including at the start of the game).

@BBeast

This work?

@Antarctic Termite

The trouble is that will more than double the amount of Might it takes to Level Up at the current proposed costs.

A suggestion: our goal with this is to encourage Might spending on useful stuff rather than on power-levelling, yes? What if, instead of spending Might to increase your Level, you Level Up whenever you spend your Level's worth of Might on things other than Holy Sites, Domains and Portfolios? (The exact quantity of spending needed could be rebalanced, of course.)

Mid/High Casual - Divinus: The Deity Roleplay Mk.II

I'll be honest, I have little idea about how the Free Section works. I haven't had time to explore. But I agree that current Divinus is definitely Advanced material.

Btw, I definitely do not have time to GM this new version. I've been procrastinating for the past 6 hours simply talking about this when I should probably be doing work.

Mid/High Casual - Divinus: The Deity Roleplay Mk.II

<Snipped quote by BBeast>

Haven't read the draft OP yet, but I'd like to raise that some gods will play cautiously with their Might simply because they don't know when they next need it, even if they're active, in which case we shouldn't punish them for actively choosing to stay quiet. Also, losing excess Might at the end of the turn is also incentive to try and level up with your spare Might if you have it, and it's enough.

I think the Might cap / Might expiry should be merged into a simple cap = 2 x Might per turn rule. That way you can still save a little, if you feel like playing that way.

I also would still like to keep the level-up-available-if-Might-is-spent rule, amended somehow, maybe so that Might spent on levelling doesn't count.

@Antarctic Termite

You raise a good point. It's hard to know when to save for a rainy day and when to spend all your Might. With the cap on expenditure on single items, saving up for super-weapons is no longer a concern.

I propose that the Might cap should either be 1.5 * Might per Turn, to encourage people to spend at least some Might during each Turn; or 2 * (Level+3), which is the Might per Turn ignoring Holy Sites (so Holy Sites can boost your generation, but not beyond the capacity allowed by your Level).

Also, for levelling up, how about you can Level Up only if you have spent at least 1 MP on something else since your last Level Up (including at the start of the game).

Mid/High Casual - Divinus: The Deity Roleplay Mk.II

@Antarctic Termite has a point. Demigods work as a good probation system with the level to ascend scaled back as proposed, but whether such a system is necessary at all in a Free Section RP is debatable. Depends whether we want to have a consistent committed player base or allow drop-in-drop-out play.

If we allow drop-in-drop-out play, then we would need to encode some mechanism to remove inactive gods from the pool and free up their Portfolios for other players. Perhaps not doing anything IC for, say, 2 consecutive Turns without leave of absence results in that god's power fading away, such that their Portfolios can be taken, and they lose influence over worshippers.

Mid/High Casual - Divinus: The Deity Roleplay Mk.II

In line with BBeast's suggestion that 'the threshold for ascending to godhood can be reduced to, say, Level 6 or 7', I've edited it in the proposed OP to level 6.

@Kho

It largely depends on how many Turns we want to make the new players wait. Getting to Level 6 takes 16 Might. Power levelling gets you there in 4 Turns with 9 MP to spare on other expenses along the way. If you get 1000 worshippers by the end of your first Turn, you can cut it down to 3 Turns. If we lower the limit to Level 5, then we reduce the time it takes by another Turn. Although the time taken by a Level 6 threshold seems adequate (especially considering that Turns should be faster).

Mid/High Casual - Divinus: The Deity Roleplay Mk.II

A more sandboxy and free feel as well as freedom from a vague backstory that I'm not all that fond of. GM intervention would be a last resort in my idealized vision; for the most part, if one god is being overly destructive and a dick, I think that it should fall to the other players to stop him. If nobody does, then he rampages and run loose. Only if the story is utterly stagnating or something extreme happens (ie alliance of chaos gods threatening to scour all of creation) should some ex nihilo event need to happen with GM intervention. Because we'd plan on trying to avoid the need for such things, I dislike having the Primordial Beings primed and loomed over us like a bucket of water rigged to the top of a door.

@Cyclone

I can see the appeal there. As a player driven RP, it should be up to the players to keep the other player characters in check. This is, indeed, what we have been doing all along. In that sense, the Primordials are unnecessary.

As for your other points, I think you have identified the key question: what is to be the design philosophy behind Divinus Lite (or whatever we end up calling it)? Do we want to stay true to the style of the original Divinus, with Gods being transcendental beings who predate all mortal civilisation in a fully customised world? Or do we want to create a different flavour of god RP, as you are suggesting? Ultimately, these choices come down to whoever actually decides to run such an RP.


On a more mechanical thought: for Divinus Lite, I think we can streamline the ascension from Demigodhood to Godhood more (P.S. Termite already pointed out that this needed doing). As it stands, there are two tiers of players: those who were here at the start, and those who came later. This helps maintain consistency in the Divinus IC canon, where it would be weird if new fully-fledged gods kept appearing and disappearing, but it can be relaxed in Divinus Lite. A Demigod can basically be considered as a probationary god in this context. If the player sticks around for long enough to level up a bit, then they receive the privilege of becoming a full god. On the other hand, if the player drops out soon after joining, then only a demigod is lost and not a proper god. This probationary period allows the character to smoothly enter into the pantheon.

Perhaps the threshold for ascending to godhood can be reduced to, say, Level 6 or 7. We can retain the Might gained from worshippers, since obtaining worshippers requires roleplaying and that should be encouraged especially in the newer players.


Also, all this talk of Divinus Lite has made me start thinking about how it could be adapted to a tabletop setting...

Tabletop Divinus

To be played with a group of friends. Because you are all present in person, and all action is done live, and the story is all player-driven, you don't need a GM to coordinate things. No GM needed.

A story-driven RPG, inspired by the likes of Polaris and Microscope (and of course Divinus itself). No dice needed. You will need paper to write stuff down. Conflict resolution is to be roleplayed out. If no agreement can be reached, then the other players at the table are to arbitrate, based on factors described in actual Divinus rules.

Mechanically this game is very similar to Divinus Lite as proposed by Kho so far. There will be Might, and Turns, and Levels, and Heroes, and Holy Sites, etc.

The game is played by going around the table and asking each player what they want to do. They can do up to one action, then they move on to the next player (passing is allowed). You go around like this until everyone has spent all their Might or nobody wants to do anything any more. You then progress to the next Turn.

The trick will be ensuring we have enough roleplaying for this to be more than a world-building simulator. Perhaps, whenever a Hero, Avatar, or notable mortal does something, or whenever your God interacts directly with the people in the world or the other Gods, the players at the table have to roleplay a scene (similar to Microscope, except we have more recurring and personal characters, like Polaris).

Mid/High Casual - Divinus: The Deity Roleplay Mk.II

@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.

@Kho

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

Mid/High Casual - Divinus: The Deity Roleplay Mk.II

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.