Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 9388625" data-attributes="member: 42582">I dunno, this reminds me of when people complained that Qantas was going to stop serving pork as part of a deal to fly through Saudi airspace.There's no religion I'm aware of, and certainly there's no prominent Australian religion, that obligates adherents to eat pork. So the non-serving of pork is not symmetrical as between different traditions.By trying to approach religion in a subtle or muted way, D&amp;D might open the door to players from a range of traditions while not offending anyone - no one (that I'm aware of) has a traditional obligation to pretend to be a worshipper of pretend deities.This post doesn't mean that I agree with [USER=58172]@Yaarel[/USER] on every point of detail about what an inclusive or subtle approach might look like. For instance, I think it can be possible for a RPG to present a possible approach to worship, or even a default approach to worship, without that coercing people into it. But - and just as one example - presenting an approach as possible but not &quot;coercively&quot; might mean being rather careful about the art that is used, given that purchasers of the books can't &quot;opt out&quot; of the art.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 9388625, member: 42582"] I dunno, this reminds me of when people complained that Qantas was going to stop serving pork as part of a deal to fly through Saudi airspace. There's no religion I'm aware of, and certainly there's no prominent Australian religion, that [I]obligates[/I] adherents to eat pork. So the non-serving of pork is not symmetrical as between different traditions. By trying to approach religion in a subtle or muted way, D&D might open the door to players from a range of traditions while not offending anyone - no one (that I'm aware of) has a traditional [I]obligation[/I] to pretend to be a worshipper of pretend deities. This post doesn't mean that I agree with [USER=58172]@Yaarel[/USER] on every point of detail about what an inclusive or subtle approach might look like. For instance, I think it can be possible for a RPG to present a possible approach to worship, or even a default approach to worship, without that coercing people into it. But - and just as one example - presenting an approach as [I]possible[/I] but not "coercively" might mean being rather careful about the art that is used, given that purchasers of the books can't "opt out" of the art. [/QUOTE]

Verification