Nero name change and what it means for Seattle

[Cerulean Jax]

Well now we're getting into the 'gray' area where it can be claimed that religius symbols and icons don't have to mean what they're attributed to mean; but again, why use the icon, or the title, if it's not being used for the assumed purpose? Not every cross has to be a symbol of Jesus' Crucifixion, but if i were to attempt to bring a cross into the game at this point, I'd likely be shipped out on that same one. If you draw an Eye of Horus, whether you claim that it's not the same meaning or not does't change the fact that that's what you drew, and it's what the majority of people who are familiar with that Icon will assume. Calling a rose an orchid doesn't change it one molecule.

I've always thought the attempt in NERO to keep religion completely out of it was merely a thinly veiled attempt to discriminate against Religion, period. The reasons I've heard (and read) given for excluding Religion have absolutely no basis when you take into consideration that the game still allows personal bias of every kind, racism, elitism, and the ability for players to discriminate against other players for any and all reasons (provided it is an IG thing and not motivated OOG); which is all to say that I don't mind that one bit, if a Dwarf wants to hate ALL trolls because of a racial bias, that's just fine with me; but let's not continue to state that that's considered "ok" but religious bias and fervor is not. I would LOVE to be able to serve a "god" in-game and have that servitude come into conflict with someone or something that counters that belief system, and it would make very convenient story hooks and plot, and that's no different than hating All Dark Elves because of their race or skin colour.

That's a question I used to deal with pretty much daily on the GiveUpAlready forums where I moderated the Religion forums and later admin'ed the whole shebang for a while before my attentions were directed elsewhere.

A belief is not a religion, or even necessarily a sign of a religion. I believe vanilla to be the finest of the flavors. I am fairly certain that it will remain so over time. Definitions and measurables for what that means are pretty subjective and, to an extent, arbitrary. This does not make it a religion, mean that I am religious, or even a Bare Naked Ladies fan (bonus points for knowing the citation... Bryan can't play). Likewise, believing that "necromancy" is evil is not a religion, per se.

Similiarly, being superstitious, or even having supernatural elements, in a game does not immediately mean "religion" or even "religious". Not everybody who rubs a rabbit's foot, hangs up a horseshoe, or burns incense is a pagan, and not every invocation of beings from beyond is a prayer.

I recommend checking the definitions I linked. Only one out of the four offered ever invoked religion, and when it did, it was clear that the barbarians were not that. As reported, the use of the word shaman does not imply religion. Not every brazier used at the game is for offering burnt sacrifices, not every pentagram is the Horned God, and not every Eye of Horus is drawn to let him measure your soul. Sometimes, they're just words and pictures.

 

[obcidian_bandit]

Participation in this conversation is getting dangerous. So dangerous that you'll have to sign a waiver. (I want those points.)

Avoiding religion in nero has much more to do with some over protective mom showing up to an event to drop off their child, stumbling onto the the PCs fighting 'demons' or 'avatars' or whatnot, and then running to the papers about the 'devil worship cult in the woods that tried to abduct her child.' Cause we don't need that kind of publicity.

Generally, for as long as I can remember in nero, a 'Shaman' has almost always meant 'the biggest caster in the group,' not 'spiritual leader.'

 

[Lycose]

I agree with Matt. I have always seen a shaman as a powerful caster and the wisest of a group.. never as a spiritual leader in some religion, and I believe the idea of adding a religion could push some people away... I think the fae were close enough to gods/religion as we should get in a game that is played by many people that I'm sure don't all believe the same thing.

 

[Kasuni]

Well, since we've already used shamans (which may or may not be religious), what religious aspects would be added to the game? Would there be a god? Instead of the earth guild, would we have a temple to Pelor or something like that? Is that still up for debate?

I'd like to know more specifically what the changes would be before I cast any sort of opinion or vote. Being able to use chaos magic infront of people sounds fantastic. I don't know how much fun it would be if suddenly we were getting IG religious pamphlets instead of IG newspapers.

Also, how would this change happen (if we were to change worlds)? Would our characters all start over not knowing eachother? Would the world suddenly *pop* and we have a new one?

I'm mainly curious about what the changes would be like

Emily

 

[obcidian_bandit]

There are somethings that really shouldn't change for game balance.
For example, (since it keeps coming up) Necromancy.
Necromancy is illegal for game balance, not just because 'mike v doesn't like it.' If earth casters suddenly have free access to damage and healing spells, it makes them too powerful, and makes celestial casters pretty worthless. You'd also see more mods get lame when the local necromancer sucks up all the NPCs as undead minions. Right now a big part of Necromancy's "cool factor" is casting it and not getting caught. You have to put effort into doing it and not ending up dead, and it's cool when it works out.
It's like playing a Thief. Taking things from somebody else isn't as much fun if they're letting you do it and there's no consequences. "Evil" is no fun if there's no risk.

