Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6226609" data-attributes="member: 42582">[MENTION=27160]Balesir[/MENTION], your post makes sense.  Part of the reason for my limited enthusiasm for the social/political side of religion in D&D is that, in general, D&D is (I find) a poor vehicle for exploring history and society. (In this respect, and not just this respect, it resembles the super hero genre.)But I think it can permit exploration of the devotional, "charismatic" side.Not quite, for two reasons.First, "The DM awards faith points based on the magnitude of the deed and how well your character is "walking the walk." . . . The DM is the arbiter of how many faith points you'll earn". So this is really a variant on "GM grants or withholds benefits based on the player's play of the PC". It puts power over the PC, and the PC's religious conception, in the hands of the GM rather than the player. The only mechanical consequence of a lack of faith is a decrease in mechanical effectiveness. Which, conversely, means that the only consequence of devotion is mechanical effectiveness. But there is no real integration of faith and effectiveness - for instance, I am no better when pursuing religious goals. And there is no temptation to depart from the requirements of faith.Second, I don't have to experience devotion to earn faith points. I just have to describe my PC doing appropriate things. This contrasts with good combat mechanics which - if my PC is taking a risk, or experiencing a threat - make me undertake a risk, or feel a threat, too. So, for instance, if my PC is down to single-digit hit points, and is therefore fighting for his/her life, so am I! The mechanic conveys and mediates the experience of the PC to me the player.So a good faith or devotion mechanic should convey and mediate, to me, the experience of my PC's devotion. I don't want to just describe it and then imagine it.This relates to Campell's post. My views are very similar to those that  [MENTION=16586]Campbell[/MENTION] expresses.I don't know if Campbell would agree, but <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?347648-The-chamberlain-the-king-and-the-dragon-(drobe)" target="_blank">this play-by-post</a> that he, I and some others have been involved in better illustrates how I like to see religion engaged in RPGing. But it's by no means the last word, either mechanically or in terms of framing techniques. For instance, it relies on the GM posing decision points for the players that include decisions about backstory. There is no mechanical regulation of that pacing, and little mechanical regulation of the players' narration. There are other ways those matters - plus other matters, too - might be handled.</blockquote>

Verification