TheRPGSite

Not sure if the title reflects what I am about to type. Let's see.

I know RPGs are make-believe, fantasy, sci-fi, horror and everything in between but there is something I am not comfortable with: Gods. Or something about them.

I am happy playing pretend with anything and everything else. Super heroes, Zero to Heroes, Investigators, Crazies. I mean, Cthulhu gets a green card on this one by virtue of essentially being a fucking big alien. Kult and the Demiurge and Sephirot I can handle. Again, there is a disconnect between being a god and being a creature with immense power. Both of those we never really played with magic in-party, just crazy "otherness" happening around.

But D&D-esque gods, clerics, temples, churches.... I just can't do it. I am starting in a game as a player and a major part of this is: "you are on a journey to a temple, because you were called/chosen by your god, shit happens in between being called and you getting there, and we are starting just after said shit hit fan."

You can, I am sure, enjoy doing these things. I am not stopping you enjoying your deities, clerics, powers and all the rest of it. Go roll those dice in the name of the lord(s). But the whole thing is a bit odd for me.

In a previous game we had to escort a cleric to an opposing king's palace where he then started cursing the king and his people with locusts, frogs, rains of blood etc (we were playing in a fantasy-Egypt. WHY the GM had to bring Moses into it I don't know). Up until that point I was quite happy. But the whole "God(s) sent me" thing didn't really float my boat (or reed basket, depending). I actually engaged less with the game at that point. :jaw-dropping:

The thing is, I have no faith. I don't even play pretend when my wife runs off to the temple at new year, or whenever she feels it necessary. I don't DO organised religion. I have no faith or belief in higher powers, and I just cannot disconnect the little extra bit for it to all sit comfortably. I am about as spiritual as a used nappy (diaper for American readers).

Really weird I know. People are probably reading this going "OMGWTFBBQ. Get over it, it's just pretend".

So yeah. No gods please. I don't want to play games with gods in (maybe Lords of Olympus is different? ;) ). The same way I don't want to play games with vampires or werewolves, but for different reasons.

I'm Atheist myself, but I do attend stuff like weddings and funerals.

I have no beef with D&D religions myself, I think they can be quite fun, but well, there's certain weird stuff you just have to take in stride. I do prefer 2e's take on things, mind.

I am having a bit of trouble discerning what, exactly, is your beef with in-game religion. Is it the fact that your party's quest-giving patron is a deity, or a priest?

In your ideal fantasy game, how would you like religion to be handled?

I prefer D&D religeon on player-side to be monotheistic and poorly defined, and therefore open to human intepretation. That's how I see the LotFP Cleric=Lawful dogma. I don't care for the D&D laundry list of deities any more than I care for the Vampire laundry list of clans.

The point about worship is faith, and so religeous PCs should have faith. They don't (or should not) speak directly to their god; much of what they do could be viewed cynically as being manipulated by other humans, and yet they choose to live by a code and strive to be holy, maybe even in the full knowledge that their Church masters are less than holy. That's a cool roleplaying challenge.

So, yeah, "my god sent me on this quest" should be "my church sent me". Or if it's really "my god" then there should be some suggestion of mental illness. Make it ambiguous. Otherwise the PC is just being led by the nose by a superbeing. Boring.

That's the thing. I am really not sure. Like ENT, I attend weddings and funerals. That is because of the people, not the religion issue.

As for gaming. Maybe it's the manner in which it is sometimes foregrounded? With this particular upcoming campaign it feels very 'present' and I am just not in that place mentally. Maybe?

Most of the time I want to roll magic users and clerics into one. This taps into the "real world" magic threads that have been floating around. Maybe they should be? It was probably a design decision/accident/source material issue that had arcane and faith magic split. Looking at how the occult and magical traditions developed in the West I am surprised that the link between magic-user and priest isn't stronger (some games probably do not have the distinction between classes that D&D has).

This isn't some crusade (not perhaps the best word?) against religion or faith. I don't really care what other people do, as long as it doesn't have too much of a negative impact on me.

Perhaps I am in a minority: People (person?) who are not comfortable playing the role of a character that has faith. I never expected to find something like that to be an issue.

Quote from: smiorgan;728094The point about worship is faith, and so religious PCs should have faith. They don't (or should not) speak directly to their god; much of what they do could be viewed cynically as being manipulated by other humans, and yet they choose to live by a code and strive to be holy, maybe even in the full knowledge that their Church masters are less than holy. That's a cool roleplaying challenge.

So, yeah, "my god sent me on this quest" should be "my church sent me". Or if it's really "my god" then there should be some suggestion of mental illness. Make it ambiguous. Otherwise the PC is just being led by the nose by a superbeing. Boring.

Perhaps this is the issue? "You were chosen/had a vision/macguffin". Yes it is a starting point for something that could go many different directions. But it feels too much like a personal relationship with the divine (alien territory).

So with that in mind, perhaps it is less to do with my personal feelings toward religion and more to do with how the GM has framed the game?

Quote from: smiorgan;728094The point about worship is faith, and so religious PCs should have faith. They don't (or should not) speak directly to their god; much of what they do could be viewed cynically as being manipulated by other humans, and yet they choose to live by a code and strive to be holy, maybe even in the full knowledge that their Church masters are less than holy. That's a cool roleplaying challenge.

So, yeah, "my god sent me on this quest" should be "my church sent me". Or if it's really "my god" then there should be some suggestion of mental illness. Make it ambiguous. Otherwise the PC is just being led by the nose by a superbeing. Boring.

Perhaps this is the issue? "You were chosen/had a vision/macguffin". Yes it is a starting point for something that could go many different directions. But it feels too much like a personal relationship with the divine (alien territory).

Sounds like you're more anti-spiritual than un-spiritual, or anti-religious maybe. You seem to dislike the whole trope? This seems quite common among American atheists at least, the whole "Get your God out of this, you're making me sick!" thing. I was raised atheist myself but I haven't seen much of this attitude in the UK. I think they have it in France a bit.

I like gods not just because they're weird but because their domain is so large that, properly employed, they can make everything else weird.

Like: I can pick up any old module TSR published and there's goblins and orcs and Yuan Ti and clerics.

But if I decide, early on, that the goblins have a god to whom anything green is sacred and that the Yuan ti's skins are all sacred texts that can be read to explicate their god, suddenly that ordinary TSR module--which was inert a second ago--is a minefield of adventure seeds.

As in anything TSR, WOTC, or anybody else pumps out that has these stock elements.

By taking the idea of gods and their dominions and sects seriously, generic content can turn from checkers to chess in seconds.

Faith in a game world however--assuming the typical D&D world--is not faith in what you can't see of feel, but more like devotion or fealty.

In other words, just see worship of the pantheon and its gods by the masses as a form of vassaldom or the acceptance of a spiritual kingdom, with the priests being the equivalent of knights or gentry.  When you think about it that way, it makes a lot more sense.

I've always been kind of uncomfortable with faith-based PCs as well. Until recently I'd never played a cleric.
A lot of it might be that gods in most RPGs I've played have just been another stat as far as players are concerned, a justification for the power the cleric is wielding but beyond that not of much import... interchangeable.
Also, no matter who their god is the cleric just about always ends up getting played as christian... and to focus on healing. He's really only there for the heals.
Just seems bland... I'd rather have some other means of healing, surgeons and anatomists with a bit of alchemy. No religion necessary.

Clerics and gods are in the same category as wizards & magic. Its just different flavor for extraordinary stuff. The gods are just batteries for certain types of power.

I can understand not liking cleric type characters or wanting to play them, but a fantasy game with zero religious references would be a bit strange.

Nothing wrong or out of the ordinary here. I don't like playing in "evil" games where the PCs are bad guys, because it goes against my core. Even though it's just playing pretend, it's not enjoyable. So I can understand that roleplaying someone with religious beliefs may not be enjoyable for you.

A possible solution would be to have a chat with your DM and get the two of you on the same page. Let him know that you will be playing a character that doesn't worship divine beings, and won't take the bait for any quests that religious figures send you on. Still you are left with the problem that you're playing in the DM's sandbox where gods are real.

Your other option is to only play in settings where the divine doesn't play a role.