 

[Cerulean Jax]

I agree with Matt. I have always seen a shaman as a powerful caster and the wisest of a group.. never as a spiritual leader in some religion, and I believe the idea of adding a religion could push some people away... I think the fae were close enough to gods/religion as we should get in a game that is played by many people that I'm sure don't all believe the same thing.

Umm, since when did every player need to believe the same thing in order to play a game? This isn't a church group or a youth center, this is a medieval fantasy GAME; if parents are afraid of that then they shouldn't be dropping their kids off in the first place. I'm not talking about using 'Real' religions and religious icons, i'm referring to the kinds of things you could find in any D and D book..if the parents wouldn't let their kids play D and D, they shouldn't be letting them play this. Signing waivers is an important and necessary part of this (especially for parents of younger children), as is realizing that this is a GAME.

 

[Cerulean Jax]

There are somethings that really shouldn't change for game balance.
For example, (since it keeps coming up) Necromancy.
Necromancy is illegal for game balance, not just because 'mike v doesn't like it.' If earth casters suddenly have free access to damage and healing spells, it makes them too powerful, and makes celestial casters pretty worthless. You'd also see more mods get lame when the local necromancer sucks up all the NPCs as undead minions. Right now a big part of Necromancy's "cool factor" is casting it and not getting caught. You have to put effort into doing it and not ending up dead, and it's cool when it works out.
It's like playing a Thief. Taking things from somebody else isn't as much fun if they're letting you do it and there's no consequences. "Evil" is no fun if there's no risk.

I agree on this, though I don't think it should be an automatic death for the PC if the player gets caught (unless the characters who caught the player put him to death, something like that); maybe that's what was meant, but it sounded like "someone sees you using chaos magic, you automatically die" which would be ridiculous. In game consequences are fine as long as they are logical consequences.

 

[Shikar al'Basteua]

I agree on this, though I don't think it should be an automatic death for the PC if the player gets caught (unless the characters who caught the player put him to death, something like that); maybe that's what was meant, but it sounded like "someone sees you using chaos magic, you automatically die" which would be ridiculous. In game consequences are fine as long as they are logical consequences.

The intent is that the minimum penalty for being caught casting chaos magic is death/resurrection *if* you get caught and *if* you are turned in, and *if* you are good enough to talk yourself down from obliteration.

 

[cymryc]

I agree on this, though I don't think it should be an automatic death for the PC if the player gets caught (unless the characters who caught the player put him to death, something like that); maybe that's what was meant, but it sounded like "someone sees you using chaos magic, you automatically die" which would be ridiculous. In game consequences are fine as long as they are logical consequences.

The IG games consequences are logical, it is illegal to cast necromancy. The penalty is at the very least death and ressurection, it can be up to obliteration.

Things that work well in a table tob system, don't nescessarily work when applied to a LARP.

I play NERO (soon to be Alliance) because I like transfering to other chapters and playing the same game and the same character. I have gone to a tournament at Ashbury, this summer I am planning on attending the week long event at Traverse City. I have seen about a dozen players from the east coast out here at games over the years. I enjoy seeing all of my friends when I travel to another chapter to play.

Are there problems with the system, sure. are there issues that frustrate us, probably. I however enjoy playing the game, and look forward to the time that I can start taking my children with me to various different chapters to play.

 

[Polare]

There are somethings that really shouldn't change for game balance.
For example, (since it keeps coming up) Necromancy.
Necromancy is illegal for game balance, not just because 'mike v doesn't like it.' If earth casters suddenly have free access to damage and healing spells, it makes them too powerful, and makes celestial casters pretty worthless. You'd also see more mods get lame when the local necromancer sucks up all the NPCs as undead minions. Right now a big part of Necromancy's "cool factor" is casting it and not getting caught. You have to put effort into doing it and not ending up dead, and it's cool when it works out.

Gotta put my two cents in against this one. IMHO, legal Necromancy would not change the balance of Earth vs Celestial casters one whit. The damage is minimal, especially compared to the other spells on every level - NERO at this point almost always devolves to 'who can get the first instakill effect in' - binding, command, and paralysis are FAR more powerful than necromancy at every level. Even evocation is stronger, and most people agree that evocation is the weakest class of effects out there.

