Well, let's not waste a a perfectly good necroing.They do kind of. Buddhism has enough saints/post-death beings it can work. Confucisum is philosophical examination of how rulership and the universe works in context of traditional Chinese taoist belief. It also has enough non-mortal beings/beliefs that it could work well.
As or my votes: Aztec, Japanese and Polynesian.
Haudenosaunee
Ashanti
Greek
It’s like you read my mind. Not kidding at all. I just watched Errementari but I was at the same time thinking more broadly Aztec and the word Vedic was specifically in my thoughts. Great minds I guess.Well, let's not waste a a perfectly good necroing.
My choices would be
Vedic (Pre-brahmanic)
Anahuac (Not just Aztec)
Basque
I hope someone isn't preparing for an "But other people got to talk about religion on ENWorld, why can't I?" argument with the moderators. I'd strongly advise against that.
Respectfully, you have the opposite interpretation.My point was based off the “No Religion” guidelines of this board, this thread should not even exist, let alone have grown to 4 pages from the 3 pages,it was this morning. New votes have been added.
Clearly, people talk about religion on the board and reference it.
If talking about religion is an accepted practice, then I just want clarity as to what the redlines are.
If the board guidelines as written is the answer, I’m all for it. I’m cool with Rules as Written campaigns as well, but I get perturbed at Rules as Written-Sometimes campaigns.
Religion is too important a topic, for a RAW- Sometimes, in my opinion.
The existence and growth of this thread, is a really big sometimes.
My personal preference is for RAW Guidelines, not just Sometimes.
Also, to be clear. I respect, Umbran, and his moderation was never in question by me.
I do, however, feel that it does illustrate how, haphazardly, we all, ENworld posters included, have applied the No Religion Guideline, vis a vis this very thread.
Not picking a fight CleverNickName, just clarifying my point.
If people do not want RAW Guidelines enforced, then what are the rules?
(That is all I am asking).
Nordic
Celtic
Egyptian
Greek
Roman
Slavic
Sumerian
Hawaiian
Japanese
Zoroastrian
Indeed, and I was happy to be wrong. I should assume better of people, and I really try, but years of argument on the Internet has hardened my expectations a bit too much for my own good.Respectfully, you have the opposite interpretation.
Hi Coroc...this is copied from above: the list to be voted on.
More importantly if we exclude active religions we exclude the Mahābhārata, from India, which is still a part of the subcontinent’s religions and culture....and also is an awesome mythological source.
Is it fair and inclusive that we can talk about Thor and not Shiva?
Trishula makes Excalibur look like a toothpick.![]()
Respectfully, you have the opposite interpretation.My point was based off the “No Religion” guidelines of this board, this thread should not even exist, let alone have grown to 4 pages from the 3 pages, it was this morning. New votes have been added.
Clearly, people talk about religion on the board and reference it.
If talking about religion is an accepted practice, then I just want clarity as to what the redlines are.
If the board guidelines as written is the answer, I’m all for it. I’m cool with Rules as Written campaigns as well, but I get perturbed at Rules as Written-Sometimes campaigns.
Religion is too important a topic, for a RAW- Sometimes, in my opinion.
The existence and growth of this thread, is a really big sometimes.
My personal preference is for RAW Guidelines, not just Sometimes.
Also, to be clear. I respect, Umbran, and his moderation was never in question by me.
I do, however, feel that it does illustrate how, haphazardly, we all, ENworld posters included, have applied the No Religion Guideline, vis a vis this very thread.
Not picking a fight CleverNickName, just clarifying my point.
If people do not want RAW Guidelines enforced, then what are the rules?
(That is all I am asking).