I can certainly understand why the whole thing would be off-putting to you, and it may require some work to find a group willing to play in a setting that's more to your taste.

Just think of fantasy deities as ultra powerful "aliens"/beings with their own agenda and treat accordingly.

Basically you are Captain Kirk and there are computer gods all around you. Some benign, some indifferent, and some malevolent.

What do you do? ;)

Sounds to me like there's a part of your feelings coming from being irked about the "chosen one" trope, or the idea that some entirely DM-controlled force outside the campaign would basically orchestrate things without your character having any impact on these elements, than the actual idea of religion. Hence, Cthulhu's cool, because he's a big alien, and at least if you take a ship to its flank, or a nuclear weapon for that matter, it MIGHT work, temporarily at least.

Would that be correct, BarefootGaijin?

As an aside many live action games, including the one I am involved in avoid religion in our campaigns. Even  missing a common tropes  we manage to make decent adventures without it.

In their place there are are philosophies, "powers", and very powerful beings that are just that. For example Life, Chaos, Nature, etc. In place of worship there are philosophies and codes.

I also think that most games to a crappy job of creating engaging 'religions' and working on the effects of faith.
Pantheons, etc, Patron deities, gods who involve themselves in the every day world...eeeecchhhh.....

"And as with any institution run by mortals yet fueled by the passion of belief, players in Celtricia find sects, cults, and power-bases in a state of growth, change, or upheaval, as often as in a stable state.  In Argus, the Vernadalian worship takes the form of the Church of the Serpent Queen, while in Igbar the Serpent Queen cult has been banished and repudiated, replaced by the Church of the Green Mother.  The different foci and different morality systems of these related groups creates a conflict more bitter than a typical rival."

Quote from: LordVreeg;728113I also think that most games to a crappy job of creating engaging 'religions' and working on the effects of faith.
Pantheons, etc, Patron deities, gods who involve themselves in the every day world...eeeecchhhh.....

"And as with any institution run by mortals yet fueled by the passion of belief, players in Celtricia find sects, cults, and power-bases in a state of growth, change, or upheaval, as often as in a stable state.  In Argus, the Vernadalian worship takes the form of the Church of the Serpent Queen, while in Igbar the Serpent Queen cult has been banished and repudiated, replaced by the Church of the Green Mother.  The different foci and different morality systems of these related groups creates a conflict more bitter than a typical rival."

I think that part of that problem is due to us being raised in a monotheistic environment --mostly Christian-- so while we understand the classic polytheistic pantheon, actually internalizing what its like to worship a pantheon is quite a bit different.

That's always been a stretch to the imagination when talking about D&D in particular, with a Cleric that is rooted partly in the holy hunter Van Helsing type of character, and partly in the tradition of the crusades and heroic priestly figures like Odo of Bayeux.

Ernie was pretty clear to me from the start that low level clerical spells are a matter of faith and personal dedication, whereas true divine power, as in, being a channel for the higher powers beyond the reach of the world, is something you can only attain at very high levels. The way that works in the Hobby Shop Dungeon campaign is that you have patron deities, which might be figures of legend, historical heroes and the like, which are worshiped by different folk and are treated differently whether you are Gaelish or Frankh or Iyathari or whatnot. These are not actual "gods", but really legendary/mythical patrons people feel a cultural devotion and attachment to. Imagine the devotion one might feel towards heroic figures like Roland, or Arthur in our world, or if Elric after destroying the Young Kingdoms and giving birth to the new world was somewhat remembered and worshiped as a composite figure by the new generation of men there. There is a point in your evolution as a cleric where you might learn this truth and part of the challenge in becoming a high priest is to sublimate this understanding of the world in order to connect with the higher powers and become a conduit of their will in the world. This is not easily achieved.

To the OP: forget about D&D per se for the moment.

Do you have an interest in history and mythology?

In history, religions have been among the most powerful social phenomena affecting everything from daily life to royal succession and wars. Religious institutions and their hierarchies have had enormous social and political influence. All without any real supernatural powers or miracles as far as you are likely to believe. Would you have a problem with such religions being in your game?

In myth, gods often appear to mortals and do...stuff...or they answer mortals' requests for help. Rarely if ever in "real myth" do you see someone whose relationship to their god lets them cure light wounds 1/day, but read the Iliad or the Old Testament and you've got divine effects all over the place. Would you have a problem with that?

Sounds to me like you should try this new thing I heard about, called role - playing. Because seriously, for me (an atheist as well) this sounds like Fuckyoumomanddad Atheism 101 problem, sorry. In a lot of fantasy settings, there isn't belief as we know it, because existence of gods is made certain by their divine presence, and divine magic of priests. And even without such reassurances, unless the world has advanced enough knowledge of nature phenomena (and they aren't caused by invisible gods, of course), you'll still have religions develop, to explain those natural phenomena. The best I'd allow you to do in my games'd be to have some guy with a grudge against gods, refusing to bow down to any rather than deny their existence. And I'd be sure to strip any Cleric PC who'd heal you of their powers, if any.

Quote from: Arminius;728120To the OP: forget about D&D per se for the moment.

Do you have an interest in history and mythology?

In history, religions have been among the most powerful social phenomena affecting everything from daily life to royal succession and wars. Religious institutions and their hierarchies have had enormous social and political influence. All without any real supernatural powers or miracles as far as you are likely to believe. Would you have a problem with such religions being in your game?

In myth, gods often appear to mortals and do...stuff...or they answer mortals' requests for help. Rarely if ever in "real myth" do you see someone whose relationship to their god lets them cure light wounds 1/day, but read the Iliad or the Old Testament and you've got divine effects all over the place. Would you have a problem with that?

Yeah. Modernistic approach to religion makes me grind my teeth more in cases of medievalesque fantasy even more than those lesbian single mom drow pirates who are not buying into the Drow concept of matriarchal society, maaaan.

Especially if you realise that adventurers are very much the types, to whom the "no atheists in foxholes" apply. I have no problem pretending that sacrificing a goat on the altar of God of War will grant me luck in battle any more than pretending to be a guy who, by our standards, would be a mass - murdering thug.

Quote from: flyerfan1991;728115I think that part of that problem is due to us being raised in a monotheistic environment --mostly Christian-- so while we understand the classic polytheistic pantheon, actually internalizing what its like to worship a pantheon is quite a bit different.

Part of this is the knowability/mystery dichotomy.

in too many games, the will and mind of the 'gods' is too well known and assumed.  I think that attitude, and the 'plug and play' nature of books like Deities and Demigods, actually got in the way of creating more actualized settings.

Consider that the default, quasi-medieval setting would actually have the monotheistic setting actually in the process of absorbing the pagan beliefs of the area...this sounds like a far more engaging game than the ones I played trying to stick temples of Hermes and Asmodeus next to each other...

Quote from: BarefootGaijin;728089Not sure if the title reflects what I am about to type. Let's see.

I know RPGs are make-believe, fantasy, sci-fi, horror and everything in between but there is something I am not comfortable with: Gods. Or something about them.

That is the nice thing about sci-fi, is that religion is usually never touched upon. In my Traveller 1323 campaign, I had the black ships, and a transdroyneist horror (like skitters from Falling Skies), and they hated people moving into the frontier because they felt those people were coming from the sphere of "grandfather". Grandfather being an ancient droyne of godlike power, but to them, totally evil, their ancestors being on the losing side of a civil war. So they did in fact have a religion, no afterlife or rituals, but that God was real, God was evil, and to try to fanatically resist God and "God's people", moving into their territory.

Get over it, it's just pretend.

Quote from: Rincewind1;728121Sounds to me like you should try this new thing I heard about, called role - playing. Because seriously, for me (an atheist as well) this sounds like Fuckyoumomanddad Atheism 101 problem, sorry.

Yep.

Quote from: Rincewind1;728121Yeah. Modernistic approach to religion makes me grind my teeth

Don't get me wrong; I'm not dumping on the OP, I'm trying to figure out where he's coming from. Also, not to dump on D&D but if that's the only approach to fantasy religions that you've seen (and I would include "the way a lot of DMs fill in the cracks in D&D" as part of that), then other games might provide some perspective.

Also, the portrayal of religion in Middle Earth is about the lightest, near-atheistic (or you might say modern) you'll find in almost any fantasy. I mean very little that you see in the books has any of the qualities of real religion: ritual, faith, priests, sacrifices, a sense of personal relationship to a god or gods, let alone a sense of divine patronage. You can find bits and pieces but that's all. Nobody seems to mind much when Tolkien does it.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;728128Get over it, it's just pretend.

Okay, now I have a moment to expand on this.

Fact is, I get it. There's no amount of "it's just pretend" that makes rape or child abuse acceptable to me in a game, and while I don't say no to slavery or torture, I will think you're a fucking sheet-shitter for lovingly lingering over them should they come up in actual play.

I'm an athiest, yet I like spending time thinking about and roleplaying religion and religious characters, largely because it is so removed from my own experience. I can understand why it might not appeal to others.

Quote from: BarefootGaijin;728095Perhaps I am in a minority: People (person?) who are not comfortable playing the role of a character that has faith. I never expected to find something like that to be an issue.

I read your OP as you just not engaging with D&D-style religeon.

But here you say you're not comfortable with playing someone of faith, because you're not a person of faith.

Now, I can get not wanting to play a Christian because you just don't get Christianity in real life.

I can also get not wanting to play a D&D Cleric because D&D religeon lacks verisimilitude. D&D clerics are about an exchange, their prayers for powers; pretty much the antithesis of faith. I'm not keen but as others have pointed out, it depends on your perspective of what the gods are, and hey, it's a game.

I can't really get not having real-world faith getting in the way of playing someone who's basically a wizard who gets their power from an otherworldly benefactor (who likes to mess with mortals and send them on quests).

Quote from: BarefootGaijin;728095So with that in mind, perhaps it is less to do with my personal feelings toward religion and more to do with how the GM has framed the game?

Going back to your OP

Quote from: BarefootGaijin;728089In a previous game we had to escort a cleric to an opposing king's palace where he then started cursing the king and his people with locusts, frogs, rains of blood etc (we were playing in a fantasy-Egypt. WHY the GM had to bring Moses into it I don't know). Up until that point I was quite happy. But the whole "God(s) sent me" thing didn't really float my boat (or reed basket, depending). I actually engaged less with the game at that point.

What it really sounds like is the game jumped the shark at the point the curses began, which is a totally different reason not to engage with that game. So I'd (a) check you really mean uncomfortable about faith and (b) check you're not pinning the "blame" on the ouvert display of divine power, when you've actually got a different and more fundamental reason why you didn't like that game.

Quote from: LordVreeg;728122Part of this is the knowability/mystery dichotomy.

in too many games, the will and mind of the 'gods' is too well known and assumed.  I think that attitude, and the 'plug and play' nature of books like Deities and Demigods, actually got in the way of creating more actualized settings.

Consider that the default, quasi-medieval setting would actually have the monotheistic setting actually in the process of absorbing the pagan beliefs of the area...this sounds like a far more engaging game than the ones I played trying to stick temples of Hermes and Asmodeus next to each other...

From a logical standpoint, you see people who are devotees of a particular god[dess] in a pantheon, even while acknowledging the entire pantheon.  In game terms, that's how we kind of hand-wave a polytheistic environment into a pseudo-monotheistic one.

Given how obfuscating "the gods' will" can be from a historical perspective (just look at the Oracle at Delphi for a good example of that), that very fuzziness is something that could be incorporated into a game fairly easily.

Quote from: flyerfan1991;728115I think that part of that problem is due to us being raised in a monotheistic environment --mostly Christian-- so while we understand the classic polytheistic pantheon, actually internalizing what its like to worship a pantheon is quite a bit different.

Frankly I'm inclined to run D&D as monotheistic deism in the future for this reason. Most of my players aren't interested in internalizing and performing alternate spiritualities to play in an anarchic fantasy sandbox, so let's just skip to the chase.

They're really into the Protestant/Catholic conflict that has become central to my current 7th Sea campaign though, largely because it's so accessible. To date this is the only campaign I've run where religion became a central theme through player choice rather than DM insertion.

I major in comparative religion and I've never really cared about inventing religions for my settings, mostly because it takes way too much effort, and unless you put that effort in, it probably turns to "and here's 20 gods of the pantheon that have weird names."

Occasionally I have an idea and run with it, for instance in my current project there's a ton of folk religiosity that's about cats since they're seen as souls of the house, Loviatar's in because she's got a cool name and in a setting where a history of plague is a big deal, why not have a goddess of disease. And then there's Russian Orthodox Christianity evolved into a state cult mostly concerned with signs and portents.

Quote from: BarefootGaijin;728089Not sure if the title reflects what I am about to type. Let's see.

I know RPGs are make-believe, fantasy, sci-fi, horror and everything in between but there is something I am not comfortable with: Gods. Or something about them.

I am happy playing pretend with anything and everything else. Super heroes, Zero to Heroes, Investigators, Crazies. I mean, Cthulhu gets a green card on this one by virtue of essentially being a fucking big alien. Kult and the Demiurge and Sephirot I can handle. Again, there is a disconnect between being a god and being a creature with immense power. Both of those we never really played with magic in-party, just crazy "otherness" happening around.

But D&D-esque gods, clerics, temples, churches.... I just can't do it. I am starting in a game as a player and a major part of this is: "you are on a journey to a temple, because you were called/chosen by your god, shit happens in between being called and you getting there, and we are starting just after said shit hit fan."

You can, I am sure, enjoy doing these things. I am not stopping you enjoying your deities, clerics, powers and all the rest of it. Go roll those dice in the name of the lord(s). But the whole thing is a bit odd for me.

In a previous game we had to escort a cleric to an opposing king's palace where he then started cursing the king and his people with locusts, frogs, rains of blood etc (we were playing in a fantasy-Egypt. WHY the GM had to bring Moses into it I don't know). Up until that point I was quite happy. But the whole "God(s) sent me" thing didn't really float my boat (or reed basket, depending). I actually engaged less with the game at that point. :jaw-dropping:

The thing is, I have no faith. I don't even play pretend when my wife runs off to the temple at new year, or whenever she feels it necessary. I don't DO organised religion. I have no faith or belief in higher powers, and I just cannot disconnect the little extra bit for it to all sit comfortably. I am about as spiritual as a used nappy (diaper for American readers).

Really weird I know. People are probably reading this going "OMGWTFBBQ. Get over it, it's just pretend".

So yeah. No gods please. I don't want to play games with gods in (maybe Lords of Olympus is different? ;) ). The same way I don't want to play games with vampires or werewolves, but for different reasons.

No offense, but this sounds like a personal problem you have.

I can get not wanting to play a cleric or wanting to go on religious quests I suppose but not wanting any religion in your campaign setting seems a tad extreme. I am an atheist but I always find one the most fascinating aspects of a setting to be religion if its handled well. I have problems with religion as presented in d&d for various reasons, mostly in that it never seems well thought out and the presence of the Cleric provides a default answer to the question of gods in setting. I would rather there be a deal of ambiguity, some real mystery to that element of the setting.

I am mean hell from this point forward in my life I will likely role MU's and Clerics into one class for future campaigns. The whole no religion in game because I don't believe in real life thing seems rather... I dunno childish? No offense intended just being candid.

edit; As an after thought though this has reminded me that it would be near impossible play an atheist in most D&D or fantasy settings in general, another reason why I don't like the Cleric as written or the general presentation of fantasy religion.

It does seem a bit extreme, this degree of rejection towards religion.

But in any case, if it's really bothering you, I'd talk it over with your gaming group, or at least with the GM. Ideally outside a game session. They're your friends... right?

Quote from: Arkansan;728205I can get not wanting to play a cleric or wanting to go on religious quests I suppose but not wanting any religion in your campaign setting seems a tad extreme. I am an atheist but I always find one the most fascinating aspects of a setting to be religion if its handled well.

That and also that fantasy campaign worlds also usually have radically different metaphysics (because, after all, magic) than real life and that's fun to explore.

I think that if I were to get rid of "religions" in a fantasy world (scare quotes because is it a religion, exactly, if you have material proof) I would go with a black magic/ white magic split or something similar.

Quote from: flyerfan1991;728149From a logical standpoint, you see people who are devotees of a particular god[dess] in a pantheon, even while acknowledging the entire pantheon.  In game terms, that's how we kind of hand-wave a polytheistic environment into a pseudo-monotheistic one.

Given how obfuscating "the gods' will" can be from a historical perspective (just look at the Oracle at Delphi for a good example of that), that very fuzziness is something that could be incorporated into a game fairly easily.

Totally agree.
that obfuscation is a good thing.  
People see what they want to in their gods. People have imperfect understandings of these beings, and that is one of the underlying themes of the Celtrician mythos.  Simplified, static Churches have no place in a complex world. Nothing is more satisfying than when the mythos is deep enough so the players actually can understand and extrapolate from it, due to the sense of realism.

Quote from: BarefootGaijin;728089Not sure if the title reflects what I am about to type. Let's see.

I know RPGs are make-believe, fantasy, sci-fi, horror and everything in between but there is something I am not comfortable with: Gods. Or something about them.

I am happy playing pretend with anything and everything else. Super heroes, Zero to Heroes, Investigators, Crazies. I mean, Cthulhu gets a green card on this one by virtue of essentially being a fucking big alien. Kult and the Demiurge and Sephirot I can handle. Again, there is a disconnect between being a god and being a creature with immense power. Both of those we never really played with magic in-party, just crazy "otherness" happening around.

But D&D-esque gods, clerics, temples, churches.... I just can't do it. I am starting in a game as a player and a major part of this is: "you are on a journey to a temple, because you were called/chosen by your god, shit happens in between being called and you getting there, and we are starting just after said shit hit fan."

You can, I am sure, enjoy doing these things. I am not stopping you enjoying your deities, clerics, powers and all the rest of it. Go roll those dice in the name of the lord(s). But the whole thing is a bit odd for me.

In a previous game we had to escort a cleric to an opposing king's palace where he then started cursing the king and his people with locusts, frogs, rains of blood etc (we were playing in a fantasy-Egypt. WHY the GM had to bring Moses into it I don't know). Up until that point I was quite happy. But the whole "God(s) sent me" thing didn't really float my boat (or reed basket, depending). I actually engaged less with the game at that point. :jaw-dropping:

The thing is, I have no faith. I don't even play pretend when my wife runs off to the temple at new year, or whenever she feels it necessary. I don't DO organised religion. I have no faith or belief in higher powers, and I just cannot disconnect the little extra bit for it to all sit comfortably. I am about as spiritual as a used nappy (diaper for American readers).

Really weird I know. People are probably reading this going "OMGWTFBBQ. Get over it, it's just pretend".

So yeah. No gods please. I don't want to play games with gods in (maybe Lords of Olympus is different? ;) ). The same way I don't want to play games with vampires or werewolves, but for different reasons.

I don't see why one can't be an atheist, but still enjoy mythology.

A wizard is not much different than a classic mythological deity with magic powers.

I am not saying you have to enjoy clerics and dnd gods just because I do, but I personally don't see being Atheist as in conflict with that.

I suppose if you don't like playing characters who worship gods, you should not do so. But i never see what my character believes, needing to match what i believe. By the same token, i don't see the cosmology of the setting being a commentary on anything outside the game.

I've had more trouble with hundreds, if not thousands, or miracle workers walking about,every day.

More to the point, hundreds, if not thousands, of people walking about who can cause an epidemic of influenze, or cholera, or smallpox, with a single 3rd level spell, walking about...

Evil priests of death and disease must have a shitty work ethic, in fantasy games.

Quote from: BarefootGaijin;728089So yeah. No gods please. I don't want to play games with gods in (maybe Lords of Olympus is different? ;) ). The same way I don't want to play games with vampires or werewolves, but for different reasons.

If I decide I like a certain ant, and I feed it and stomp and burn out all the other kinds of ants that attack it or it's colony.  Am I not a god as far as ants are concerned?

Change that ant to a human, change me into whatever the hell that would be.  There's your fantasy god.  Does it still bother you?

I'm actually a big fan of the Discworld version of gods in that it's belief that creates them and disbelief can unmake them (to a certain level).  Would this idea still bother you?

One thing they added to D&D in 3rd edition is that a divine caster may be powered by what amounts to cohesive idea, rather than an actual god.  I kind of liked that as well.

That all said, I prefer to call "magic" something like "magic" and the only real difference between a priest and a mage (or anything else) is exactly how they call up the "magic."

And lastly, there is the Lovecraftian option of inscrutable ancient aliens.

Quote from: BarefootGaijin;728089I mean, Cthulhu gets a green card on this one by virtue of essentially being a fucking big alien.

My fantasy gods are pretty much universally "fucking big aliens", in the sense that they're just creatures who have attained lots and lots of power. Having "faith" in my version of D&D-land is a lot like swearing fealty to your local duke or king. I don't swear fealty to anybody in real life, either, but fantasy-land is not the real world.

The other option (that I use with less frequency) is that the clerics are all drawing their spells from the same "energy" source, but they all have different interpretations of what that energy source actually is. Sometimes this is the exact same source of energy that the wizards draw their magic from (the only difference is that the wizards don't interpret it to be a God or gods; which is, of course, heresy for a lot of religions). This scenario is a lot more like the way the real world works: People ascribe divinity to all sorts of things (like the sun crossing the sky) that turn out to have nothing divine about them at all.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;728105Clerics and gods are in the same category as wizards & magic. Its just different flavor for extraordinary stuff. The gods are just batteries for certain types of power.

In your gaming circle, perhaps.  There are plenty of campaigns out there, happily, that have religion and faith as genuine tropes.

That being said, to the OP ... fair enough.  I'm not going to be one of the ones insinuating that you suck at roleplaying and that you just need to get over yourself.  There are elements of RP we all can hack, and elements we can't, and there's often no rhyme or reason to it.  I'm sure that you don't need to be told that you're behind the 8-ball in most fantasy-style campaigns.  Your best bet -- other than just ditching fantasy RPGs altogether -- is to find a gaming circle like, say, Exploderwizard's, in which worship and faith are one-dimensional at best, if they're ever mentioned at all.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;728227I suppose if you don't like playing characters who worship gods, you should not do so. But i never see what my character believes, needing to match what i believe. By the same token, i don't see the cosmology of the setting being a commentary on anything outside the game.

The only thing it really would start to breakdown for me is that if there are no gods, then there is no magic, logically. As by the definition of magic is from the supernatural, which generally equates to "gods" of some sort. So that begs the question, why play fantasy at all?

The fact someone can cast a spell doesn't require that gods literally exist, or that people believe in them in the setting, although I would find lack of faiths unusual whether or not there's magic, particularly in a setting that looks a lot like premodern Earth.

It would also be strange for people to believe in gods without without believing in "divine magic" of some kind. So it would be strange for them to see "real magic" and not relate it to the gods in some way--either seeing it as demonic or heretical, or coming from the gods. It might not be. After all the mainstream, modern outlook is to separate science from faith.

This is pretty much the default outlook in Steve Jackson's two fantasy games, The Fantasy Trip and GURPS (when played as fantasy). Religions may exist but they have no supernatural effect; magic draws on an essence (mana) which is just "there" and that's that. I think it smacks of a juvenile kind of atheism-cum-wish-fulfillment ("powerz!") and it's kind of interesting that Jacskon does include demon-summoning in both games iirc. But it's reasonably consistent.

It should be easier for you with no faith -- there's no faith in D&D either since the gods are objectively real. It's not really about religion, it's about super powers. It's more like a gritty accurate depiction of the Marvel or DC Universe than religion. And you don't get to play Superman -- you run errands for him.

Traditionally, "mana" was from the gods. However, if one wants to suppose there is some "powerz", which does seem a massive handwave. It is kind of a thing where you can totally re-engineer the universe if you want to, but why would you? Plus to the fact, the fantasy milieu does lose part of it's "magic" when say Conan no longer talks to Crom.

Runequest, especially from RQ III on, takes a pluralistic or meta-metaphysical approach to magic and religion. There are mechanics for types of magic (in 3e: divine, shamanistic, and sorcerous) but the game doesn't say exactly how they work. Or rather, it has a section for each type that explains from its perspective how it works, and what is "really" going on with the other two. For example shamans, who deal in spirits, see gods as just powerful spirits and priests as their slaves. They see sorcerers as having dried-out spirits, and so forth.

Quote from: Brad J. Murray;728357It should be easier for you with no faith -- there's no faith in D&D either since the gods are objectively real. It's not really about religion, it's about super powers. It's more like a gritty accurate depiction of the Marvel or DC Universe than religion. And you don't get to play Superman -- you run errands for him.

This is a modern perspective (equating religion with faith in the sense of blind belief) which doesn't jibe with the portrayal of religion in e.g. The Iliad. In much of the world and much of history, religion is a kind of patronage, where you give sacrifices or devotion to the gods, and they take care of you in return.

Quote from: dragoner;728359Traditionally, "mana" was from the gods. However, if one wants to suppose there is some "powerz", which does seem a massive handwave. It is kind of a thing where you can totally re-engineer the universe if you want to, but why would you? Plus to the fact, the fantasy milieu does lose part of it's "magic" when say Conan no longer talks to Crom.

I agree, but it works. And although it's a handwave, it's simple and easy to digest for modern minds. As Brad's comment illustrates, modern minds start from powerz and are then comfortable to punt on the metaphysics. How many comics or movies have you seen (e.g. The Mummy) which completely fail to confront the religious/metaphysical implications of the really-real supernatural stuff that happens?

Quote from: Arminius;728361This is a modern perspective (equating religion with faith in the sense of blind belief) which doesn't jibe with the portrayal of religion in e.g. The Iliad. In much of the world and much of history, religion is a kind of patronage, where you give sacrifices or devotion to the gods, and they take care of you in return.

Exactly.

OTOH, that can be exactly what rubs some people the wrong way. The idea of worshiping a more power being just for the rewards seems tacky.

Quote from: dragoner;728359Traditionally, "mana" was from the gods. However, if one wants to suppose there is some "powerz", which does seem a massive handwave. It is kind of a thing where you can totally re-engineer the universe if you want to, but why would you? Plus to the fact, the fantasy milieu does lose part of it's "magic" when say Conan no longer talks to Crom.

Well, you could just be extremely vague as well, allowing people to see whatever they want in the magic, ascribe it to some hazy cosmic force. That might still be too religious for the OP. Not sure how far he wants it stripped down.

Quote from: JeremyR;728363Exactly.

OTOH, that can be exactly what rubs some people the wrong way. The idea of worshiping a more power being just for the rewards seems tacky.

To moderns, yes.

If your god didn't do what you requested, it wasn't because he didn't exist, it was because another god was more powerful, or because you didn't do enough to please the god, or because your god was being a jerk. In that case you could,yell at him, but you didn't stop believing he exists. In the Middle Ages, although the omnipotence/omniscience/benevolence of God was a given (so you couldn't yell at Jehovah), people did make ritual complaints against saints (like taking away some decorations of their shrines) if they didn't come up with the goods.

When the prophets or Jesus or saints performed miracles, they weren't kindling people's faith in the existence of God, rather it was in the power vis a vis other gods and and spirits.

Quote from: Arminius;728370To moderns, yes.

If your god didn't do what you requested, it wasn't because he didn't exist, it was because another god was more powerful, or because you didn't do enough to please the god, or because your god was being a jerk. In that case you could,yell at him, but you didn't stop believing he exists. In the Middle Ages, although the omnipotence/omniscience/benevolence of God was a given (so you couldn't yell at Jehovah), people did make ritual complaints against saints (like taking away some decorations of their shrines) if they didn't come up with the goods.

This is very much true, and one of the major factors in the early middle ages that caused those monotheistic religions, which often offered a more...lofty ideas of gods, to make easier converts by the sword against the pagans who lost a war to them.

Quote from: Arminius;728362I agree, but it works. And although it's a handwave, it's simple and easy to digest for modern minds. As Brad's comment illustrates, modern minds start from powerz and are then comfortable to punt on the metaphysics. How many comics or movies have you seen (e.g. The Mummy) which completely fail to confront the religious/metaphysical implications of the really-real supernatural stuff that happens?

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;728365Well, you could just be extremely vague as well, allowing people to see whatever they want in the magic, ascribe it to some hazy cosmic force. That might still be too religious for the OP. Not sure how far he wants it stripped down.

I agree with both of you. Can't say I like it much, it seems to sanitize it for mass consumption; losing the depth, or mystery of the old ways which are being represented. Not that I believe in superstition, but I do think there is something in the old perspective that the Gods were rather ambivalent, or people's attitudes to them, not the sort of Manichean division between evil and good. Stories of Perchta were good for scaring us around the campfire, that she would slice you open and stuff you with straw if you were bad, but that is bad now to scare kids like that.

Quote from: dragoner;728309The only thing it really would start to breakdown for me is that if there are no gods, then there is no magic, logically. As by the definition of magic is from the supernatural, which generally equates to "gods" of some sort. So that begs the question, why play fantasy at all?

I don't see the logical conclusion that magic comes from gods. Magic can simply exist as a part of the world, like water and air, without needing a deity as a source.

I enjoy religions in games because human society has religions, just like wealth inequity and crime. I like to have a world that makes sense for the humans within it, but since I'm good with magic having being of immense magical power that fit the definition of gods existing within that world as well. In fact, despite my atheism in real life I enjoy playing a religious character in a game where gods are proven to exist.

Generally I prefer the concept of a god that simply has more of the magical power and can do more with it than mortals, including massive changes to the world, but not as as a creator of the world.

Quote from: snooggums;728380I don't see the logical conclusion that magic comes from gods. Magic can simply exist as a part of the world, like water and air, without needing a deity as a source.

The definition of magic:

3.supposed supernatural power: a supposed supernatural power that makes impossible things happen or gives somebody control over the forces of nature.

Of which, in that Gods being supernatural, have power over nature and can control it and grant powers; this being the traditional idea. I don't see how magic can exist as a natural force, logically; water and air, for example, having known physical properties which magic doesn't. I understand the sort of "scientific" description, but it isn't correct, I don't see the reason to mix the two.

I'm another who doesn't see 'magic' as requiring 'gods'.

I do like the Patron setup in DCC, and some of them may pass themselves off as gods or angels or demons... but I guess that depends on how gullible their supplicants are.

Quote from: dragoner;728387The definition of magic:

3.supposed supernatural power: a supposed supernatural power that makes impossible things happen or gives somebody control over the forces of nature.

Of which, in that Gods being supernatural, have power over nature and can control it and grant powers; this being the traditional idea. I don't see how magic can exist as a natural force, logically; water and air, for example, having known physical properties which magic doesn't. I understand the sort of "scientific" description, but it isn't correct, I don't see the reason to mix the two.

I don't see a reference to gods in your definition, and being supernatural still doesn't mean it has to be 'from gods'. That isn't a 'scientific' thing, just a different source than from a creator which is very common in many religions around the world.

One example among many: Werewolves are supernatural, and I can't think of a werewolf story that started with a werewolf being created by a god. There might be one out there, but not in the common story. Vampires are often cited as being cursed by God, which I'm also good with as 'supernatural from gods'.

Basically, not seeing a requirement means I'm good both ways. I'm only responding because you are stating one specific approach as the 'definition of magic' instead of your personal preference.

Quote from: dragoner;728387The definition of magic:

3.supposed supernatural power: a supposed supernatural power that makes impossible things happen or gives somebody control over the forces of nature.

Of which, in that Gods being supernatural, have power over nature and can control it and grant powers; this being the traditional idea. I don't see how magic can exist as a natural force, logically; water and air, for example, having known physical properties which magic doesn't. I understand the sort of "scientific" description, but it isn't correct, I don't see the reason to mix the two.

"Supernatural" is basically a disease of language combined with the modern outlook. To the ancients of course magic and miracles were real thus no more unnatural than the sun rising in the morning.

Note, I'm not aware of "mana" coming from the gods according to the cultures from which the word is drawn. Wikipedia's article makes it out to be a an abstract sense of "power" that just exists in the universe, something like "qi". (I'm willing to be corrected, but my college textbook also says that mana, as well as the Native American terms "wakan" and "orenda" are "universal impersonal power" in the interpretations of leading anthropologists of the last century. Needless to say they may have gotten it wrong, and other cultures may see things differently.)

Quote from: snooggums;728399I don't see a reference to gods in your definition, and being supernatural still doesn't mean it has to be 'from gods'. That isn't a 'scientific' thing, just a different source than from a creator which is very common in many religions around the world.

One example among many: Werewolves are supernatural, and I can't think of a werewolf story that started with a werewolf being created by a god. There might be one out there, but not in the common story. Vampires are often cited as being cursed by God, which I'm also good with as 'supernatural from gods'.

Supernatural does suppose "Gods" traditionally as it is their realm.

Werewolves are cursed, like "Vampires", so yes, technically, the more modern Christian perspective, and as such from the Devil, or a God-like being.

Removing the traditional frame of reference for a mechanistic approach to magic ... why? Seems very flat.

Quote from: Arminius;728401"Supernatural" is basically a disease of language combined with the modern outlook. To the ancients of course magic and miracles were real thus no more unnatural than the sun rising in the morning.

Note, I'm not aware of "mana" coming from the gods according to the cultures from which the word is drawn.

Supernatural being beyond the natural world, which people in the past did recognize a division, and did use terms such as unnatural for it.

On Easter Island, the Polynesian religion did seek to gain "mana" from the Gods.

Quote from: jeff37923;728182No offense, but this sounds like a personal problem you have.

Indeed it is!

It is more to do with the framing of the issue than "mystical all powerful deities in general".

Quote from: smiorgan;728148What it really sounds like is the game jumped the shark at the point the curses began, which is a totally different reason not to engage with that game. So I'd (a) check you really mean uncomfortable about faith and (b) check you're not pinning the "blame" on the ouvert display of divine power, when you've actually got a different and more fundamental reason why you didn't like that game.

That particular game was awesome. The thing I am experiencing now is probably different from the thing back then.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;728128Get over it, it's just pretend.

Word. Working on it.

Quote from: Benoist;728108Sounds to me like there's a part of your feelings coming from being irked about the "chosen one" trope, or the idea that some entirely DM-controlled force outside the campaign would basically orchestrate things without your character having any impact on these elements, than the actual idea of religion. Hence, Cthulhu's cool, because he's a big alien, and at least if you take a ship to its flank, or a nuclear weapon for that matter, it MIGHT work, temporarily at least.

Would that be correct, BarefootGaijin?

It is possibly the lack of control as to why the character is where he is. Also the assumption that "there are gods therefore all the characters believe in them". This is something quite new. In all my years I have never really given it any thought. Now its a case of "you are believers, deal with it".

Just as you are now vampires, wizards, barbarians, monks, undead, slaves, victims, persecutors, murderhobos, whatever. Some shoes fit better than others.

Quote from: estar;728107Just think of fantasy deities as ultra powerful "aliens"/beings with their own agenda and treat accordingly.

Basically you are Captain Kirk and there are computer gods all around you. Some benign, some indifferent, and some malevolent.

What do you do? ;)

I like this (and to answer your question: kill it and take its stuff!).

I do myth, legend, sci-fi, mystery etc. This is why this campaign seems so strange to me. Or rather, my feelings toward it seem strange.

Anyway, I have emailed the GM about the character with a few ideas and how I can get on board without worrying about all this too much. Not that it is causing sleepless nights, but it'd be interesting to see what other directions this can go.

TL;DR - probably the lack of player agency deciding stuff.

Quote from: dragoner;728404Supernatural being beyond the natural world, which people in the past did recognize a division, and did use terms such as unnatural for it.

On Easter Island, the Polynesian religion did seek to gain "mana" from the Gods.

Well, since I have seen sources that say no such thing--rather that in Polynesian beliefs mana was a kind of power you got from your actions in life or from places, I'd like to know where you get your counterclaim. I'm not holding Wikipedia out as the final authority but it's where I'm starting and I'd appreciate a pointer to something better.

Similarly, qi in the Chinese cultural portrayals that I've seen bears no relationship to gods, certainly not personal gods. I haven't done any formal study of that aspect of Chinese culture though, so I wouldn't be surprised if I were mistaken. But I'd appreciate if anyone who knows better would tell me where I can find an authoritative source.

EDIT: The idea of qi reminds me that we have an example of a strictly fictional but well-accepted setting that has magical powers but no apparent gods: Star Wars. (Well, iirc the Ewoks thought C3PO was a god but the story itself seems to portray this as a primitive belief without any "real" support.)

Quote from: Arminius;728412Well, since I have seen sources that say no such thing--rather that in Polynesian beliefs mana was a kind of power you got from your actions in life or from places ...

No, even wiki says: In Polynesian culture, mana is a spiritual quality considered to have supernatural origin ...

Context is important to how people were thinking, the modern mechanistic worldview is largely a product of the west; eg like "magic points".

Losing the old reference and context, loses the flavor.

You do realize, if there was no God, The Blues Brothers never would have happened.

JG

A) 'Gods' are just a subset of 'supernatural.'

B) Siberian shamans (for instance) are normally not, I think, contractually obligated to use English words or English conceptual boxes. If a man has power over spirits, why say he gets his power from them? And if a man has power over them, wherefore call them gods?

There are some rather interesting examples in anthropology about cultures that have (as far as we know) lost their religion. We know of at least some groups in the Amazonas that have rituals without a religious context, and the best guess the anthropologists have is that they used to have religion but for some reason the knowledge of the ritual's context disappeared.

Which reflects pretty well on how secularization goes. People in Nothern Europe are among the most irreligious of the world, still people do celebrate Christian holidays without giving the religious side of things a single thought.

I'd argue that gods are necessarily not a subset of the supernatural, but a completely different thing. Folklore at least shows that the issue of God was dealt with differently than the existence of the supernatural trolls, huldras, aufhockers, mylings and whatever.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;728143I'm an athiest, yet I like spending time thinking about and roleplaying religion and religious characters, largely because it is so removed from my own experience. I can understand why it might not appeal to others.

That's pretty much my experience as well. Same thing with magic and the occult. As much as I don't believe in that stuff, I find it all very, very interesting. Roleplaying games allow me to explore those themes without joining a new age crystal worshipping coven or whatever.

I like how the Dragon Age setting handles gods.

You never see one, or have any actual proof they exist.

Most of the humans worship 'The Maker'; similar to the christian god.

Elves have a pantheon of deities somewhat like greek or norse.

People in the setting think Dragons are corrupted elder gods.

But there is not one shred of proof that any of these gods are real.

Quote from: BarefootGaijin;728409I like this (and to answer your question: kill it and take its stuff!).

Excellent answer, it will probably be very difficult with a high probability of character death. Either way it will be hell of an adventure.

Chiming in late, but just wanted to make the point that, as a pretty hardcore believer in monotheism (my actual faith is irrelevant here), I've never had one issue playing in games with rampant polytheism, atheism, whatever. I don't really understand the OP's gripe...it's just a game, right? Religion exists in the real world, and in fact, is one of the most prevalent, pervasive things we encounter everywhere on the planet. If you create a world where religion doesn't exist at all, the verisimilitude seems a bit lacking. My personal belief in something doesn't extend to suspending disbelief to enjoy a game, or a work of fiction, or whatever.

Quote from: Brad;728499Chiming in late, but just wanted to make the point that, as a pretty hardcore believer in monotheism (my actual faith is irrelevant here), I've never had one issue playing in games with rampant polytheism, atheism, whatever. .

When i was a kid, i have to admit, gaming in settings that had multiple gods and not the God i worshipped, was quite difficult for me. It didn't make me mad, or offend me, i just had trouble understanding a world with no God. But that softened pretty quickly and i was able to see the distinction between what I believed personally and the fictional cosmology of the setting.

Quote from: BarefootGaijin;728089The thing is, I have no faith. I don't even play pretend when my wife runs off to the temple at new year, or whenever she feels it necessary. I don't DO organised religion. I have no faith or belief in higher powers, and I just cannot disconnect the little extra bit for it to all sit comfortably. I am about as spiritual as a used nappy (diaper for American readers).

Do you believe that magic exists?

How about dragons, giants, giant spiders, orcs, elves, dwarves, minotaurs and so on? What about aliens, jump drives or psionics?