I say make Necromancy legal if you want it to be - it won't change game balance at all. I'm very firmly in the camp of 'it's done for RP reasons, but has no game balance impact whatsoever'.

would we have a temple to Pelor or something like that?

Methinks a temple to Polare might be more appropriate

-Bryan

 

[jpariury]

It wasn't an actual Wiccan ceremony which caused the no religion fervor, it was elements of one.

We must be thinking of different fervors. Ford talked about not wanting to let people kill one another for not playing Christians ala the Crusades when I first learned the game, which was his reasoning for ditching religion altogether.

The use of a Shaman asa spiritual leader for the tribe (which he was presented as) makes for a clear implication that it is being tied to the Shamanic cultures of real world tribes - they're religion was borrowed from, however slightly.

There is a difference between a character who talks to spirits (a part of the NERO system) for his tribe, and a religious leader.

Not every cross has to be a symbol of Jesus' Crucifixion, but if i were to attempt to bring a cross into the game at this point, I'd likely be shipped out on that same one.

Depends on the cross and how you use/wear it, really. I've never seen anyone decry an X on a shield or button, but if you hold it 45 degrees clockwise, and its a whole new shebang.

I've always thought the attempt in NERO to keep religion completely out of it was merely a thinly veiled attempt to discriminate against Religion, period.

That certainly wasn't the intent of the founders, see above. People have a bad habit of overidentifying with their characters. You think that's bad? Wait until people start overidentifying with their religion. Heck, it already happens, and no one's even trying.

NERO racism is quite different from real-world racism. You can discriminate against someone's IG species, which is not the same as discriminating against their real-world ethnicity.

 

[Cerulean Jax]

NERO racism is quite different from real-world racism. You can discriminate against someone's IG species, which is not the same as discriminating against their real-world ethnicity.

LOL!! I know you didn't mean this to be funny, but it's quite hilarious; Discrimination against a species isn't any different than discriminating against one's colour (and Racism in the real world still refers to a discrimination against 'race', otherwise it'd be called 'colorism'); the whole point is that it's discrimination, pure and simple. The reasons for discriminating that particular race or colour can ALWAYS be justified by the people who belive their discrimination is justified, but it doesn't change what it is. (And again, i'm not saying it's a bad thing in the confines of the game, it certainly creates conflict and story hooks; i'm just amused at the insistence that discrimination because of race is allowable and perfectly fine, but religion isn't allowed because of possible discrimination; it's ALL discrimination.)

At any rate, I was merely intrigued at the prospect of it being possible to actually have religions to follow and new storylines that could sprout up because of that. Without it, Nero is still fun, and will continue to be, but it would certainly add a new aspect to the game that i personally find missing.

 

[Sarah]

Y'know, as long as it's an originally derived pantheon or god (names and some concepts... there's no way you'd avoid borrowing from *somewhere*) and isn't shoved down the PCs throats, but just sits there as something that those that want can pursue, I'd be cool with that.

I'm just of an all or none philosophy on the issue.

 

[Avaran]

I think one of the biggest reasons for the banning of religion is because it is one of two topics that people get very heated about (politics being the other).

I think if it is done properly, and as Sarah said, it's "originally derived" and not clearly based on any popular religions, it could be very fun. This is a hard goal to attain though.

I, like Cymryc, enjoy the multi-chapter aspect of (current) NERO. I like being able to go to Seattle, Oregon, and (hopefully soon) San Fran events while still playing the same character. It gives greater depth to that character, and a much wider range of experiences (not just for the player, but for the character too).

I would be curious to see how open they will be with rules changes/additions with the "Fortannis" campaign once this goes through. Are they planning a total overhaul? Partial? Minimal?

 

[Alavatar]

I am confused. Somewhere along the lines this thread devloved into an debate about what consitutes religion/game balance/breaking the rules.

Can someone answer the following questions?

1. What is going on between NERO Seattle and NERO HQ?

2. What does this mean for the Seattle chapter?

3. Will Seattle players still be able to transfer to chapters throughout the nation?

4. What is meant by 'mainly concerned with treasure policy and with experience'?

5. What happens when we go back and forth between Fortannis and non-Fortannis plot?


And now back to the original derail: religion.

