|
12 months ago ::
Jun 17, 2012 - 8:30AM
#81
|
|
|
America is statistically, the most religious country on the planet.
More than, say, Iran or the other Islamic states?
Yes. America is more religious than Iran.
America believes in freedom of religion. That seems to be part of why spirituality flourishes in America.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jun 17, 2012 - 12:31PM
#82
|
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2002
|
Lots of valid points and lots of incredibly insulting anti-religious sentiment, but I do appreciate the people willing to actually tackle the idea of a different name for what causes some visceral discomfort. Thank you to those people.
Ceremony, Synthesis magic, performance (in the case of Bards), Extended casting, thaumaturgy, solemnity (also another word for dignity, interestingly), and...did I miss any?
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jun 17, 2012 - 12:38PM
#83
|
|
|
None of the proposed words fit even remotely as good as Ritual. It is what it is. Don't call a block a ball.
If you have questions about 4th Edition - don't hesitate to ask me via PMs. Join the Community Monster Manual Group and help to collect a mass of monsters which will make your life as DM easier, and your life as Player pure hell!  I am a cartographer. You can find some of my maps in my profile, free for non-commercial use. Also, if you happen to like maps or make them yourselves, join into the Cartographers Group!
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jun 17, 2012 - 1:16PM
#84
|
|
|
Relatedly,
A single action is called an “action”.
An extended action that requires 15 minutes, can be called an “activity”.
Many things would require “activities”:
• Ceremony/ritual
• Preparing spell
• Searching a room
• Possibly picking a lock
And so on.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jun 17, 2012 - 2:05PM
#85
|
Date Joined:
Dec 12, 2011
|
It is financially stupid to make Anti-Christian religion the center piece of the Dungeons & Dragons game.
No one's being Anti-Christian... If anything, we're against giving in to prejudice of ignorant ultraconservative religious fundamentalism--regardless of what religion they are part of. Fortunately, not all (or even most) Christians (or members of other religions) fall into the above category.
Right. By forcing characters to worship polythestic gods. And consort with Tieflings. Just saying. The center of the game is the Cleric. The center of the Cleric is polythestic gods.
D&D does not, nor has ever "forced" characters to worship polytheistic gods. The setting that the DM and players choose to use typically decides the availble religions within the campaign, and that, again, is the purview of the DM and players. If you decide to aventure in a game with only one god, 15 billion gors, or even no gods at all, the game supports that.
The inclusion of tieflings is also a campaign choice and not "forced" upon anyone. Their inclusion is entirely optional (like most things in D&D). You don't have to have elves or humans, either. D&D is a toolbox.
I would rather D&D just let players decide what their story setting will be, and for the core to be as neutral as possible.
This is already done. Even with "Greyhawk as default" in 3e, the Greyhawk elements only served as samples and examples and were in no way required (it'd make it difficult to run other settings otherwise).
It is fine to have Forgotten Realms and Planescape, and even overtly demonic and devilish settings (like Vile Darkness, Lolth, Asmodeus, etc.), as long as they are options and not the default.
"Default" does NOT mean that it is not optional. Any setting or setting-related material is inherently optional.
Im not talking about fundamentalists. Im talking about normal people who get turned off, because they arent interested in playing a game that worships gods or obsesses over demons.
I have yet to see a "normal" person get turned off by an entirely fictional setting that makes no claim at reality and is ultimately entirely optional. Heck, D&D has been run by pastors for youth groups before.
Harry Potter is successful because it DOESNT do that kind of thing.
And yet there was (and is) still a tonne of bruhaha over the HP franchise. No matter what you do, there will be people who get offended.
Playtest or get off the playtest boards.
---
I want justice for the voice that can't be heard
Vindication for every suffering and hurt
Let retribution hold dominion over earth
--Nemesis, VNV Nation
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jun 17, 2012 - 3:22PM
#86
|
|
|
I want D&D to go mainstream.
Even tho it is a “bookish” game, and inherently attracts educated people (and wealthy enough to afford books and accessories), it still has much to offer everyone.
The renewed possibility of a narrative style (mapless theater of the mind) means that poor people can play, across the world, anyone with a love of storytelling or a strong imagination.
Moreover, playing D&D in a virtual reality environment is inevitable. Basically this an impressive table-top game that can toggle between 1st-person and birdseye perspective, that makes worldbuilding easy. This will make the game accessable to most people who have computers.
Philosophically, the benefit of the game is, it teaches people how to create their own worlds. This helps people in reallife to imagine better ways of doing things, and even helps people make the world a better place.
I want people to see the appeal of the game, without niche nonsense distracting them.
I agree, default means optional. Worldbuilders can and should think of default as raw materials to sculpt and tweak. That said, the default needs to make the freedom of choice as clear as possible. Its rules need to apply to as many different kinds of settings as possible.
The D&D game assumes homebrew worlds, which are unpredictable settings. Even official settings differ wildly, Eberron, Forgotten Realms, Darksun, even Gamma World and Modern, and so on. Plus Indy settings like Amethyst and Ultramodern. The rules for the classes (especially for the Cleric class) need to be as setting neutral as possible. So they make sense in any setting that the players choose.
Generally, low-level Adventures (levels 0-4) dont need explicit settings. The adventures themselves will supply the essential local information. Its easy to plug an adventure into almost any setting.
D&D Next should lack an official setting. Instead it should make a choice of settings available from day one. Probably start with both the Eberron Setting Guide and the Forgotten Realms Setting Guide, and then make other settings available after that.
The variety of settings relates somewhat to how D&D Next should publish its gaming purchases.
