Religion in Gaming

I hope that everyone had a Merry Christmas. (If you don't celebrate Christmas, I hope that the last few days have been enjoyable for you.)

I'm back after some good time with the family.

Last time I talked about a little about religion in gaming and how it relates to players. Let's talk about creating religions in your game.

There is the obvious answer - use real life religions. That works for modern and near-modern games but can run afoul of your player if you get the details wrong. But what if you want a non-real life religion for the setting?

Well, there are (at least) two ways to do this. You can mix-and-match or you can create a religion from the cloth. Let's examine the first method.

1. Select a theme.
2. As a base, choose an existing or ancient religion with aspects that are similar to the chosen theme. You should know something about the religion in question. Do research if necessary.
3. Select a few practices or doctrines from other religions that help flesh out the theme.
4. Add window dressing to taste.

Example:
Let's say you are playing a fantasy game and need a nature based religion with memorable elements. I want nature worship with animistic elements. Ritual will also play a role. I'll select Wicca as the base. While not all Wiccans agree, most agree revere a Goddess. We'll have our fantasy religion based on worship of Gaia, the great Mother. The rituals of Wicca; natural settings, circles, etc. work well for this. I will add in some elements of Shinto to recognise the spirits of the Mountains, Lakes, Forests etc. that are separate from Gaia. Minimum need to add window dressing. Viola! A nature based religion with animism.

The second method is to create the whole thing from scratch. This is harder but can allow for more tailoring.

1. Select a theme.
2. Monotheistic or Polytheistic?
3. Angels or other type of divine servants?
4. Avatars?
5. Prophets?
6. Determine symbols.
7. Add window dressing.

Example:
For the antagonists in a horror game, we can have a cult that celebrates death. They believe that they will be rewarded in the afterlife if they "purge" the world. The cult is essentially monotheistic with as at yet unnamed god. There are no divine servants nor avatars. When [the god] comes to Earth he/she/it will come in full power. There was a prophet (in the Old Testament sense) who first taught the message of death. He killed himself in a ritual some 134 years ago. (Yes, I pulled that number from nowhere.) They use a sickle as their symbol as they are preparing the world for the harvesting of death. Window dressing would include a name for [the god] and for [the prophet].

Granted this can end up being the flavor of the week if you are not careful but all games can fall into that pattern.

Well have fun with that and let me know what you think.

-----

Spycraft 2.0 Update:
The crew managed to kill 2/3 of the party yesterday in a poorly planned explosion. In the player's defense, there was a failure to communicate on my part.

We rebooted tonight and they tied up loose ends quite nicely.

The team was sent to Haiti to find the mastermind - Baron Samedi's base. They found an outpost guarded by mercs, attack dogs, crazed cultists and new and improved zombies. They slice through the mercs and dogs and had to fight of the cultists. (Half fled, the other half died under PC fire.) The zombies fell to extremely heavy fire. Finally, they called in the preplanned air strike to destroy the base. While waiting for the boom to fall, they were pinned down by an assassin in the employ of the good Baron. Despite his capture, he managed to escape (one part GM fiat, one part story dictate and two parts, action dice.)

Well played by all.

Hello there good reader,

My last post talked about religion in gaming. Perhaps it should have read - random thoughts and rambling on how religion and gaming interact.

This time I would like to discuss the religious makeup in the gaming world.

There are three basic approaches in gaming: 1) pretend that religion doesn't exist, 2) create a random religion for the purposes of the game and 3) not deal with it.

Granted, numbers 1 and 3 seem like the same thing but they are not. Number 1 assumes that religion is not important or doesn't have any game effects. This is the approach often used by science fiction games. Number 3 is perhaps the easiest as it requires nothing more than a willingness on the part of those at the table to not bring it up. Characters are assumed to have religious portions to their lives but don't often act on them. This is often used in a modern style game.

The classic example of Number 2 is the DnD pantheon for the various settings.

Next time, info on how to create a religious setting in your game.

- ludomastro

Religion in Gaming

Nothing causes more consternation in the gaming world that the inclusion of religion. Back in the 80s and 90s parent's groups and various members of the religious right were bemoaning the evils of gaming. It was corrupting morally and/or spiritually depending on who you asked. My own father was not particularly religious; however, he had decided that RPG were detrimental. I did what every pre-teen or teen has always done - I played anyway.

Now, I am the proud father of four and would happily let my kids play - under my supervision of course.

I digress. Religion about games is not the topic at had but rather religion in games. Anyone who has played a Paladin in DnD knows what I am talking about. The core beliefs of the Paladin are either scripted or imaginary. Often it falls to DM fiat - which never seems to end well.

What I have observed is that it is easier for an atheist to play a devout follower of FSM than for a believe to play a devout anything. Mostly it seems to be the Abrahamic prohibition on worshiping more than one god or worshiping a false god. I find it funny frankly. I am a Christian who believes in God and in the divinity of Christ. Neverthelss, I can just as easily play a character who is Muslim as I can one who follows Torm (a diety in the DnD universe.)

I would like to explore this a bit more; unfortunately, I have to get up early tomorrow.

Until later,
- ludomastro

Following up on how the game feels

Ok, meeting with suits is done, now back to my discussion:

The "feel" of the game due to the rules can be tweaked to some degree. Let's say I want to run a wild west themed game where mages are the gunslingers and call each other out.

