Sunday, October 23, 2005

Proposal: Of cities and gods

Passed 5-1, reaches quorum. Enacted by Angry Grasshopper

Adminned at 23 Oct 2005 15:56:38 UTC

Surely there must be cities in the world where men and mortals can congregate and play their part in the will of the gods. 

Add a new Wiki page called “Cities Wiki” and put a link to it in the sidebar.

Add a new rule titled “Cities”:

A Deity may create a City by spending a point of Quintessence and listing the City in the Cities Wiki. The Cities Wiki shall list the name and pantheon of the deity which created that city (the current role of the Deity in question), as well as some optional description.

The Archon may create a City without spending Quintessence.


Add the following text to the rule “Temples”:

When a new Temple is created, it must be located in an existing City. This is noted by the creating Deity in the Cities Wiki. For example: False Odin creates a Temple and decides to place it in Niflheim, which has no Temples devoted to him. He notes that Nibelheim has one Temple of False Odin in the Cities Wiki under the appropriate header.


Once a Temple is located in a City, it may not be moved from one City to another.

A Temple that was created before the passing of this proposal may be moved by the Deity that created to an existing City it at no cost.

All Temples that are not located in an existing City at the time this proposal is enacted do not contribute to the count for Godhead until they are re-located to an existing city.

Comments

gazebo_dude:

23-10-2005 18:42:03 UTC

for

Excalabur:

23-10-2005 18:51:30 UTC

against

Rodney:

23-10-2005 19:15:59 UTC

for Err, you should know that these days, Subrules are used much more often. So we should probaly make some related rules in subrules.

Angry Grasshopper:

23-10-2005 19:20:45 UTC

Yeah, subrules, nuances, I’ll draft a proposal to make things pretty.

Excalabur:

23-10-2005 20:19:02 UTC

That’s because subrules are /easy/ now.

On a related note, the vote against this is that we’re creating a ‘more worshippers is good, must be loved’ system here.  However, a lot of ‘successful’ gods/dieties never got a lot of lovin’, namely almost all of the ‘evil’ or ‘death’ related gods.  Never mind nomadic or messenger gods, or what have you, as well.

i’ll propose something soon.

Angry Grasshopper:

23-10-2005 20:22:23 UTC

The term ‘Temple’ is pretty loosely defined, so far.

Who knows what some antisocial god’s temple might be? Although you might have had the Parthenon in mind, a perpetual battlefield might be better suited to Mars, no?

But yeah, it’s just a mechanic.

Rodney:

23-10-2005 21:58:33 UTC

You could have mad cultists worshipping a anti-social god. They could worship just about anything.

lunaetic:

23-10-2005 22:25:07 UTC

for

jamuraa:

23-10-2005 22:34:49 UTC

for