Religion in Gaming

[johndallman]

Originally Posted by CraigM

Non-belief in a D&D style gods-as-monsters setting is rather silly.

I've seen it done. The PCs in question don't dispute that the gods of the various pantheons exist, but they regard them simply as large and powerful (and somewhat childish) spirits, and don't see any reason why they should worship them. The gods in question have not been childish enough to show up and insist.

[ULFGARD]

Originally Posted by johndallman

I've seen it done. The PCs in question don't dispute that the gods of the various pantheons exist, but they regard them simply as large and powerful (and somewhat childish) spirits, and don't see any reason why they should worship them. The gods in question have not been childish enough to show up and insist.

Exactly. There's a big difference between belief that they actually do exist (which would be a silly thing to deny in DnD) and belief in them in the sense of being a worshiper of said deities. It could be possible in less deity centric DnD campaigns to be a skeptic -- i.e., believe that divine magic comes from some other source than spell magic, but the gods themselves might simply not exist or -- stranger still -- actually be creations of their worshipers.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by johndallman

I've seen it done. The PCs in question don't dispute that the gods of the various pantheons exist, but they regard them simply as large and powerful (and somewhat childish) spirits, and don't see any reason why they should worship them. The gods in question have not been childish enough to show up and insist.

Originally Posted by ULFGARD

Exactly. There's a big difference between belief that they actually do exist (which would be a silly thing to deny in DnD) and belief in them in the sense of being a worshiper of said deities. It could be possible in less deity centric DnD campaigns to be a skeptic -- i.e., believe that divine magic comes from some other source than spell magic, but the gods themselves might simply not exist or -- stranger still -- actually be creations of their worshipers.

There has been more than one character in my Forgotten Realms campaigns who would qualify as agnostic, in that he acknowledges the existence of beings more powerful than archmages, such as archfiends, elder dragons, legendary monsters and even the so-called 'deities', but he sees absolutely no reason to credit claims by any of them that they might be the Prime Mover or have something to do with such a force.

Indeed, at least one such character disbelieved any claims made by such powerful creatues on principle, on the theory that since their power derived at least partly from the prayers and acknowledgement of worshippers, they had a vested interest to lie egreriously about their importance, history and role.

[simply Nathan]

Originally Posted by Ashtagon

[*]It has ceased to be relevant to the setting: Common in modern and science fiction settings; almost compulsory if they lack "divine magic".[*]The setting uses modern real world religions: This is most commonly seen in medieval or age of sail settings which attempt to get a close match with historical authenticity.[*]The setting uses modern religions with the serial numbers filed off: I am not aware of any examples of this, although I am working on a gaming supplement that covers this case. My goal here is so I can have religion have a part in modern era games without causing too much problem.

I wouldn't say "has ceased to be relevant" so much as "is not considered relevant" in that the only GURPS campaign I've played (generic fantasy + dinosaur jungle) in there was simply no mention of religion at all, aside from a joke I made with another player between sessions. No divine magic either.

The third one I use for writing my own personal fantasy stories and RPG material for now, but I'm extremely blatant about it (think like Aslan from Narnia, only he's a dragon and I'm not a subtle writer).

I prefer this approach, and the first one, since the variant of using real-world religions without filing off the serial numbers grates on my nerves if handled poorly by any one of the setting's writer, the Game Master, or any of my fellow players. I don't like the ancient religions much at all (serial numbers or no) though I do like taking names, character designs/appearances/personalities, and legendary gear from various mythologies.

Originally Posted by Ashtagon

[*]The setting does not define where divine magic comes from: This is essentially where D&D was as written in the core rulebooks of 1st edition and the red box rules.

I don't like divine magic at all, but if it must be included this way is better in my opinion than the way all the later D&D rules covered it.

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

[*]Religions that claim to have divine magic, except in truth those are secular mages that use their abilities to claim being favoured by fictional gods. This is how Scientology works in the Age of Aquarius setting (except they're mostly psionicists, not mages).

This is how I have clerical magic function when used by religions other than Crystal Dragon Jesus worshipers (or sometimes Pacts with demonic entities, witting or unwitting). The priests of the Crystal Dragon Himself don't claim their magic is divine, they just flavor their magical style based around their beliefs (much like those priests in Yrth who are also wizards).


Divine forces are one of those things where even if I was to allow it, I would do them as Powers with Pact limitations. (But not Sanctity since the omnipotent Creator and Redeemer can reach everywhere, even Ravenloft; probably the Cosmic power modifier as well.)

[robkelk]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

Actually if you are going to group all fictional polytheisms as "real world ancient religions with the serial numbers filed off" and all fictional monotheisms as "real world modern religions with the serial numbers filed off", then why not just call them fictional polytheisms and fictional monotheisms?

Especially since Shinto is a modern polytheistic religion, as are some forms of pantheism.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Icelander

There has been more than one character in my Forgotten Realms campaigns who would qualify as agnostic, in that he acknowledges the existence of beings more powerful than archmages, such as archfiends, elder dragons, legendary monsters and even the so-called 'deities', but he sees absolutely no reason to credit claims by any of them that they might be the Prime Mover or have something to do with such a force.

Uh...how would that qualify as being "agnostic"? Most polytheistic priesthoods do not in fact claim their particular totem created the universe or controls all of it and the mere belief that something conscious did and that doing so is a prerequisite for worship is not any kind of agnosticism I'm familiar with apart from a perfunctory "but I could be wrong" sort.

