Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Macv12" data-source="post: 6736547" data-attributes="member: 6801600">Hey, you inspired it. Alignment can be fascinating to discuss if someone has some really quality thoughts about how to approach it.Interesting. I think the problem I'm having is just the term "Tech." It's actually pretty hard to make yourself truly believe something, which a faithless person would have to do to make these artifacts behave exactly as they wanted them to, while someone who already had strong religious faith when they approached the artifacts should be able to use them intuitively. It just seems strange that very many Faith-based people would go to the trouble of pursuing technology when they have these things that can actualize their faith claims directly. So just on its face, Tech-Faith seems pretty niche to me. But given that you juxtapose Tech with "Eco," that changes the implications, so it's probably just my problem with the terminology.Granted on Eco-Logic, I was just thinking in the wrong terms before. That's pretty much what I was trying to get at with "Logic-Preservation."The Splicer thing still sounds like something that could equally be described as "Eco" (enhancing oneself instead of relying on tools) or Tech (only possible with very high technology).I won't quote the whole thing, but this is fascinating stuff. Is it right to guess you've played some Mass Effect?You could shift the alignments I described a bit to get, essentially, "progressive" and "conservative," without the politics. New tech and gene splicing would both be "progressive," or whatever you'd call that (expansion, tech, etc), while preserving the human (or other) race in it's "true" state would be "conservative" (/preservation/eco). But OTOH, that may not be an interesting dichotomy.Of course, techno-religions and splicer communities and such give your world a really cool aesthetic, so in that sense, I think you have a good system already.As far as changing the term "Tech"...you might also frame it as "artifice" versus "nature." Maybe it's not much of a difference, but to me, it would make more sense for some Faith groups to advocate "works" and creating things to glorify the divine (glorious temples in older times, technology now), and others to advocate against profaning the world the divine already created, rather than to have Faith groups associated with "technology" per se. And this illustrates the difference between cyborg limbs and genetic splicing more clearly, to me.Man I love this thread. I'm going to be thinking about this for hours.</blockquote>

Verification