Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Particle_Man" data-source="post: 1582927" data-attributes="member: 892">Hmmm...well the campaign world I have would have 9 sentient species, each created by a god to be one of the 9 alignments (there has been drift, but that was relatively recent and seen as a great shift).&nbsp; So the original instincts would, I suppose, have been put there by the relevant deity in this world, and alignment would provide a good short-hand for that (perhaps coupled with a general instruction from the god, encoded subconsciously into the souls of the created beings).&nbsp; Perhaps the &quot;Drift&quot; could be an example of culture changing the original package, but I would also manage to have &quot;interference&quot; from other deities count here as well.I think I would keep things like &quot;anti-beastiality&quot; and &quot;no harming kids&quot; as instincts, in general.&nbsp; I mean, I like to eat while I DM, after all.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />&nbsp; (The nice thing about creationism in the campaign world -- I can explain things as simply &quot;What the relevant God wanted, perhaps as modified by interference from another God&quot;).&nbsp; Although the CE race (orcs in this case) and quite possibly the NE race (goblins) would have less of the &quot;don't harm kids&quot; instinct, presumably. I liked Takyris's idea that the polyamorous groups could, but don't have to, be relatively utopic.&nbsp; Some would be nice to live in, some nasty, depending on the society alignment. Oh, I would also let players choose their character's sexual orientation, which may solve some of the problems above.&nbsp; And I would make it clear how the societies were different in this world, without dropping players into it blind.&nbsp; You are right, that would be a shocker.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />So in general, the &quot;genetic instincts&quot; would be replaced by &quot;divinely inspired instincts&quot;, cultural forces would have a powerful effect, and &quot;biological kin-protection instinct&quot; would be replaced by &quot;raised child-protection instinct&quot;.&nbsp; That could keep a lot of the fantasy tropes in play.&nbsp; Jealousy would be one instinct that would be reduced, but perhaps not as much as all that (there are other things to be jealous of than partners, after all, and in the CE &quot;wolf pack&quot; society, there would be plenty of room for it).&nbsp; And perhaps there would even be elements of romanic jealousy.&nbsp; Just more rare.&nbsp; Thanks for the comments.&nbsp; And &quot;The Selfish Gene&quot; was a great book, that I recommend to everyone.&nbsp; But part of what I am trying to do is to get variety in people (a la color-blind casting in movies and plays), while having their race only having existed after being created by a god about 10 000 years previous.&nbsp; And also to do a bit of &quot;what if?&quot;&nbsp; [wanders off to look up stuff on kibbutz's]</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Particle_Man, post: 1582927, member: 892"] Hmmm...well the campaign world I have would have 9 sentient species, each created by a god to be one of the 9 alignments (there has been drift, but that was relatively recent and seen as a great shift). So the original instincts would, I suppose, have been put there by the relevant deity in this world, and alignment would provide a good short-hand for that (perhaps coupled with a general instruction from the god, encoded subconsciously into the souls of the created beings). Perhaps the "Drift" could be an example of culture changing the original package, but I would also manage to have "interference" from other deities count here as well. I think I would keep things like "anti-beastiality" and "no harming kids" as instincts, in general. I mean, I like to eat while I DM, after all. :) (The nice thing about creationism in the campaign world -- I can explain things as simply "What the relevant God wanted, perhaps as modified by interference from another God"). Although the CE race (orcs in this case) and quite possibly the NE race (goblins) would have less of the "don't harm kids" instinct, presumably. I liked Takyris's idea that the polyamorous groups could, but don't have to, be relatively utopic. Some would be nice to live in, some nasty, depending on the society alignment. Oh, I would also let players choose their character's sexual orientation, which may solve some of the problems above. And I would make it clear how the societies were different in this world, without dropping players into it blind. You are right, that would be a shocker. :) So in general, the "genetic instincts" would be replaced by "divinely inspired instincts", cultural forces would have a powerful effect, and "biological kin-protection instinct" would be replaced by "raised child-protection instinct". That could keep a lot of the fantasy tropes in play. Jealousy would be one instinct that would be reduced, but perhaps not as much as all that (there are other things to be jealous of than partners, after all, and in the CE "wolf pack" society, there would be plenty of room for it). And perhaps there would even be elements of romanic jealousy. Just more rare. Thanks for the comments. And "The Selfish Gene" was a great book, that I recommend to everyone. But part of what I am trying to do is to get variety in people (a la color-blind casting in movies and plays), while having their race only having existed after being created by a god about 10 000 years previous. And also to do a bit of "what if?" [wanders off to look up stuff on kibbutz's] [/QUOTE]

Verification