After numerous discussions on Bellators, and the recent implementation of Domoths, the issue of Vernal Ascendants has come up again.

With the current costs to Vernal Ascension, and the chance that someone will go inactive/leave, 1 million power is a hard pill to swallow. If nothing else, it provides complete freedom to do what one pleases, for getting ousted would seriously cost the city/commune.

The goal has always been to make power meaningful.. With the Domoth realms, there's incentive to raise a Vernal. Now we just need to take that last step to make power really something to be sought: remove the cap on Vernal Ascendants and allow as many as possible to be raised

I agree with this completely.

1) It makes Vernal Ascendants 'permanent,' like True Ascendants, assuming they don't quit the organization at least.
2) It means that you don't have to ostracize the Vernal Ascendant to raise a new one, if they go inactive.
3) It encourages organizations to get a *ton* of power to raise new Ascendants, making power possibly THE most important commodity in the game.

Since I refuse to agree with anything Visaeris says, I agree with Xenthos!

One other thing I'd like to see is a decreased cost for Demigods to Ascend if the cap is lifted. Make it like 500k for a Demigod, and perhaps reduce it further if said Demigod has over a certain threshold(250k power for 50-100 million essence? Something along those lines).

This would allow the fundamental trade-off of Personal Time <-> Organisational Time.

This is more of a side note that I'd like to see added. The main focus of the OP is to speak to adding multiple vernals. It'd be fine to keep it at one million, just remove the cap!

Don't really think that this part is necessary. I think that the flat rate means it's an organizational resource, and thus it will be used to benefit the organization instead, regardless of their current level.

I'd like to see the first part implemented, and then this one can be considered later. In fact, I'd just like this one dropped now so it doesn't get in the way of implementing the first.

I agree with removing the cap on Vernal ascendants, I think that would be good. I very much dislike the idea of reducing the cost of raising demigods.

Like I said, just sort of tossing that out there for the sake of counterbalancing the disincentive to raise Demis (namely, why have 1 ascendant when you could have an ascendant and a demigod)

Being as we haven't seen any vernal ascendants yet, how about we see how the first wave fares before jumping the gun and talking about allowing cities/communes to raise an unlimited number?

(BTW, I'm not dismissing this. I'm keeping an open mind but would rather not jump the gun before even one vernal has been raised.)

I think that this is a pretty large reason there hasn't been a whole lot of movement to raise a Vernal. There's the whole sense that it's 1,000,000 power "gone," because... well, if that person goes inactive, you have to drop them and raise another. With this change, you can keep raising Vernals and the old ones will stick around, active or not. Even if they go inactive for a month or two, when they get back they'll still be there. The power's not "gone".

At least, that's a large portion of the concern I've heard about it. Though once Glomdoring has all its GMs again, I'm pretty sure we'll raise somebody.

Well, part of the reason (to my knowledge) that there's been a delay is because it's a HUGE commitment to put up just one, ever. I promise that if you could have as many as you want, and if it were not such a permanent thing, the decision and the raising would be much easier and more eagerly undertaken.

I understand your eagerness to let things sort themselves out, but part of the reason they aren't undertaken just yet is due to the fact that it's a big step to dare with that first wave.

The problem there is that being able to raise unlimited makes it far more likely that we will see Vernal Ascendents sooner rather than later. Having one person that you can imbue with this huge power and responsibility is both a huge concern for the city as well as a huge concern for whoever is picked to do it.

Celest has already had people who would be great candidates otherwise express a lack of interest due to the huge responsibility that would rest solely on their shoulders. Until they burnout and stop playing anyway

I think there are relatively few "practical" choices for each city/commune to choose from, so the one-per thing isn't a big deal. It does make it interesting.

I just assume a big part of it is that nobody is willing, or has enough support to, stir the drama-pot on this one.

I mean, sure, maybe Forjirludad would be able to put the position to its best combat use, but practical arguments tend to fall on deaf ears when people want the "thing" for some other party.

Not really. Might want to check the posts above again. This is one of the major reasons it's not being pursued at this time. Most organizations do have 2-3 people at least who could seriously consider it right now. They also have enough power for 2 each (excepting Magnagora).

The top Magnagoran choice, who would have virtually no opposition if he declared for it, does not want it due to the pressure it would put on him to be here and stay active.

Well, how about if the 1.000.000 power is returned to the nexus if the vernal ascendant is outsted for leaving the city/commune or going inactive? Call it a loan simply, an ascendant representating that amount of power for the nexus.

Then there's really no cost for it, and power's meaningless once more.

Well, in the end it is meaningless to trust one million power on a single person in the first place, they then gain absolute power over an investment made by an entire city/commune. We all know exactly what an immense amount one million is.

Which is why, if it vanishes completely for no gain whatsoever when you have to switch it to someone else, it's a significant reason not to invest.

If, however, you can invest it for something that benefits you, and aren't limited in that investment by the concern that it will disappear, but you can continue to invest...

Consider this:

Example 1 (With the cap on Vernals):
Organization X holds numerous referendums and debates to decide whether Person Y or Person Z is better suited to represent Organization X and should, therefore, be raised as the Vernal Ascendant. No Vernal Ascendants are raised for a long time, and less people participate in this new activity.

Example 2 (Without the cap on Vernals):
Organization X realizes that both Person Y and Person Z are well suited to represent Organization X, and the two are raised as Vernal Ascendants. Two Vernal Ascendants are raised from each organization, and there are a lot more people participating in this new activity.

I like this idea. Never really thought of the 1 per org limit as such a discouragement, but I can definitely see why it would be.