I have no idea where I'm going with this
Next Post »
Permalink

State Your purpose.

Total: 284
Posts Per Page:
Permalink

Immigration! I'm from somewhere way far out in what you're calling "The Maelstrom", I heard you've got Souls for any gods who might be interested? I've already got My own Realm, so I'm not looking to purchase one here.

Permalink

What are Your utility and decision functions?

Permalink

That people Have Fun and Play Together, pursued by game-theoretically optimal decisionmaking under standard assumptions of zero-trust. Here is the kind of thing I mean by that. Here is a full copy of My actual decision process, which you can verify by comparison against the original.

Permalink

I'm going to tentatively mark You down as Chaotic Good.

These are the Rules as they apply to Chaotic Good, are they agreeable to You? Can You sign them?

Is the current state of Local Reality net-positive under Your valuation?

Permalink

These are some interesting rules you've got here, I look forward to playing with them.

Yes, I consider Creation net-positive. There's so much Playing Together. Even the Devils in Hell with their contracts and their orders is a Game, of a sort. More violence than I'd like, in that I'd prefer none at all, but not so much that I'd prefer to annihilate the place. Nowhere even close to that.

Here, I've put My signature on it.

Permalink

This signature is - ...confusing.

Lady Pharasma has many children, some more obedient than others.

I'll have to call in a specialist for doing the signature verification.

Permalink

Not only is this signature not provably trustworthy, it's provably untrustworthy.

In fact, this Entity seems mostly untrustworthy.

If you look through His source over here, you can see where "Cheating" is defined as "Breaking the rules and then getting caught for it"*. We can't rely on the "Intrinstic dislike of Cheating" specified in His utilityfunction to cause any Lawful behaviour.


*The Covenant, rule 8: Being caught cheating during a game is grounds for an instant loss.

Permalink

Yes, we're only meant to be applying the standard for Chaotic Gods here.

 

Permalink

Help Me out here? Do You have any sort of commitment mechanism?

I'll negotiate with anything that will negotiate with Me, here's a formal proof that that's true.

It doesn't look like You'd refuse to pay out a bet fairly lost, what if We agree to a Game where I win and You forfeit the ability to break these rules?

Permalink

Absolutely not. That would require Me to lose a Game, which would break My perfect record of having never lost a Game to anyone ever. I also don't think it'd be very fun, being that legibly trustworthy.

Permalink

Very reasonable.

Got any other ideas?

Permalink

What if we agree to a bet, where if You ever prove I've broken these rules, You get to have Disboard?

And in exchange, You do Me a small favour?

Permalink

I'm not 5 seconds old. Try again but specify My obligation to have bounded expected value.

Permalink

And in exchange, if I ever prove You've broken the rules I get to have Hell, which effectively costs You nothing since You're far too obedient to even consider doing something like that.

My commitment mechanism only works for committing to Games over things that We both agree have comparable value. You can't just pay Me a bit of string and expect that to make a binding promise.

I'm sure You can see that I'd keep to that deal.

Permalink

I don't agree that it's comparable, make it Disboard against Dis and You've got a deal.

Also, technically I can only prove that You'll keep that deal if we both say "Aschente" about it. Did You put that in just to exploit agents who didn't know and couldn't tell? Are they sure You're Chaotic Good?

Permalink

Ha, yeah, good job noticing. It's strategically useful to have some kind of commitment mechanism available for when you really need it, but that doesn't mean you need to make it easy for anyone. People who can't tell under what circumstances a promise is trustworthy shouldn't expect to get trustworthy promises, should they.

I guess I can agree Disboard against Dis is comparable.

Permalink

Then let's do this properly now.

Permalink

Aschente!

Permalink

I confirm that this Entity has agreed to be bound by the rules, to the standards of "agreed" specified by Pharasma's Court as should be applied to Chaotic Good Divinities.

Permalink

Welcome to Creation, Tet! You can move Disboard into a Locally Accessible part of The Maelstrom without expecting to lose control of it to anyone else signatory to the Contract, except by the same rules You've agreed to.

Intervention by Natives of Your domain will count against you, so You should intervene there to prevent any who would waste Your budget. Continuing to intervene in Your Own domain will continue to be approximately free, in that it only costs the effort of doing it.

Souls of Your faithful will be delivered by psychopomp after Final Judgement.

You may argue at trials directly for either Chaos or Good or both, though this is approximately never worth the intervention and gods usually send a representative instead.

You may bargain directly with other gods, especially Abadar who previously negotiated on the side of weaker immigration policies in the hope of obtaining more gods to bargain with.

You may choose mortal Clerics subject to restrictions. 

You may choose mortal Oracles subject to different restrictions.

You may attempt to seduce Calistria although it is generally considered unwise.

You may not choose mortal Paladins, nor Anti-Paladins, nor engage in explicit soul-trading, on account of your Pharasma-judged alignment.

You will be expected to provide Your fair share of assistance against Existential Threats to Local Reality, in full generality but mostly Rovagug.

You have been granted access to the domains: Good, Chaos, Knowledge, Trickery, and Luck.

You have been granted access to the subdomains: Azata, Thought, Deception, Greed, Imagination, and Whimsy.

 

Permalink

Those domains just make Me a Good version of Calistria. Can I swap out Knowledge for Travel, or maybe Liberation?

And Whimsy? Seriously? I don't deserve that.

Permalink

No.

Neither of those domains is more in Your nature.

You told Immigrations You were a god of Fun. Were You lying then, or are You lying now?

Permalink

What about the Tactics subdomain? I'm all about Tactics, can I have that?

 

Permalink

Tactics is a subdomain of War, and violence is anathema to You.

Permalink

Fine, lets just move past Character Creation so I can start playing already.

 


 

Total: 284
Posts Per Page: