Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7671182" data-attributes="member: 42582">I don't think it's a problem at all - I think it could be a lot of fun! But the rulebooks don't really put it forward as a possibility - you'd have to work it out for yourself!I think there are two things going on here.First, can a paladin persuade Zeus? My preferred approach, as a GM, is not to have the game pose problems for the players that their PCs aren't capable of answering. So if I take the view that Zeus can't be persuaded, then Zeus's opinions aren't going to be part of the game.Second, the Olympians shape their home plane in the sense of determining its geography. But can they make it true that,on Olympus, free self-realisation is a necessary condition of achieving wellbeing? If they can, then their alignment choice is basically arbitrary (because had they woken up on the LG side of the bed, they could equally have made it true that social order is a necessary condition of achieving wellbeing. There would be nothing actually at stake in the disagreement between LG and CG.To me, the campaign set-up seems to offer more prospect of engaging play if the disagreement between LG and CG over the necessary conditions for human wellbeing is treated as a real one, and actual play then permits this to be settled one way or the other (eg by finding out what, in play, follows from the PCs rebelling against the social order, or alternatively what follows from the PCs imposing social order on those who (at least initially) reject it).</blockquote>

Verification