From: Michael Raaterova (michael.raaterova.7033@STUDENT.UU.SE)
Date: Sat 09 Nov 1996 - 15:18:27 EET
Scott disagrees:
>Michael writes:
><< If Yelm changed his path and went north to punish Valind, he would rupture
>the
>pattern and risk the destruction of the world, which is why he doesn't and so
>stays passive. >>
>
>I agree with alot of what you wrote Mike, but this part above would not be
>possible. I feel that the compromise is made in such a way that Yelm himself
>would be unable to change his path, as an inside agent(*) is needed to alter
>the terms of the compromise. The gods bound by it are unable to themselves
>and thus the need to manipulate their worshippers.
I think gods with no freedom of action are boring. If the Compromise binds
all the gods to inaction, then they can't even answer a divination or send
a vision, because that would be a conscious act. Gods must have some degree
of freedom, as we all know they answer divinations and send visions, and so
IMG the Compromise is merely an agreement between the gods not to take any
action within Time. So who makes sure that the gods honour their agreement?
The gods themselves, of course. If a god breaks the agreement, all the
other gods would gang up on him and teach him some manners. And they all
know that that sort of thing could escalate into a new Gods War, which is
precisely what the Chaos Gods are waiting for.
So the gods watch the gods of other pantheons like paranoiacs while they
try to sneak a small action past the watching eyes. Most small actions
actually go unpunished and most of the gods of a pantheon have a silent
praxis that minor actions are OK, but Acts of God are not.
My interpretation retains the results of the old Compromise and allows for
some small divine actions on the mundane plane without player-driven divine
intervention, which can only enhance MGF.
- -----------------
Michael Raaterova
<.sig omitted on legal advice>
------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 13 Jun 2003 - 16:53:34 EEST