From what I have gathered NERO Alliance wanted to refrain from the inclusion of religion (that is, a defined doctrine concerning the worship of a diety [be it god or spirit] that ascends or dooms the spirit of the worshipper after death) so as to not offend the zealous over-protective and easily offended guardians of someone under the age of 18 attending the event. Also, it is completely feasible for someone of a particular religion to come to an event and claim offense because the religion IG is remarkably similar to their OOG religion, but bastardized it. And allowing people to go around claiming they worship Polare as a god and establishing a religion around him could indeed offend many MANY people who are religous OOG.

Like Adam said, religion and RL politics are two things you do not want to bring into a game unless you are OBSOLUTELY POSITIVE that no one playing the game, or who will play the game in the future, will be offended. Essentially not possible with religion or RL politics.

NERO condones IG racism between creatures, not OOG racism. Leave it at that.

 

[Seattle_Dave]

1. What is going on between NERO Seattle and NERO HQ?

Nothing in particular. HQ and the other owners have decided to allow for other campaings within the Alliance. *Every* chapter is going to have the option of having their own campaigns as well as playing in the Fortannis campaign. It is no longer an all or nothing prospect. The feeling has been all along that theEast and West coast chapters have a different play style, and that we are often out of the communication loop since we areso far removed. It was suggested to me by Mike that wemight want to start a west coast campaign since, by and large, we usually only transfer between each other anyway.

Thereis no ill will between Seattle and HQ in any way.

2. What does this mean for the Seattle chapter?

It means that we are remaining within the Alliance as we always have. We will still be playing by the same rules we have, using the same treasure policy we have, etc. We will be able to form a West Coast ARC, a west Coast logistics comittee and deal with things on a more regional basis. It also means we would be allowed more leeway as far as what our plots can and cannot do. This does mean that, as we go on, our rulings may (and probably will) begin to diverge from the East Coast campaigns.

I am also looking at thepossibility of running both a west coast campaign and a Fortannis campaign. People coming into the West Coast campaign might want to make new characters since any build and treasurethey earn would not go into a Fortannis campaign.

San Francisco is onboard for a West Coast Campaign. I have not heard from Oregon recently.

[quote3. Will Seattle players still be able to transfer to chapters throughout the nation?[/quote]
Any game played within the Fortanis campaign can transfer to any other game playing within the Fortanis campaign. It is our intention to have a west coast campaign which would allow transfers between each other. Any of these chapters would not be able to transfer to any other campaign without a transfer agreement with the campaign in question, and would *not* be able to transfer to Fortanis campaigns.

In other words, any chapter who wants to accept characters from our west coast campaign can do so as long as the event they are running is not the Fortannis campaign that event.

4. What is meant by 'mainly concerned with treasure policy and with experience'?

The transfer agreement we areworking on deals with making sure each chapter in our campaign is using the same treasurepolicy and build policy. This will ensure that build and treasure are distributed thesame way campaign-wide and would not end up in disparate numbers coming from any one chapter.

5. What happens when we go back and forth between Fortannis and non-Fortannis plot?

build and treasure earned in non-fortanis campaigns would not transfer to Fortanis campaigns. Period. Non-Fortannis campaigns would be using different coin, different treasure systems, logistics systems, etc.

 

[Seattle_Dave]

Re:

I think one of the biggest reasons for the banning of religion is because it is one of two topics that people get very heated about (politics being the other).

I think if it is done properly, and as Sarah said, it's "originally derived" and not clearly based on any popular religions, it could be very fun. This is a hard goal to attain though.

I, like Cymryc, enjoy the multi-chapter aspect of (current) NERO. I like being able to go to Seattle, Oregon, and (hopefully soon) San Fran events while still playing the same character. It gives greater depth to that character, and a much wider range of experiences (not just for the player, but for the character too).

I would be curious to see how open they will be with rules changes/additions with the "Fortannis" campaign once this goes through. Are they planning a total overhaul? Partial? Minimal?

And yet we have politics in the game on a constant basis.

We would, of course,not derive our religion from real world sourcesany more than they already are. No Christian mythos in the game, no sudden introduction of Wicca, Buddhism, Shinto, Judaism (Judyism), or any other ism thatis extant real world. There also won'tbe gods walking around amongst mortals.