The only purchases a new player needs:
• The D&D Rulebook (combining both DMs Guide and Players Handbook, plus dice and tokens for gridless map style).
• One of a variety of Adventures (whose appendix reprints listed monsters and treasures)
These are an inexpensive way to enter the Worlds of D&D. Theres no ambiguity about which items to buy.
For more advanced players (whether DM or heroes) more options:
• Modular Styles (tactical style, narrative mind style, etc.) - each style includes a set of Adventures
• Setting Guides (Eberron, Forgotten Realms, Planescape, Dark Sun, Ravenloft, etc.)
• Hero Cultures (classes, themes, races, backgrounds)
• Bestiaries (monster manuals)
• Treasure Catalogues (adventurers vaults, emporiums)
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jun 17, 2012 - 3:28PM
#87
|
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2002
|
I have yet to see a "normal" person get turned off by an entirely fictional setting that makes no claim at reality and is ultimately entirely optional. Heck, D&D has been run by pastors for youth groups before.
.
Correction,. You refuse to acknowledge it and you call people who do feel that way "not normal". Coming from gamers, I find that quiote ironic.
Arguing in poor fiath here.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jun 17, 2012 - 7:06PM
#88
|
Date Joined:
Jan 28, 2007
|
a rite is an established form of religious or otherwise solemn practice;
-Webster's Dictionary
Show
.
1 a: a prescribed form or manner governing the words or actions for a ceremony b: the ceremonial practices of a church or group of churches 2 : a ceremonial act or action rites> 3 : a division of the Christian church using a distinctive liturgy
Definition one works just fine. a ritual is a prescribed form for carrying out the ceremonies associated with such a practice.
Webster's Dictionary
Show
1 : the established form for a ceremony; specifically: the order of words prescribed for a religious ceremony 2 a: ritual observance; specifically: a system of rites b: a ceremonial act or action c: an act or series of acts regularly repeated in a set precise manner
Both one and two work. Though the definitions are linked to religion, they cover more than religion.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jun 23, 2012 - 9:08AM
#89
|
Date Joined:
Jul 31, 2007
|
It is financially stupid to make Anti-Christian religion the center piece of the Dungeons & Dragons game.
No one's being Anti-Christian... If anything, we're against giving in to prejudice of ignorant ultraconservative religious fundamentalism--regardless of what religion they are part of. Fortunately, not all (or even most) Christians (or members of other religions) fall into the above category.
Right. By forcing characters to worship polythestic gods. And consort with Tieflings. Just saying. The center of the game is the Cleric. The center of the Cleric is polythestic gods.
I would rather D&D just let players decide what their story setting will be, and for the core to be as neutral as possible.
It is fine to have Forgotten Realms and Planescape, and even overtly demonic and devilish settings (like Vile Darkness, Lolth, Asmodeus, etc.), as long as they are options and not the default.
Im not talking about fundamentalists. Im talking about normal people who get turned off, because they arent interested in playing a game that worships gods or obsesses over demons.
Harry Potter is successful because it DOESNT do that kind of thing.
They don't push characters to worship any gods at all... only the cleric is required to. I have run games in monotheistic worlds before, and that didn't change anything.
That said, a lot of fundamentalist conservative christians WERE offended by Harry Potter. It will alway happen regardless because according to many fundamentalists ANYTHING that pulls your attention away from 'Him' is the work of the devil.
I refuse to turn this in to a religious debate. I've done the research, but I will never deny who I am because it may bother Christians. I am stronger for being exactly who I am, just as D&D is stronger for being what it is. Start asking, polling even, most people that you see as you wander through a city. Geek is getting more popular and a MUCH higher percentage than many people realize have at least played it a couple times. Granted, many say, 'It's just not my style', or something similar, but face it, the times are already changing. Modern movie adaptations are more and more fantasy every year now, with superheros and fantasy worlds taking over the market box-offices because people are tired of living in the safety bubble of blindness.
The Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, and even Percy Jackson are all hugely successful franchises now, and this trend is drawing more attention. We don't have to submit to the whims of the Westborough Baptist Church and its ilk in order to play a game. If we start down that road AGAIN as we did with second edition. The Westborough Baptist Church and those like it won't hate D&D ANY less due to the change of ANYTHING in the system, as those that hate it will hate it because of the percieved connotations of the term D&D and the fact that they believe the idiocy and brainwashing that we are secretly worshipping their devil.
The average person that doesn't want to play isn't going to play not because it is religiously charged, but because a fantasy role-playing game just isn't their forte. I am always talking to people about both religion and my hobbies, and I've found that the two aren't directly connected except in extreme cases where the first words out of the person's mouth in either case is that I'm going to burn in hell.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jun 23, 2012 - 9:47AM
#90
|
Date Joined:
Apr 10, 2009
|
For the OP: My imprssion is that anyone who would be concerned about the use of 'ritual' to describe an activity in a game would also be upset (perhaps even more upset) by the very thought to using magic, period.
Ritual is most commonly associated with religion in some views, not because of its actual meaning, but because - for many socieities and people - all magic is seen as divine. For many - magical powers comes from the divine and if it comes from your god(s) it is good magic and if it comes from someone else's god(s) it is evil or black magic. But the narrow view of ritual that results from this world view does not apply in a game (or, frankly in other real world applications) where magic is not necessarily flowing from the divine.
Thus, as ritual IS the best and most accurate word, because few to no players or potential players of the game are likely to be bothered by its use, and because any alternative would likely carry equally 'negative' connotations - the argument that it should be changed is wholly without merit.
As I see it.
Carl
|
|
|
