Introducing fantasy RPGs to religious players

[HellHound]

Hmm. Perhaps I'm not explaining myself properly then.

I agree that adding strong religious overtones to the game would take away from the fantasy.

What I'm saying is that *removing* religious elements or elements that the religious person would have problems with won't take away from the game. I change my games specifically to suit the audience, and if the target audience includes new players with issues with religious overtones, then religion goes away. If they have problems with violent problem resolution, then we focus on non-violent solutions. I they have problems with deep immersion role playing, we avoid that.

I think we are essentially agreeing.

I'm saying that it would be a good thing to run a game without religious overtones or even religion at all to introduce player X to gaming. Then afterwards, once he's had a feel for gaming, describe that this is not how *you* typically game, and that the elements he was uncomfortable with are present in your regular games, but he is welcome to try it out if he is interested.

 

[DonTadow]

Hmm. Perhaps I'm not explaining myself properly then.

I agree that adding strong religious overtones to the game would take away from the fantasy.

What I'm saying is that *removing* religious elements or elements that the religious person would have problems with won't take away from the game. I change my games specifically to suit the audience, and if the target audience includes new players with issues with religious overtones, then religion goes away. If they have problems with violent problem resolution, then we focus on non-violent solutions. I they have problems with deep immersion role playing, we avoid that.

I think we are essentially agreeing.

I'm saying that it would be a good thing to run a game without religious overtones or even religion at all to introduce player X to gaming. Then afterwards, once he's had a feel for gaming, describe that this is not how *you* typically game, and that the elements he was uncomfortable with are present in your regular games, but he is welcome to try it out if he is interested.

To that point I agree with you, if the other players agree with the changes and don't mind. IN that case I"d run something like the testament campaign or one of the other monothesium campaigns. (or he could run and find a godless campaign). I don't think any of the player new or old would have a problem with it.

However, taking out spells and violence seems to be apart of the d and d game. Seeing as though I am sure witchcraft, sorcery and violent ends are not apart of his religion, how do you take these things out of dungeons and dragons and still have a good game? I havn't read the Testament supplement, but I hope they have rules to deal with these issues.

 

[brehobit]

My current group includes 5 folks. One is a Chirstian missionary (to a college campus) and I'm a member of a fairly conservative Chirstian church.

Not really a big deal so far. Although while he was away we changed game worlds to a "real religion" world. I'm hoping he won't have a problem with that...

 

[Mercule]

I'm not knocking how you're doing it, it seems to work really well for you and you should keep it up.

However, for me it simply is a matter of Reality and Fantasy and the stark division between them. What I create in the game is completely unrelated to reality except as much as anyone's imagination is. In the same way I don't want a Christopher Columbus in my made up, imaginary game, I don't think, for me, that any real concept of God needs ot have any kind of bearing on it. Those are both real things that no game could really do justice to.

For me, the reason that it can't be applied to any setting is because that's real. And the settings are not. The settings are imagination. Religion is real.

As you have said, that works for you. If that worked for everyone, the Islamic individual in question would not be baulking and this thread would not have started. Nor would I have posted my response.

To continue to repeat "it's just a game" is not particularly constructive. People understand that. It is not just a matter of explaining that little bit of information until it "clicks". There is nothing silly or mentally wrong with someone who finds it difficult, if not impossible to suspend their belief for a setting that does not contain their God, definitely not if that God is omnipresent.

 

[Mercule]

To be accurate, like many Protestants. Lutherans, Anglicans (& Episcopals &Methodists) along with other denominations venerate saints.

To correct a factual error: Lutherans do not venerate saints.

 

[DonTadow]

As you have said, that works for you. If that worked for everyone, the Islamic individual in question would not be baulking and this thread would not have started. Nor would I have posted my response.

To continue to repeat "it's just a game" is not particularly constructive. People understand that. It is not just a matter of explaining that little bit of information until it "clicks". There is nothing silly or mentally wrong with someone who finds it difficult, if not impossible to suspend their belief for a setting that does not contain their God, definitely not if that God is omnipresent.

I honestly do think that Dungeons and Dragons, its original concept, is directly against some religous doctrines. There's little place for a "real" god in it. Even if yo udo that, there are so many other aspects that would be "against" most religous doctrines. Again, so what if you put a god in it, how do you deal with sorcery, magic and killing. At some point you got to start pretending this is fantasy, else you're playing that beautiful game called "real life". If you can't play a game without worrying about being smited then you could be playing the wrong game. I just don't buy it that someone can't suspend his belief if he really wants to play the game. He just has to face facts, the core of this game is evil dungeons and magical dragons. The weapons are sharp and the magic may or may not be divine.

I'd love to see this game grow but I don't believe this game is for everyone. I have half a dozen friends whom I know wouldnt accept this game. I have a best friend and a brother whom both love the concept but to get them to play I'd have to change too much of the core.

To my friend who brought up the anime example, anime is different again. Youre talking about converting fantasy to another form of fantasy. What he is describing is attempting to make d and d as religous friendly as possible for his friend. Being a former muslim, if you're practicing it correctly you'd have to have a seriously "g" rated game to not offend someone following that religion to the text.

 

[Dr. Harry]

To correct a factual error: Lutherans do not venerate saints.

Interesting, as I've lived near a number of Lutheran churches named for saints.

 

[S'mon]

I love dealing with ethics in game, is something right or wrong, but the serious ethical debates I leave for CNN

ROTFLMAO

 

[Mercule]

I honestly do think that Dungeons and Dragons, its original concept, is directly against some religous doctrines. There's little place for a "real" god in it. Even if yo udo that, there are so many other aspects that would be "against" most religous doctrines.

I don't disagree, at least not entirely. I wouldn't advocate being the devil on someone's shoulder to begin their "corruption", either. I do think, though, that there is a difference between really being at odds with and just a prima facia notion of such.

Lest I be thought a crackpot, I really don't spend too much time on the matter, mentally. The best way of describing where my metacosmology came from is to say that it qualifies as one of those things that comes from a religious philosophy minor and having a bit too much time on my hands. The entire question is only relevant when so deep into navel-gazing that playing the game would actually be impossible.

 

[Mercule]

Interesting, as I've lived near a number of Lutheran churches named for saints.

I've seen that, too. There is one near my wife's folk's house, named "St. Gabriel the Archangel" that belongs to a Lutheran branch that I am quite certain frowns upon the veneration of saints. It would also be an oxymoron for the church to have a sainted angel, because a saint is always a human, and an angel never is.

Chalk it up to one of three things: 1) it's an old Catholic church that somehow converted in its entirety (not likely), 2) poetic naming, 3) named for some Old World religious site.