Picture this: The town runs for cover while two robed men step into the center of the street. They begin to unload spells on each other and continue to do so until one of them begins to bleed from the nose and his concentration slips.

That just doesn't sound right.

Try this: The town runs for cover while two robed men step into the center of the street. They begin to unload spells on each other and continue to do so until both are out of "ammunition". It appears that the undertaker won't have to start a new coffin after all today. That fits more with the gunslinger mythos.

The first is a fatigue based casting system. The second is a Vancian (DnD) style system.

Now, imagine a game where the training of the individual is more important than inherent ability. Would you use a system where ability scores are the greatest portion of the roll? Or, one where the skills rule the day?

-----

I think that I finally understand the concept behind GURPS (Generic Universal Role Playing System) - the ability to pick and choose those elements which fit your understanding for each element.

The downside of this would be the loss of a seemingly coherent rule-set.

Well, have a great time gaming.

- ludomastro

The effect of rules on how the game "feels"

Every now and again people will get into a tussle over which set of rules is the best - whatever that means. Perhaps it would be better to say that a particular rule set is better for X. Perhaps an example is in order?

The DnD folks use what has been termed Vancian casting for the magic system. The wizard (or whatever) uses the spell and it is simply gone. Tick it off the sheet and move on. It lends itself to wizards blasting off the best they have in quick succession and then being able to do nothing. It "feels" like the wizard is a gun with a certain number of bullets. Once used, the gun must be reloaded.

The True 20 folks use a fatigue based casting system. The wizard can unload spells continuously provided he can stay consious. Consequently, the experienced mages can do simple things all day long without getting tired (provided the character doesn't flub the roll). This "feels" more like the type of game I want to play.

Which is better? Neither. The DnD method is easier to keep track of and allows for truly impressive spells. The fatigue model is great for rapid fire spells that might be a little less powerful. Pick what fits the setting and go with it.

Combat is another.

Let's take Spycraft2.0 as an example. The attacker rolls to see if he hit, then rolls damage. The defender just takes it until it is the defenders turn.

Shadowrun 4.0 has both players roll at the same time for melee damage and the winner deals damage against the loser. (Ranged combat - bows, guns, etc - still use the attacker/defender model.)

Which works better for the game? Depends. In DnD it is possible to kill the defender before he has the chance to kill the attacker. The Shadowrun methodoly allows the "defender" to kill the "attacker". I like that way but I understand the DnD take - "the fastest guy goes first."

The Lone Star games by Joe Dever use a combat ration and random number generator (tables, believe it or not) to determine how much damge each side took during the round.

Well, I have a meeting tomorrow with some suits from corporate so I must go to bed.

Adios,
ludomastro

It's been a while. I managed to catch another cold. Whoever said you come down with something obviously never had kids.

I have been thinking about the purpose for this blog ever since I posted the links to the other sites. The Gaming Den spends a lot of time on DnD 4e which is a lot narrower than I would like to see. The other site is a bit out of date.

I think that I will keep posting about my current Spycraft 2.0 game and listing random thoughts on game design.

This weekend, we played again. The team was sent to New Orleans to investigate zombies. Yes, I played the Hollywood zombie angle. They were so horribly confused to begin with that it made me smile. As they start investigating leads, they discover that college kids at Tulane were using zombie costumes to rob various stores. Other college kids were using a new drug that gave them the strength of zombies in modern films and causes them to loose self control. The team begins to assume that this is a drug ring. Now they start kidnapping college kids who are using the designer drug. At one point, one of the female characters tracks the kid back to college and grabs him at school. He collapses in a heap due to fear. She just "kicks" him in the stomach before accusing him of needing check his manhood. It made the who table laugh.

Eventually they met up with the real zombies - that is to say animated corpses. Chaos ensues. The big bosses get called in and help sort things out. Then a trained sniper misses the kill shot on one of them before fading away. The session ended with everyone happy and looking forward to more.

Have a great night!

An awesome site

I am exhausted and have a cold. However, I have been lurking (and occasionally posting) on a nice site that does discuss game design theory and other items.

http://tgdmb.com/

For those of you who are more interested in game design theory here is another site:

http://www.darkshire.net/~jhkim/rpg/systemdesign/

What attributes are needed?

Quick Spycraft 2.0 update
I reset the game back to the beginning and got more traditional spy-like B&E action. Much tear gas was thrown and the group had a great deal of fun.

-----

How many and which attributes should an RPG have?

Well, for me I would say as many as needed to convey the system. Yes, I know that is a cop-out answer. D&D could do without Charisma and could replace Constitution with some class abilities if they wanted to. Shadowrun could drop Strength for all the good it does in the game.

For some reason most games try to preserve an even number of attributes and a more or less even split between physical and mental attributes. I don't see why that is important. If the game is about the head games that spies play, then the mental side of the equation should weigh more. If the game is about kicking in doors and chasing the bad guys then the physical side should outweigh the mental.

So, where to I sit?

Good question. I would say that you need an attribute that describes the toughness of the character, one that describes his physical abilities, one that describes his mental toughness and on that describes his mental processes.

Let's call them:
Toughness
Athletics
Willpower
Intelligence

And there we see that I have an even number of attributes with an equal division between physical and mental. Maybe I've played too many games? Maybe there is something inherent in wanting to balance the body with the mind?

Well, my daughter needs me to change her - well the wife says I need to at any rate.

Until later, have fun gaming.