If you are happy to accept them then why not accept that deities of some kind can have their place in games?

Quote from: BarefootGaijin;728089So yeah. No gods please. I don't want to play games with gods in (maybe Lords of Olympus is different? ;) ). The same way I don't want to play games with vampires or werewolves, but for different reasons.

Fair enough. You should make that point clear when you start playing in a game. If the GM says that deities or religions play a part in the game then you have a choice to make - to play or not to play. But it is then your choice.

I am as anti-religion as they come and I love playing pious, evangelical clerics of all flavors.

As a GM though, I prefer my gods to be more Greek. I like them more as demi-gods who actually live somewhere on the game world and who can be slain.

Quote from: Simlasa;728392I'm another who doesn't see 'magic' as requiring 'gods'.

RuneQuest/Legend has the concept of Divine Magic that originates from deities, Common/Folk Magic which are cantrips or low-level magic and Sorcery which is the manipulation of magic to make powerful spells. If people don't like Divine Magic then don't use it and don't have cults. The other magic will still be available.

Honestly, I think that the exploration of different and clashing mythologies in the game world is one of the most interesting things about roleplaying. Different theories as to where magic comes from, different cosmologies. I play RuneQuest too, and as someone mentioned upthread, its different magic systems not only provide different flavours of magic, but also completely different worldviews, and each of them has ways of explaining how the others work (usually in a pejorative fashion). I think this might be somewhat missing in D&D, in its default mode. Correct me if I'm wrong, but there's rarely any material in the Cleric character class telling you how you might view a wizard's version of magic ...

Without going full-Glorantha on it, the campaign I'm working on at the moment is a lot about the interactions of different types of magic and gods, but I think the key is that Divine (and other types of) magic is going to be vanishingly rare, particularly in one authoritarian religion which is vigorously anti-magic, and sets up an inquisition and witch hunts. The folk religion in the region where this is now being imposed from the top down includes many superstitions, but those who could invoke the power of the gods, the Chosen, are now mostly a thing of children's stories.

The way I handle magic is to have Divine spellcasters of the heavenly, inquisitorial religion mostly given access to 'invisible' magic. They can pray for Sathar the Lightbringer to bless their blade, or invoke Hallor the Judge of the Dead to protect them from evil spirits, and these have in-game effects, but no visible "flash-bang". The tiny few of this religion who can achieve effects like healing by laying on hands are hailed as miracle-workers, and begin to be the centre of a cult like medieval saints.

In the more earthy, Old Religion of the natives, druids deal with nature spirits and elementals, but the order of druids has been broken and scattered, and the Chosen of the Gods, who are once more on the rise, can invoke blessings and curses which have visible magical effects, but as far as the inquisitors are concerned, ALL magic (unlike the miracles of saints) which is performed by religions other than theirs, which worship 'demons and demigods', is sorcery and witchcraft.

So the whole idea of who your gods are, how they provide magic, if they do, if magic is moral or blasphemous, whether there's a line between a demon, a spirit, and a god, depending on where you're standing .... it all becomes a central part of the campaign. I think it would be lots less fun without it ...

Quote from: soltakss;728664If you are happy to accept them then why not accept that deities of some kind can have their place in games?

(shrugs)  Because that's his break point.  You don't share it.  I don't share it.  But I'm certain that there's at least one element of RPGs that I can't stand with which I bet every other poster on this thread has no problem, and that there's at least one element of RPGs I love that you all hate to death.

After all, your laundry list could be altered to fit genres, rather than facets of fantasy.  You like X, Y and Z, don't you?  Then why don't you like SF, or horror, or Wild West gaming, say?

Quote from: Spinachcat;728666I am as anti-religion as they come and I love playing pious, evangelical clerics of all flavors.

As a GM though, I prefer my gods to be more Greek. I like them more as demi-gods who actually live somewhere on the game world and who can be slain.

"If it bleeds, we can kill it."

Interesting approach.

Personally Im fine with pantheons in a RPG. Im even ok with more than one in an RPG. Within limits.

But in one of my published RPG there was a pantheon, but no organized religion. It was all down to the individual. Any temples built were under the aegis of the individual adherent, usually dedicated to a particular concept. But it didnt grant any power and there were no empowered priestly organizations.

I look at pantheons and organized clergy in games the same as other aspects of gaming. If someone doesnt want it in their campaign then dont use it. Dont like assassins in AD&D? gone. Want a "no wizards" campaign? Ta-ta mages. etc.

Quote from: BarefootGaijin;728089So yeah. No gods please. I don't want to play games with gods in (maybe Lords of Olympus is different? ;) ).

Well, in LoO you play gods, or the not-yet-god children of gods.  But of course, they're "classical" gods, which means that if you squint a bit you can understand them as hyper-dimensional space aliens of incredible power, rather than "father creator" types.  
In LoO, the closest thing to fit the more modern understanding of "gods" would be the Primordials, which are mostly not very anthropomorphic, certainly not very human in behavior, and are sometimes scary as fuck in a vaguely Cthulhu-esque "the universe is unfathomable and doesn't give a fuck" kind of way.

RPGPundit

First off, I'll state that I too am atheist. But I agree that in medieval and fantasy games religion and the gods should have some level of prominence, it would be weird if they didn't.

One of my best characters became "accidentally" religious. It was something I hadn't planned on but it added a whole interesting layer to the character and became part of his main focus. The set-up is this: in a Hero Fantasy campaign his main role was as a martial artist/swordsman. Secondarily I had tossed some points into nautical skills and made his "primary" career a merchant sea captain. He owned a ship, had a good crew and sailed between several cities.

For whatever reason (meaning, I forget) the main city the party was based in had a temple to a minor sea deity which had burned down long ago. After a particularly successful adventure the PCs were flush with cash. I spent some of mine on a new, larger ship but decided it was a good time to appease the gods. So I found the last few followers of this sea deity who owned the remains of the temple and offered to help them out.

Architects were hired to survey the land and design a new building. The land was cleared and construction was started. All funded by my largess. Seemed like a good way to invest all that gold that tends to pile up. The GM and I had a few discussions about look of the new temple, city interest in the new construction, etc. He was quite impressed with my idea and turn of character direction.

Religion isn't all bad.

Quote from: Arminius;728370To moderns, yes.

If your god didn't do what you requested, it wasn't because he didn't exist, it was because another god was more powerful, or because you didn't do enough to please the god, or because your god was being a jerk. In that case you could,yell at him, but you didn't stop believing he exists. In the Middle Ages, although the omnipotence/omniscience/benevolence of God was a given (so you couldn't yell at Jehovah), people did make ritual complaints against saints (like taking away some decorations of their shrines) if they didn't come up with the goods.

When the prophets or Jesus or saints performed miracles, they weren't kindling people's faith in the existence of God, rather it was in the power vis a vis other gods and and spirits.

There have also been some interesting archeological finds recently that show worshippers also punished Gods when they were dissatisfied using a process called God Binding. A process where they wrap ropes around the deity's statue as a form of punishment or to curtail its negative powers.

To the OP it sounds like the whole Noah incident is more naff than anything else, maybe that's what's annoying as much as anything else.

Quote from: Weru;729400There have also been some interesting archeological finds recently that show worshippers also punished Gods when they were dissatisfied using a process called God Binding. A process where they wrap ropes around the deity's statue as a form of punishment or to curtail its negative powers.

To the OP it sounds like the whole Noah incident is more naff than anything else, maybe that's what's annoying as much as anything else.

Both Xerxes' famous whipping of the sea, and, more so, Caligula's war against the Sea, has elements of this. Especially the latter, since taking the shells was interpreted as stealing Neptune's bounty.

Quote from: Rincewind1;729404Both Xerxes' famous whipping of the sea, and, more so, Caligula's war against the Sea, has elements of this. Especially the latter, since taking the shells was interpreted as stealing Neptune's bounty.

Celebrity God Binding! On a more serious note I'm guessing those two were doing that sort of shit as way to prove equivalence with the gods (or superiority in Caligula's case). I think they were both known to have 'issues' The evidence for God Binding seems to be more low key villages that have bad crops trying to stop a certain god messing with them.

