Steve Simmons <scs at di.org> writes: -snip- > Correct. But here's a place where we ought to be cautious. We don't > know that Sethra has god-level powers, and we don't know that she doesn't. > In fact, we don't even know what god-level powers are. The only statement > we have as to what the gods are is what Sethra tells us above - multiple > manifestation. Sethra's statement (which I quoted in toto) looks very > much like she considers it complete. We get three classes of things > here: gods, who can multiple manifest and not be controlled; demons, > who can multiple manifest but can be controlled, and everything else. > It's not a comforting definition, but going by what's in the text, > I think it's right. Sethra says -"multiple manifestation and all that implies"-. This means, in addition to simultaneous manifestation, there are additional abilities you can assume a god has. (These "additional abilities" are not necessarily a simple fixed set. It might be something like X + Y + Z >= 10 ) Although it is not necessarily true, I think it likely that these additional abilities include abilities other than the branches of magic we've had named for us (witchcraft, psionics, necromancy, wizardry, etc.). > So it's my opinion that Sethra Lavode would not have become more powerful > if she were made a god. -snip- Possible, but *my* opinion is that she would have additional abilities. (Plus, I don't think there's any disagreement that "more abilities" or "more power/stamina" means "more powerful" in the sense of being able to do more things.) > It's also my opinion that she is indeed a power > in the same class as the gods. I'll say why a bit further down. -big snip- > So when we think of the powers of the gods, we need to ramp down our > opinions. They're powerful all right, but they're not Gods. Disagree. They don't strike me as being all that different from, say, many of the Greek gods. - tky