 

[Maxondaerth]

Religion is a slippery slope. There is no god you could create that couldn't be found in the history texts somewhere and pointed to, guaranteed. That's neither here nor there. The huge problem you're gonna run into is interpretation. Let's say in order to try and avoid all the main line religious orders of today we make a very simple fantasy type pantheon of gods representing not big grand theological ideals in general but very specific stuff (think greek) like God of War, God of Harvest, God of Craft, etc. That's great, not too many people should be able to object at that point, but that's where it stops. How does one worship said gods in this realm? Do you get down on your knees to pray? Sounds Catholic to me! Do you just dip to one knee? Genuflection! Do you tithe a certain amount of your loot to the church? Mormon!
Also, does "god" now have the right to walk up to you OOG and say "I know you didn't kill that Duke out on the trail, but did you think about it when you were mad? YOU MUST ANSWER TRUTHFULLY FOR I AM GOD AND WOULD KNOW IG!" Isn't that one of the primary things I heard mentioned that was wanted gone about plot Must know if you cast Chaos and be killed for it?
Next, would earth scholars now be priests? If so, would "god" be able to walk up to you and say "Did you hold back even one copper of tithing? You now have no spells for the day!"
Lastly, there's the danger factor. I mean really, Solomon is a big enough pain in the *** as he is, but imagine his ego unchecked if he thought he had the backings of GOD for him to dispense justice as he saw fit! Unchecked ego and pandemonium I can assure you, and no one wants that (except me and even then it sounds like a lot of work)!

Okay the last one was comic relief but the rest I am serious about. I think religion in a brand new game with different feel and atmosphere might work, but I honestly don't feel it has any place in our game, even altered. There's way too much history behind us to make such a change now without fundamentally changing everything about the game, and I don't think in a good way. I don't see it bringing enough to the party to take such a huge risk with something so many of us have put so much into and want to see so much more come out as the years go by.

 

[Seattle_Dave]

I really don't think you all realize something. It's there, and has been for years. Religuion has been a part of NERO since before I joined, years before. In factr, I wopuld bet it's always been there - it's just been called different things.

 

[Cerulean Jax]

Religion is a slippery slope. There is no god you could create that couldn't be found in the history texts somewhere and pointed to, guaranteed. That's neither here nor there. The huge problem you're gonna run into is interpretation. Let's say in order to try and avoid all the main line religious orders of today we make a very simple fantasy type pantheon of gods representing not big grand theological ideals in general but very specific stuff (think greek) like God of War, God of Harvest, God of Craft, etc. That's great, not too many people should be able to object at that point, but that's where it stops. How does one worship said gods in this realm? Do you get down on your knees to pray? Sounds Catholic to me! Do you just dip to one knee? Genuflection! Do you tithe a certain amount of your loot to the church? Mormon!
Also, does "god" now have the right to walk up to you OOG and say "I know you didn't kill that Duke out on the trail, but did you think about it when you were mad? YOU MUST ANSWER TRUTHFULLY FOR I AM GOD AND WOULD KNOW IG!" Isn't that one of the primary things I heard mentioned that was wanted gone about plot Must know if you cast Chaos and be killed for it?
Next, would earth scholars now be priests? If so, would "god" be able to walk up to you and say "Did you hold back even one copper of tithing? You now have no spells for the day!"
Lastly, there's the danger factor. I mean really, Solomon is a big enough pain in the *** as he is, but imagine his ego unchecked if he thought he had the backings of GOD for him to dispense justice as he saw fit! Unchecked ego and pandemonium I can assure you, and no one wants that (except me and even then it sounds like a lot of work)!

Okay the last one was comic relief but the rest I am serious about. I think religion in a brand new game with different feel and atmosphere might work, but I honestly don't feel it has any place in our game, even altered. There's way too much history behind us to make such a change now without fundamentally changing everything about the game, and I don't think in a good way. I don't see it bringing enough to the party to take such a huge risk with something so many of us have put so much into and want to see so much more come out as the years go by.

*sigh* I'm sorry, but ANYONE who would immediately start pointing fingers at the act of kneeling before a god as being "Catholic" , or tithing being "Mormon" or ANY generic act of servitude and worship, is intentionally trying to find something to be offended about. If a character takes a knee or bows before a noble, is this a sign of a specific religion? If a character gives an amount of his wealth to someone as a sign of his loyalty or affection, has he just become a friggin Bible-thumper? This entire discussion has become ridiculous. In case anyone missed it, I prefaced my comments originally with "In my opinion". That didn't mean that anyone who didn't want religion was 'wrong' any more than it should mean that i'm 'wrong' because I think it'd be a neat dimension to add to the game. But now people are blowing the idea of religion so far out of proportion that duiscussing it has become a headache. Regardless, the staff and owner will do what the staff and owner choose to do..hopefully, whatever decision they make, the player base will be able to act as mature, rational, open minded adults.
Though frankly, this thread has given me doubts about that.