[Ashtagon]

Originally Posted by robkelk

Especially since Shinto is a modern polytheistic religion, as are some forms of pantheism.

Okay, those categories were a (big) bit of a simplification of what is actually a very complex topic. By "modern religions", I didn't mean to imply specifically monotheistic religions; rather, i meant any religion that is currently practised by real living people today with a significant number (say, a million people worldwide) of followers.

I was hoping to start up a discussion of the level of comfort specifically with having modern religions represented in games. In the context of GURPS, Banestorm has medieval-stasis versions of Christendom, Islam, and a relatively poorly-developed "east Asian" area. Caliph has Islam in a big way. Centrum, reich-5, and Gernsback are relatively religion-free (religion has ceased to be important compared to the issues of politics, science, and industry).

However, religion is a very sensitive issue for some, which often makes it difficult to present in a game setting without causing offence (I think the various GURPS timelines have largely done this well). For this reason, I have been developing a set of alternate modern religions, which in some ways mirror real world religions (this variant's Christianity does much the same as RL Christianity), but is radically different in others (it was founded by a priest of Athena deposing the old gods in a philosophical revolution, with schisms saying it was a priest from a Celtic, Norse, Babylonian, Egyptian, or some other pantheon, depending on the schism; it's deliberately left vague which might be "true"). I've planned similar levels of changes that cover most other major religions. The overall intent is to allow for something that let's religion be a major part of a modern setting, but without necessarily causing religious people to have issues because their RL religion is being portrayed.

(Yes, I know at a certain level that what matters is how my gaming group feels about it. However, I am partial to the idea of selling it.)

My big issue is that I am not entirely sure this can succeed in that goal. At a certain level, the issue some people have isn't a portrayal of their favourite religion specifically, but religion (and magic) in general.

[b-dog]

I like DF to have all of the gods and religions of myths and real world available to them. Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Judaism and Buddhism are major religions but older faiths like Norse, Greek, Egyptian, Celtic, Chinese, Japanese etc. are also available but they tend to be worshipped outside of town. Even older faiths like Chronic and ancient religions are available and can grant clerical magic as well. There are even religions from fiction as well as their religions can extend through other realities, especially demon lords from AD&D and Elder Gods from Call of Cthulhu. Pretty much if it is cool it is in my gameworld.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Ashtagon

However, religion is a very sensitive issue for some, which often makes it difficult to present in a game setting without causing offence (I think the various GURPS timelines have largely done this well). For this reason, I have been developing a set of alternate modern religions, which in some ways mirror real world religions (this variant's Christianity does much the same as RL Christianity), but is radically different in others (it was founded by a priest of Athena deposing the old gods in a philosophical revolution, with schisms saying it was a priest from a Celtic, Norse, Babylonian, Egyptian, or some other pantheon, depending on the schism; it's deliberately left vague which might be "true"). I've planned similar levels of changes that cover most other major religions. The overall intent is to allow for something that let's religion be a major part of a modern setting, but without necessarily causing religious people to have issues because their RL religion is being portrayed.

That's a somewhat different question than I thought you were asking.

In the first place, I'm a strong atheist, and my players, so far as I know, are various flavors of atheist, agnostic, and simple secularist; I don't know any of them who practices a religion. A couple of them were formerly practicing pagans, but aren't active any long. So I'm not faced with anyone with offendable religious sensibilities. I don't seem to have anyone so strongly atheistic that they are unable to tolerate religious content in their games, on the other hand. I've run campaigns where it was either required or strongly suggested that all of the PCs be adherents of a religion—Muslim in one campaign, Roman Catholic in another. Of course, those were mostly historical. I don't feel much impulse to focus on religion in a present-day or near future campaign. I suppose if I envisioned a world where some religion was true, it would be different, but for me that would have to count as a fantasy campaign, and I haven't run a lot of urban/modern fantasy.

But in the second place, I expect my players to cope with challenging subjects. For example, unless the theme of the campaign makes it inappropriate, I'm prepared to run quite explicit sex scenes for players who want their characters to be involved in such scenes, and I expect the other players to cope. At an emotional level, I tend to feel that people who can't have their ideas questioned, or confront ideas different from theirs, aren't really quite adults—and they're not my preferred audience.

In the third place, I really wouldn't make up religious equivalents of Roxxon Oil—real world religions with the serial numbers erased—unless I had a specific literary statement to make by doing so. For one thing, my players would see right through it! But for another, I would only do so if I were going to put in the work to give the invented religions a plausible history, and that's usually more than I want to do for a campaign whose theme is not religious.

Bill Stoddard

[Brandy]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

Uh...how would that qualify as being "agnostic"? Most polytheistic priesthoods do not in fact claim their particular totem created the universe or controls all of it and the mere belief that something conscious did and that doing so is a prerequisite for worship is not any kind of agnosticism I'm familiar with apart from a perfunctory "but I could be wrong" sort.

Probably best not to go down this path. As you can see in this post from a locked thread from ages ago, Icelander asserts that "Atheist" means "Someone who says there is no prime mover." and that "Theist" is "Someone who says there is a prime mover." You and I know that these are nonsensical definitions; however, this is probably a topic best to be taken elsewhere.