How to RP Diety Relationships w/ topsy-turvy Like vs dislike?

[twidget658]

Points to ponder:
 
 
 If you have been warned multiple times, did you think you could continue to do it without consequence? I know a certain bard that had to change his deity from Aeridin to Vorax because he killed in battle (soloing to be exact, but he dealt with it and was rather glad). A paladin of Toran fell and became a regular fighter. (Character rebuild)
 
 Why would a paladin and a cleric of Toran even deal with the lawlessness of a Kithairien? Why would a follower of Kithairien put up with the crazy law abiding Toranites any?
 
 Toran:
 " Be a shining example of goodness and righteousness by bringing order and safety to the lands. Your word is your bond."
 
 "The holy symbol of the people of Toran is the ankh, which is generally worn around the neck and displayed openly at all times."
 
 Kithairien:
 "Rely not on others for your survival." (Very first sentence of the deity description)
 
 "Law and order other than those of nature restrict; thus, they are not to be followed in any way."
 
 I had my run in with this. My Folianite was getting healed by a follower of Baraeon Ca'Duz. So I know what you are going through, to some extent. Ours was short lived (thankfully, because it would have been harder to bear if it went any longer). So it is not just you, it is a standard that has been enforced for years and will continue to be so.
 
 
 One option is for Nye to start to admire the way of Toran and leave the Kithairien faith and choose a deity that favors some law and some freedoms, a happy medium

[AeonBlues]

Since when did Toran or Kithairien really care about the Great Cycle?  And pray tell, who is this grave enemy that threatens both Toran and Kithairien...so much so that either god would say, "Hey, let's overlook the whole mutual enemy thing so that these few folks can do battle against it."

 

Corath is the enemy of both Toran and Kithairien.  As a druid, Nye seems himself as a protector of the great cycle and destroyer of undead.  "Returning them to the cycle" as he says.

As far as I'm concerned he should be a druid first, and a Kithairienite second.  A cleric of any deity does not have the same luxury, as there is no separation between deity and ability.

 

This is one of the reasons why this IC friendship exists.  I do play my character this way, so a lot of the deity relation conflicts have not existed, while some have and have been played out to a great extent.

Simply put, Nye can't go into the situations this group does with out a cleric backing him up.  Like, if he gets severely wounded, he dies if he changes shape to heal him self.  While yah I am not getting sympathy about the heal potions, a lot of place are built to kill characters that don't have a cleric casting heal spells.

The problem that I am having is not that these characters should have some conflicts. These problems have gone to the extent that Nye has walked away and left the group in the middle of adventures, and at one time he was almost asked not to adventure with them any more because he was fighting so much over leadership and decision making issues.

Now, correct me if I am wrong on this point, but the policy flat out states that any cleric is forbidden to cast any spells on any character that has an enemy deity, on penalty of having their powers taken away.  Now I really want to make sure I understand this correctly, because if this is true, then this policy is going to end not just a friendship that my character has established, but it is also going to end his relationship with the most significant group of adventures he associates with.

AeonBlues

[Dorganath]

Now, correct me if I am wrong on this point, but the policy flat out states that any cleric is forbidden to cast any spells on any character that has an enemy deity, on penalty of having their powers taken away.  Now I really want to make sure I understand this correctly, because if this is true, then this policy is going to end not just a friendship that my character has established, but it is also going to end his relationship with the most significant group of adventures he associates with.

AeonBlues

It was never stated that this is a "one strike and you're out" policy.  There are reasons for casting on followers of enemies.  We do not expressly forbid casting on enemies.  Nor do we forbid association.  It's getting late and I find it hard to explain this yet another way.

To put it briefly, there's almost always another way, however.  I fully understand what you're saying, but perhaps the correct solution would have been to cultivate the relationship a little differently from the beginning.  That's me on the outside looking in.  Personally, I don't think a cleric should be regularly casting spells of divine aid upon the enemies of the cleric's deity.  Occasionally to fulfill a specific purpose? sure. As a matter of course, with no more consideration than one would give to opening a door? Not so much.

Again, based only on what has been presented here, the "mutual enemy" of undead could just as easily be seen as a "convenient excuse".  Hey, we're all here to have fun, right?  Just I don't believe that anyone who is playing a divinely empowered character...or perhaps even an deeply pious but non-divine character...should just simply toss out dogma and relationship considerations for the sake of friendship.  I guarantee you that with the possible exception of Az'atta, your respective deities would not see things in the same light.

Play smart. Play your roles. Play your dogma. Play your character.

What you said about IC conflict and leaving the party is great.  Again, I don't know your character, your group or any of the dynamics.  You're taking this all very personally, and it's not meant to be. What we're asking though is that everyone to which this applies take some time and actually think about what it all means, and how everyone can respect the wishes of their deity to the extent that their station within the faith would dictate.  This is no more than has been expected of such characters for as long as I remember, and it is something that the players agree to when they submit a divinely-empowered character.

Is it really that wrong of us to expect that such agreements are honored? Is it really that wrong to expect people to respect the meaning behind all this?

I don't think it is.

