What was the rationale in making pretenders un-Blessable?
 

I do not necessarily disagree with this decision; I am merely curious about the rationale behind it. Was it because uber-Blessed pretenders would be too powerful? Or were there other reasons behind it? From a narrative perspective, it appears to make more sense if pretenders were Blessable.

Re: What was the rationale in making pretenders un-Blessable?
 

Actually I think it makes sense they are not blessable.

Blessable by who? In their minds they are the supreme beings, the ones doing the blessing. There is no one above the pretenders to bless them or they wouldn't be making a grab for the throne in the first place.

Re: What was the rationale in making pretenders un-Blessable?
 

Here's how I think it goes:

Belief in the pretender's divinity grants the followers the bless effects. The pretender is the source, as it were. But the pretender himself does not necessarily share all the beliefs nor can he tap himself for the power flowing from that faith. The pretender may be just out to exploit he gullible to gain more power or have any number of other motivations. Some might even believe that they are in fact gods when they are only aspiring to become one in truth, but such ones would by definition be deluded and/or insane.

The best analogy I can think of are the Sorcerer-Kings of the Dark Sun world of AD&D 2nd Edition, beings who were men once before beginning to undergo a metamorphosis into a dragon-like creature. They tapped into the power of some extradimensional creatures, which allowed them to grant clerical powers to their followers, essentially acting as channels, but they could not use that power themselves.

I see the pretender gods as being very much like the sorcerer kings, just more varied. :)

Re: What was the rationale in making pretenders un-Blessable?
 

I think Edi basically covered it. Having faith in something gives you power, but who is even to say the power stems from the thing you have faith in? Dom3 suggests it does by bless relating to their magical power, but perhaps it's the other way around - the belief of the people and practices of their sacreds (having flaming weapons, regenerating etc) shapes the magic power of the pretender.

Think about sects and denominations. They don't practice the same religion, but they usually have faith in the same godhead.

Re: What was the rationale in making pretenders un-Blessable?
 

They cant bless themselves. Or build temples (which has also been discussed).
But if you want to create such an ego-confused god then you can do it. And unit in the game can be a god if you use map commands or mod commands to do it. Either direction works.

In my chaos-mod games that Im messing with now it comes up occassionally. Some of the angels for example make cool gods.

Re: What was the rationale in making pretenders un-Blessable?
 

What is really strange is not the fact they can't bless themselves, but more that they can't bless anyone. I think the way Amos handles pretenders is much interesting, he gives them holy 4, making them top notch priests.

Why on Earth can't they use the priestly powers they grant to others ?
In D&D, they can.

Re: What was the rationale in making pretenders un-Blessable?
 

Most common explanation is that priests get their powers from their faith, and pretenders aren't so delusional as to think of themselves as omnipotent.

Indy priests don't get their powers from any spesific god, after all.

Re: What was the rationale in making pretenders un-Blessable?
 

Faith is separate from the God.

Best example is the Colossal Fetish of Machaka.

Re: What was the rationale in making pretenders un-Blessable?
 

Still, an auto-casting of Divine Blessing wouldn't be unreasonable. The presence of your god might be enough to make the sacred beings feel the power of his blessing, even though it stems more from themselves then from their god.

It avoids giving the pretender priestly power, particularly the undead/demon ones, and still presents the pretender as something almost divine. A true symbol of their faith.

In regards to game balance, the ability to enter battle already blessed might be enough reason for some bless nations to choose mobile gods over the fountains, or dormant gods over the imprisoned.

Re: What was the rationale in making pretenders un-Blessable?
 

I think it'd be really nice to have pretenders auto cast divine blessing and fanaticism. It just feels like if you were random militia #273542 you'd be pretty jazzed up about your god strolling into battle alongside you. Plus it adds a little extra oomph to your main army, making the inevitable gigantic clashes between primary armies all the more epic.

Re: What was the rationale in making pretenders un-Blessable?
 

I don't agree. Pretenders have serving mortals for that (blessing, instilling fanaticism). Priests or whatever... They don't put their hands into the "manual work" of their cults and practices. They are the object of cult, not a minister of it.
IMHO.

Re: What was the rationale in making pretenders un-Blessable?
 

Exactly Tifone, which is why they shouldn't be given priestly power. That doesn't mean that that symbol is worthless to the people who behold it.