NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Quickleaf" data-source="post: 6412765" data-attributes="member: 20323">Yes, definitely <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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Ah, I see. You are thinking there are 2 paradigms of play: Either Planescape is about absolute truth or it is about subjective truth. My experience was that most of our fun was had in the grey zone between those two paradigms.For example, at one point the PCs (once both were part of the Sensates) ended up on different sides of an issue. They retrieved a memory-restoring flower to restore the memories of a deva who lost his memory to the River Styx (and his memories had critical information for their quest); however, during the adventure they learned the deva had fallen once and been reformed, and that the missing memories were of events that led to his fall. So, the question was: would returning the deva's memories cause him to fall again? The mage PC believed some experiences are best left forgotten (she gained the power to use a blessed forgetfulness spell via the Sensate's sensory touch ability). The fighter PC believed that all experiences, no matter how terrible, are meaningful and to be embraced (he gained the power to experience another's most challenging memory thru the sensory touch). They found common ground in establishing a rough hierarchy of sensations according to the harm inflicted on self or other. Empowered by their belief, they worked together when restoring the deva's memory, the fighter easing the pain using his new power and the mage employing judicious use of her new power to re-wipe a small portion of the deva's memory. Their methods were agreeable to each other (and their allies), the end result was getting the info without the deva falling, so it was a resounding success. Was one of the PC's truths proven objectively true over the other? No. Or maybe yes... it depend son how you look at their resolution of the challenge. We're they uncovering absolute (and possibly paradoxical) truth? Or were they shaping truth thru the power of their beliefs? My players certainly saw it as the latter, but it was left vague enough that it could be interpreted as the former...We used alignments as beginner gateways into questions of deeper meaning and more challenging philosophy. IIRC the "Epicurean" Sensate heresy comprised of proponents with a variety of neutral and good alignments. Whereas the "Pain/Pleasure Cult" Sensate heresy had chaotic leanings (in the sense of being concerned with the ecstasies of individual experience, as opposed to communal experience).A bad analogy might be the technology/Space Race. Truth of their convictions would be proven if, for example, the Pleasure/Pain Cult made some great discovery in awakening psionic sensory abilities, or if "Epicureans" created a more peaceful educated society thru their efforts. Who gets there first or most impressively will see numbers swell and philosophy infiltrate into the core faction's tenets so that when someone says "Sensate" it might become synonymous with "Pain/Pleasure Cult" or "Epicureans" depending on the outcome of the conflict.I'll leave the alignment discussion to you guys. It just holds no interest to me.While [MENTION=2067]Kamikaze Midget[/MENTION] and I share a lot in common in our appreciation and perspectives toward Planescape, subjectivity of moral labels is not something I see as endemic to Planescape. Rather it is a personal touch individual DMs may or may not embrace.From my perspective, one of the precepts of Planescape (as described in the boxed set) is that planar characters know exactly what the rewards for temperance or betrayal are because they can tour the afterlives while yet alive. That doesn't mean that everyone makes the right choices (e.g. some won't care about the afterlife and some will cling to the maxim "better to reign in hell than serve in heaven!"), but the influence of Paradise Lost and Inferno in the setting suggest to me that evil is meant to be punished in the afterlife and good rewarded, and the nature of the punishment or reward should suit the life of the petitioner. That doesn't mean that there aren't grey areas of "good" or "evil" (which make for great roleplaying challenges), but that there is a common sense "I know it when I see it" core to those moral definitions that is good enough for my gaming.</blockquote>

Verification