Simply divine.

I'm really looking forward to the release of Divine Power for D&D 4E. Just as Arcane Power restored familiars to the game, updated in a way that fits 4E's quick-and-easy mechanical gaming paradigm and the greater focus on personal flavor and flair, Divine Power is bringing back a concept that was missing in the Player's Handbook: Domains.

This might seem like a little thing, but so far in 4E, there aren't many differences in how clerics of different deities play out. As of PHB, each stock deity has a different "Channel Divinity" feat, giving the divine characters access to another encounter power that uses their Channel Divinity feature (essentially, divine characters can have extra encounter powers but they all occupy a shared "slot"), and as of Adventurer's Vault, there are unique holy symbols for each stock deity. Other than that, there are a few paragon paths tied to religion. That's about it.

Religious choice isn't like a warlock's pact or a sorcerer's power source, in terms of affecting many aspects of the character's powers. Sure, you can fine-tune the special effects and dress up the rituals, but that's it.

But the way domains are being handled... each deity has two or three domains defined, and each domain has two separate feats associated with it. One feat gives bonuses to specific divine powers (making choice of deity work more like those aforementioned class features of warlocks and sorcerers) and one feat gives a new Channel Divinity power.

Divine characters don't have to pay attention to domains and don't have to spend feats on them, but I like that they have the option. I like it because it allows you to "flavor" your character more heavily for a particular deity. I like it because it effectively creates more "generic prayers" that can be used across multiple divine characters, and that the existence of the "Channel Divinity slot" that can now conceivably hold a half dozen different encounter powers to pull out extends the potential flexibility of divine characters.

Something similar would be a great way to restore more flexibility to arcane characters, too. Wizards have their spellbooks and swordmages have a feat that gives them a lesser version of the same, but it would be interesting if there were a selection of minor spells that were accessible across all the arcane classes. As much as I like the fact that a wizard, a sorcerer, and a warlock all come out completely different, some "stock magic" would be a good way of emphasizing the fact that they're three different approaches to a similar end.

The other reason I like the domains is that their existence will be very freeing for DMs who do not wish to use the default cosmology and pantheons. As it is, not using the built-in gods leaves you with basically three options: let players take an existing god's channel divinity power feat with the serial number filed off if it makes sense for their deity, ignore those feats, or create new powers and accompanying feats that are roughly balanced with the existing ones. Having a bunch of pre-made and pre-tested channel divinity powers that aren't tied to a particular god or goddess will make things easier on DMs, especially those who either want to create vast interconnected pantheons or not bother with them... after all, you can always let a cleric pick two or three concepts that are central to their beliefs.

The new paragon path that they've previewed for clerics looks pretty nifty, too... the "miracle worker" is an answer to anyone who thinks the cleric doesn't have enough focus on healing now that they've been transitioned into the "leader" role... and been joined by a total now of four other classes in that same role, each with a nigh-identical healing power (warlord, bard, shaman, artificer). Clerics don't have to be pigeonholed into the role of healing... but they can still beat every other class at it.

Tweets On A Plane

I had a post about Amanda Fucking-Palmer of the Boston Fucking-Palmers that I was working on the other day, which I accidentally closed out (and then bungled the "restore saved draft") thing. It was all about a blog post of hers that ephant tipped me to, where she reproduced an email she sent someone about her experiences using Twitter to interact directly with her fans... and how she's made more money doing this than she made off her celebrity-produced studio-backed album.

(Her blog post is here, but you have to scroll way down to find the relevant passage.)

I don't follow Amanda Palmer's career that closely... I'm only one state away from Neil Gaiman and I can hear him just fine from here. But it really is amazing what she's done for herself.

At the moment I'm writing this, she's answering randomly tweeted questions to kill time while in flight to the west coast. Warren Ellis, observing the goings-on, had this to say:

The level of determination @amandapalmer shows to engage directly with her audience is fascinating me. Post-Mystique Pop Life.

That's a brilliant phrase. "Post-Mystique Pop Life". It's been a while since I bothered to engage with anyone who really feels this way, but I used to argue with people who had what my dad called the "High Priest" mentality about the writing and publishing industry... they wanted the mystique, they wanted the separation between author and audience, because layers of insulation come with the barriers to entry they had to surmount and the golden gates they had to gain admittance through in order to get where they are today.

Amanda Palmer had this to say, possibly intended as a response to Warren's tweet (and working well as a response even if that wasn't her intent):

... it's safer to run into it. like turning and accelerating into a curve when drag-racing. your audience should be a friend, not a foe.

De-mystification puts a lot of high priests out of jobs. It opens a lot of doors. It doesn't mean that everybody gets to be famous and successful but it means that anybody can be... it means that nobodies could be.

Amanda F. Palmer is somebody. She was able to make a relative killing on Twitter in a few hours selling t-shirts spontaneously because she's got a huge following as a result of her music. That's not a feat that could be easily replicated. Not everyone could just jump on the internet and do the same thing... but then, neither could Amanda have done so. She had to put in the work to get to where she is.

But I think a lot of her career has been driven by the following she gains through the internet, via word-of-mouth and word-of-mouse. I don't believe it's necessarily true that you have to have the record deal (or the book deal, or whatever) first and then you can go on the internet and start using your fans to make magic happen. I think you can find your fans that way in the first place.

It's not necessarily easy and it's not necessarily instantaneous, but achieving success never is.