You're a villain. How would you change the world? Contest with prizes. (Spoilers for ZEITGEIST)

[Ajar]

"To the Watchmakers, I say that I see little use for flight in a world without free will. The essence of the alliance between our faction of Sky Leaguers and Trekkers is liberty! How can an explorer function without free will? How can they respond to the wonders they find on their travels, if they cannot make decisions for themselves?"

Miller's Pyre is the most readily able to accommodate your needs, as our plan has a spare plane. Consider it done. If your vote goes for the Pyre, I would certainly vote for the Sky League - that was, in fact my original vote!

"Ah, but it isn't so simple. The careful replacement of Avilona and Jiese with a binary world is the key to your plan, and we will not countenance the loss of Jiese. More would be required than simply giving your spare plane the trait of Flight. Recalculation of your planar alignments would be necessary to determine if your binary alignment can be accomplished with Nem rather than with Jiese."

"However, the Panarchists could potentially accomodate us more easily. An additional realignment would be needed, but it would not replace any of their existing realignments. To work with the Panarchists, we would ask that they add Avilona to their existing plan, replacing it with a full-fledged Plane of Air carrying the aspect of Flight. Some might argue that with teleportation freely available, flight would be unnecessary, but I must disagree. We believe that flight is necessary in order to reach distant worlds and planes, even with teleportation."

(@RangerWickett -- before we DMs get too far ahead of ourselves, is it even possible for factions to tweak their planar alignments in this way?)

(So far, I've only voted for the Sky League and Trekkers. I'm reserving my main faction vote for now. I might also make a Devil's Advocate post calling for the world to end...)

 

[RangerWickett]

lol @ world ending

Sure, feel free to get into the details of the setting and suggest changes. By the way, I need to ask Russ to post about this on the front page again, since we have another 12 days to go and voting has slowed a bit.

 

[Hitomi Camacho]

Really, people voting for Colossus or Watchmakers didn't find it absolutely cliché? After playing such an original adventure path it would be a waste to ruin it with the conspiracy pursuing two of the most typical evil guy plan (Become super powerful or gain control of everything).

 

[gideonpepys]

Really, people voting for Colossus or Watchmakers didn't find it absolutely cliché? After playing such an original adventure path it would be a waste to ruin it with the conspiracy pursuing two of the most typical evil guy plan (Become super powerful or gain control of everything).

These are my sentiments exactly. (Which is why I'm so surprised to find RangerWickett casting his lot in with the Colossus faction.) A good-intentioned plot that goes wrong is more nuanced and interesting imho. But my vote is for Miller's Pyre.

 

[RangerWickett]

Strategic voting, my friend.

Also, as the author, I'm struck by how difficult it will be to motivate adventuring parties if they agree with the bad guys.

 

[gideonpepys]

Strategic voting, my friend.

Also, as the author, I'm struck by how difficult it will be to motivate adventuring parties if they agree with the bad guys.

Surely that's the challenge?

These guys wanted to screw with the universe so badly they lost sight of the fact that the ends did not justify the means. Having messed up their grand scheme, they then move to persist with it, and maybe at that point a different faction takes over. But 'rule the world' Bond Villainy is so 2012, don't you think?

 

[Hitomi Camacho]

Strategic voting, my friend.

Also, as the author, I'm struck by how difficult it will be to motivate adventuring parties if they agree with the bad guys.

That's why Miller's Pyre is a bad choice, it's to Good and to close of the original desire of Miller which as we can see on the campaing guide has twisted with the passing of time. Panarchists on the other hand have the adequate mix of surprise element and unexpected consequences.
Anyway what i would like to see it the Moral Mind in effect because that is at the core of the Obscurati Origin.

 

[Ajar]

I see that Hitomi has cast one of his secondary votes to the Sky League. Accordingly, I have cast my primary vote for the Panarchists. So I voted for Panarchists + Sky League + Trekkers, with Avilona's replacement added to the Panarchists' existing plan in order to make flight possible.

I think it makes a lot of sense, and in particular I think Nicodemus would be supportive of the Panarchist concept. While Nicodemus and the ghost council have little faith in common folk, Panarchism allows him to appear compassionate while actually setting up a meritocracy that could, ultimately, lead to Colossus-style rulership for those who rise to the top. A sort of steampunk corporatism.

That said, none of the factions I voted for are currently leading, so I guess my advocacy thus far hasn't been super successful. Perhaps we need some sort of Panarchist-Pyre hybrid to forestall Colossus or Watchmaker. The planar realignments of Panarchist and Pyre are not incompatible, although I still wouldn't vote for a plan that would replace Jiese. Taking industry away from Lanjyr gives you every other fantasy world where they sit at the same tech level for thousands and thousands of years.

 

[parhadokzal]

I had initially voted for Miller's, but thought to myself that my players (as I know them) would literrally want to rally the conspiracy. So I changed to Colossus, but I agree that my players would be disappointed that such a complex, shades of grey campaign would end with such a classical "dominate the world because I know better" scheme.
So, my main vote finally goes to Panarchists, which I think is both original and complex, while being something my players would, begrudgingly, impose out of rational thought. (i.e. We can't trust individuals with that kind of powers)

 

[gideonpepys]

That's why Miller's Pyre is a bad choice, it's to Good and to close of the original desire of Miller which as we can see on the campaing guide has twisted with the passing of time.

First of all, who's to say Miller is going to do what the conspiracy says? I know that's what the campaign guide says, but he's not openly expressing that, is he? (How many people even know who he is?) And if this is all about Miller as he is now (as opposed to when he developed his forward-thinking ideology), why is there even a vote? My take on it is that Miller needs the support of the conspiracy he leads, but will fix things the way he (and I) want them fixed in the end.

I had initially voted for Miller's, but thought to myself that my players (as I know them) would literrally want to rally the conspiracy. So I changed to Colossus, but I agree that my players would be disappointed that such a complex, shades of grey campaign would end with such a classical "dominate the world because I know better" scheme.
So, my main vote finally goes to Panarchists, which I think is both original and complex, while being something my players would, begrudgingly, impose out of rational thought. (i.e. We can't trust individuals with that kind of powers)

I'm almost in agreement with you here, but we need to remember that there are wheels within wheels. Who says the Ob leadership goes with what the conclave votes for? Also, the Obscurati plan fails and, above all, the ends do not justify the means. But if the players found themselves in the strange position of bringing the villains to justice and then, ultimately, enacting their 'villainous' plan themselves, wouldn't that be a fabulous end to a campaign?