What Would You Want From A Game About Defenders of The Faithful?

doctorbadwolf · Jun 19, 2019

Michele said:
I think I'd like to see various ways of fighting evil, not just one.

As to the notion that you might find evil and evil persons in the church itself, I don't think this actually defies the equation of faithful = good, unfaithful = evil, because if a high priest is actually evil, then he was only feigning being faithful.
So, if you want shades of grey (which is what I'd prefer myself), the point wouldn't be whether you can be faithful and evil. The point would be that one (a higher-ranking member of the church, but even a PC) might be faithful and... intolerant, oppressive, fanatical etc. And the question would be, at what point being intolerant becomes being evil?

Also, I think that Nietzsche's saying about staring into the abyss may be very important for characters who routinely face supernatural evil. And if you fight fire with fire, what makes you different from the arsonist? In a game about faith, good and evil, it's an important quandary, I think.

I mean, fighting supernatural evil with a sword isn’t really fighting fire with fire though.

I think there here are two ways to go fo such a game, and the decision has to be made at the start. Either it’s a game that wants to explore moral quandaries, or a game that can do, but isn’t focused on that.

I think id rather create the game that focuses on other things.

Michele · Jun 19, 2019

doctorbadwolf said:
I mean, fighting supernatural evil with a sword isn’t really fighting fire with fire though.

It very easily is.
One of supernatural evil's mainstays is possession. As late as 2018 that I know of, there were cases of exorcisms in which the supposed victims of possession by the devil ended up badly hurt at the hands of the exorcists. I'm sure the exorcists thought that beating up the victims' bodies would save their souls, and so it was a necessary, lesser evil, in comparison to the greater good.

And that's in our actual world, where objective evidence that the devil does gain possession of hapless people is skimpy. Imagine a world where such evidence is rock solid - or a world where, evidence or not, everybody believed possessions do happen.

I think id rather create the game that focuses on other things.

To each his own cup of tea. But if the focus of the game is actual faith and concrete action, then moral quandaries are hard to dodge without losing focus.

Bagpuss · Jun 19, 2019

doctorbadwolf said:
By which I mean, men and women (or mice) of faith, charged by their god(s) to defend the church and it’s faithful from supernatural evil.

What kind of resolution would you want to see?

First a god that doesn't directly commune with their followers.

Next a schism in the church, so that you have political rivalry, which later builds with each side accusing the other of being corrupted by this supernatural evil, finally all out war between the two parts.

Bagpuss · Jun 19, 2019

doctorbadwolf said:
If a faith doesn’t worship The Dark, it’s fine. No Inquisition, no persecution of minority faiths, etc. I don’t make grimdark media, of any kind, ever.

Except those that worship The Dark? Seems there is a persecution of them...

doctorbadwolf · Jun 19, 2019

Bagpuss said:
Except those that worship The Dark? Seems there is a persecution of them...

Worshiping destructive forces of darkness and corruption isn’t a valid life path. I’m not here for what you’re trying to imprint on this hypothetical game. I don’t make grimdark. Period.

Michele · Jun 19, 2019

I don't know what geimdark is, but one would have to wonder what are the supernatural evil's powers, then. If evil can't seduce the faithful, corrupt them, tempt them etc., then what is evil? A pack of dire wolves who just happen to come from another dimension or to have things like a breath of fire? Who can, in other words, only cause physical harm, albeit in more dangerous ways than a pack of normal wolves, thanks to their supernatural powers?

That's entirely feasible and may be satisfactory for some players, but then I don't see much need for framing the PCs as holy "defenders of the faithful". They can be the lay defenders of their village or townspeople just as well. The town's militiamen.

doctorbadwolf · Jun 19, 2019

Michele said:
I don't know what geimdark is, but one would have to wonder what are the supernatural evil's powers, then. If evil can't seduce the faithful, corrupt them, tempt them etc., then what is evil? A pack of dire wolves who just happen to come from another dimension or to have things like a breath of fire? Who can, in other words, only cause physical harm, albeit in more dangerous ways than a pack of normal wolves, thanks to their supernatural powers?

That's entirely feasible and may be satisfactory for some players, but then I don't see much need for framing the PCs as holy "defenders of the faithful". They can be the lay defenders of their village or townspeople just as well. The town's militiamen.

Who said anything about evil not having those powers?

I said im not interested in a game that is about corrupt organizations of faith. I’m also not interested in the sort of rhetorical trap in the post I replied to. In a world with inarguably real supernatural evil, banning the worship of that supernatural evil is not “persecution”.

Michele · Jun 19, 2019

doctorbadwolf said:
Who said anything about evil not having those powers?

I said im not interested in a game that is about corrupt organizations of faith. I’m also not interested in the sort of rhetorical trap in the post I replied to. In a world with inarguably real supernatural evil, banning the worship of that supernatural evil is not “persecution”.

So maybe evil-worshippers can't be PCs - but they definitely might be enemy NPCs. Because if evil is real, is present, and is powerful, somebody will worship it.
Similarly, the game might be not about evil organizations - but evil organizations are likely to exist, if nothing else as enemies.

I also now understand what you meant by "grimdark", but "not doing it" is not really an option, IMHO, if you have a setting like this.
If the PCs, however much they might be holy servants of good, have to eradicate a coven of worshippers of evil (or an infestation of evil possessions, or an avatar of evil that hides within an overpopulated urban neighborhood, etc.) that will be a grim and dark business, no matter how clean and bright the heroes are.

That is my opinion, of course, but that's what you asked.

Bagpuss · Jun 19, 2019

doctorbadwolf said:
Worshiping destructive forces of darkness and corruption isn’t a valid life path.

But without death and decay their can be no room for new life. You call us evil but we are but two sides of the same coin. There is no circle of life without death. Light always casts shadow, it is the very cause of the dark you seek to destroy.

I’m not here for what you’re trying to imprint on this hypothetical game. I don’t make grimdark. Period.

There is nothing grim about the dark, don't fear it and persecute it, embrace it and accept it as part of life.

I'm not really sure what you mean by "grimdark"?

pogre · Jun 19, 2019

Investigation and banishment would be the resolutions I would like favor.

Disclaimer: I definitely am a grimdark guy - so my preferences might not be helpful.