However, going back to Xerxes and Caligula, and we can add Alexander, they lived in an age where people believed in Deification for heroes and leaders (pretty much standard procedure for Roman emperors). That could be interesting fodder for RPG religions. Which I gues the I part of the BECMI had covered. It's one of the interesting D&Disms in the Malazan books too; the idea of ascendant heroes that become living minor deities or full blown gods.

Where can I find out more about god binding?

Let us not forget evocatio (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evocatio#evocatio), which consisted of kidnapping a foreign god and/or bribing him/her/it with a temple in Rome.

This is some serious Runequest (specifically, God Learner) shit right there.

Quote from: Arminius;729478Where can I find out more about god binding?

What I read was a short (1/4 page) article in either the BBC history, or BBC Archaeology magazine. I'll check see if we still have that issue and if there is any further reading/info.

Quote from: The Butcher;729535Let us not forget evocatio (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evocatio#evocatio), which consisted of kidnapping a foreign god and/or bribing him/her/it with a temple in Rome.

This is some serious Runequest (specifically, God Learner) shit right there.

Ohh, that's a good 'un. I think, in a similar way, the Mycenaean-era Greeks used to have Zeus marry various local goddesses as a way of absorbing their cults.

Quote from: Arminius;729478Where can I find out more about god binding?

What I read was a short (1/4 page) article in either the BBC history, or BBC Archaeology magazine. I'll check see if we still have that issue and if there is any further reading/info.

Quote from: Weru;729540Ohh, that's a good 'un. I think, in a similar way, the Mycenaean-era Greeks used to have Zeus marry various local goddesses as a way of absorbing their cults.

Well, that would certainly explain Zeus.

JG

Just wait a couple hundred years, and we'll demote the patron goddess of your island to a duck!

Quote from: Imp;729703Just wait a couple hundred years, and we'll demote the patron goddess of your island to a duck!

and then Zeus will rape her.

Quote from: CRKrueger;729705and then Zeus will rape her.

and then shall spring forth the Demi-Duck.

Quote from: estar;728107Basically you are Captain Kirk and there are computer gods all around you. Some benign, some indifferent, and some malevolent.

What do you do? ;)

See how many he can make out with of course.

Come on! You know Kirk wanted to boink V'ger! :cool:

Quote from: Omega;729723Come on! You know Kirk wanted to boink V'ger! :cool:

I'm confused. Was this ever a point of contention?

Quote from: LordVreeg;729716and then shall spring forth the Demi-Duck.

or Howard the Duck.

Quote from: dragoner;728404Supernatural being beyond the natural world, which people in the past did recognize a division, and did use terms such as unnatural for it.

On Easter Island, the Polynesian religion did seek to gain "mana" from the Gods.

Do you have some kind of credible reference for that?  We know almost nothing about the actual pre-colonial practices and beliefs of the Easter Islanders.

If OP doesn't like religion in gaming then he doesn't like it, there's nothing to do about it. Perhaps he could try some alternative fantasy games or just play different genres.

Quote from: The Butcher;729535Let us not forget evocatio (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evocatio#evocatio), which consisted of kidnapping a foreign god and/or bribing him/her/it with a temple in Rome.

This is some serious Runequest (specifically, God Learner) shit right there.

This used to happen amongst many ancient cultures. I think the Hittites and Babylonians both took idols from their enemies and set up shrines in their own major cities, the rationale being that they could then control the deities, or absorb them into their own pantheons. What it actually meant was a deal of cross-pantheonic transfer, changing both pantheons.

Something similar happened in Christianity, where some pagan deities were made Saints. St Brigid is one example, but there are more.

It's the old "You have a Storm God, we have a Storm God, your god fathered the goddess of wheat on the Earth Goddess, ours gathered the goddess of barley on the Earth Goddess, so they must be the same god" thing. Some said that each god shared an Aspect, but that's a slightly lesser joining.

Quote from: RPGPundit;729976Do you have some kind of credible reference for that?  We know almost nothing about the actual pre-colonial practices and beliefs of the Easter Islanders.

I thought that we didn't have any evidence of the pre-Polynesian religions and people, but do have evidence of the Polynesians who followed.

Quote from: soltakss;730023I thought that we didn't have any evidence of the pre-Polynesian religions and people, but do have evidence of the Polynesians who followed.

There were no "pre-polynesian" people on Easter Island; or at least there's no evidence or history indicating that at all. As far as we know, the very first humans on Easter Island were the "Rapa Nui" polynesians.  And we know very, very little about their original religion; almost everything about their religion is speculation, some of it fairly sound (the giant heads were almost certainly for 'ancestor worship' of some kind or another), and some of it not very sound at all (recent scholarship has indicated that the whole 'ecodestruction' theory of how the island's environment and the rapa nui society collapsed was in fact almost completely wrong).

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;729976Do you have some kind of credible reference for that?  We know almost nothing about the actual pre-colonial practices and beliefs of the Easter Islanders.

I read it years ago in a text at university maybe? Been a while since my degree though.

I'd suggest only that if you're not roleplaying religious faith, or not featuring it in your world, you're not roleplaying humans.

Nothing wrong with that, and I'm often uncomfortable with a class of NPCs by definition orders of magnitude beyond my characters' power...but an awful lot of people do have faith, or at least profess it.  Most game worlds should make room for it, or for an alternative that scratches the same itch so common in humanity.  Or tear it down, and make that a focus of an awesome campaign.

Or just ignore it completely, if that's what the group is most comfortable with.

Quote from: dragoner;730487I read it years ago in a text at university maybe? Been a while since my degree though.

:banghead:

Yep, the classic "I'm presenting as a fact Something I Read Somewhere Once Back In College" trope.  If it's not on tvtropes.com, it probably should be.

Oh well. It actually dovetailed though, funnily enough.

Quote from: RPGPundit;730474There were no "pre-polynesian" people on Easter Island; or at least there's no evidence or history indicating that at all. As far as we know, the very first humans on Easter Island were the "Rapa Nui" polynesians.  And we know very, very little about their original religion; almost everything about their religion is speculation, some of it fairly sound (the giant heads were almost certainly for 'ancestor worship' of some kind or another), and some of it not very sound at all (recent scholarship has indicated that the whole 'ecodestruction' theory of how the island's environment and the rapa nui society collapsed was in fact almost completely wrong).

I thought I'd read that Easter Island was settled by one population, then resettled by another not long before westerners arrived. I stand corrected.

You could always play BECMI D&D. :)

  "The D&D game does not deal with the ethical or theological beliefs of the characters in the game"--both Mentzer Basic and the Rules Cyclopedia, in the description of the cleric class.

  Admittedly, I'm coming at the issue from a personal position almost completely opposite of the OP--deeply Catholic--but I understand the desire to bracket off this stuff or not deal with it in gaming. The AD&D/3E/4E cleric makes that difficult to do; the premises of the class pretty much require interventionist, often polytheistic religion. The Basic approach to a cleric--dedicated to a cause or philosophy--allows the class to model any number of different things, such as priests, vampire hunters, sohei, warrior-poets, Jedi Knights, or even fairy-tale princes or princesses or magical girls who are empowered by purity of heart. ;)

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;731369You could always play BECMI D&D. :)

  "The D&D game does not deal with the ethical or theological beliefs of the characters in the game"--both Mentzer Basic and the Rules Cyclopedia, in the description of the cleric class.

  Admittedly, I'm coming at the issue from a personal position almost completely opposite of the OP--deeply Catholic--but I understand the desire to bracket off this stuff or not deal with it in gaming. The AD&D/3E/4E cleric makes that difficult to do; the premises of the class pretty much require interventionist, often polytheistic religion. The Basic approach to a cleric--dedicated to a cause or philosophy--allows the class to model any number of different things, such as priests, vampire hunters, sohei, warrior-poets, Jedi Knights, or even fairy-tale princes or princesses or magical girls who are empowered by purity of heart. ;)

Yeah, it's one of BECMI's (several) strong points.

Allthough in 2e, at least in its Priest's Handbook, there's also stuff for priests serving philosophies (like "Good" and "Evil") or unpersonal Forces ("Elemental Forces", "Life-Death-Rebirth Cycle") or monotheist faiths ("God of Everything").