[Skywatcher]

Well I think it's great that the GMs and the team are enforcing these issues that are obviously important to them and to L.  Clarissa being one of the recently chastised, is going to have much more flavor as a result.  I also think the way the team is going about correcting this issue gives great RP opportunities.  For divinely inspired characters to have a messenger of their god appear to them and directly relate the displeasure of the one they are devoted to is like a CDQ in itself.  Talk about a life changing moment.  

To comment on something that has been mentioned a few times, that being the long standing relationships that exist due to casualness in deity relations.  I would not say that these events would throw out the past RP but rather these events will provide for just the motivation for the tension that should have been there in the first place.  So Nye hasn't done a lot of Kithlike stuff in Clarissa's and Rose's pressence so they could overlook it but now they know in a very personal way that Toran does care and this will require then to work it out with new insights into the deity they follow.  

I for one am very excited about the way this is being dealt with and while it's not going to be fun to not have any spells or abilities for a while, it will make Clarissa a much more colorful character.

Thanks guys for watching out and keeping the rules the way they are supposed to be.

*Clarissa continues her prayers of repentance in the temple*

[Varka]

The team has to consider some things for the future. And you probably did it otherwise you would have begun this debate.  

A) You say it is a family friendly server game. Have fun playing etc etc.
B) You ask for people to play according to your rules. Rules that guides some players (clerics, paladins. champs) in a cetain direction.

Depending on how extreme you see A and B they can be quite the opposite.  
(WOW vs. Strict.by.the.book.old.GM.which.reminds.me.of.my.PnP.GM)

How to Balance it? Thats the teams work. And we see something being done now. The Team wants layo to stay exceptional but is will have a price.

Now Aeon is a good example (sorry dude) but what will be the consequence of all this? For everyone that will be hit by this?

Some accepts and continues, some ignore it and continues, some skip layo etc etc

As for A) and B) maybe the team could make the terms of layo more clear on their webpage? How; do not ask me that I am just a fish in the pond. (that question even creates more questions)

[DMOE]

Quote from Lore regarding Clerical and Paladin submissions....


Due to the responsibility of a character who is granted divine power to uphold these things submissions for Clerics, Paladins and Champions must contain the following three sections in addition to the standard submission (for examples of individual sections and an example showing how this should all go together see Examples):

• An acknowledgement that the player has read and understands the dogma and expectations of their chosen deity and intends to follow them.
  
• How this particular character sees and interprets their deity's dogma in the past, and how they will, in the future, reflect that interpretation. This does not mean that your character may not change how they interpret the dogma or how they embody that interpretation as they are influenced by world events and RP. Treat this section as more of a description of how your character currently plans to embody their interpretation of the dogma.
  
• A discussion/explanation with respect to how closely the character follows normal practices of the chosen deity, particularly in regards to the character's choice of weapon, armor, clothing and even colors worn.

Maybe it's just *me* but I think point one covers among other things deity relations and as EVERY clerical and paladin submission MUST have that acknowledgement include to be approved I am failing to see how that isn't clear on what the team wants.....But as I say...that's just  my humble opinion.

Also....If a player isn't exactly sure what that means....Well, it sounds simply but they could ask before submitting a cleric or paladin

[Pseudonym]

Dorg, can you try to explain what you've said in this thread another way for me please?

[size=-2]I figure Dorg will be waking up in about 5 hours time, just wanted to see if I could make his head explode when he logs on to the forum[/size]

[Skywatcher]

I agree with respect to new requirements.  I think the rules that exist make it very clear that there can be penalties for not playing a divine character in accordance with the dogma of the deity they represent.  New rules aren't the solution.  Good RP is the best option in my opinion.  

[LynnJuniper]

Maybe it's just *me* but I think point one covers among other things deity relations and as EVERY clerical and paladin submission MUST have that acknowledgement include to be approved I am failing to see how that isn't clear on what the team wants.....But as I say...that's just  my humble opinion.

Also....If a player isn't exactly sure what that means....Well, it sounds simply but they could ask before submitting a cleric or paladin

That's True DMOE, but sadly These things really need to be made crystal clear at creation. I always thought they were but obviously others are either thinking differently or downright ignoring what's not explicitly stated, so sadly it should be explicitly stated.

[Weeblie]

The announcement/notification about the deity relations isn't a new "rule" or something. When I joined the server for 1.5 years ago, my own character was personally having some dreams (I think) of her somewhat slippering faith which promptly put her back on track!

So... what is this about then?

Well, it's simply to say: "Sorry... we know that we have been too inactive in this area, but now seeing that the deity relations are slowly more and more getting grinded down to be insignificant, we want to notify everyone of that the chance for consequences are going to be much higher once again.".

So... what sort of consequences is one talking about? Could be (just throwing some ideas around here):

1. Being talked to by some priest higher ranked than your character.
2. Having some dreams as warnings.
3. Sudden and short blackouts when doing something that the deity might not like. To slowly increase in duration and strength the more such things are done.
4. Temporary stripped of powers.
5. Add whatever you think is suitable here!

[Varka]

by more clear...I mean aahhh bloody hell

Well eaiser to find, make it even more clear how important this issue is for layo. That kind of stuff.

a forth point in the rules:
Warning...bla bla bla if you drink tea with a Corath follower and you are a Toran follower beware there can be consequences.

DMOE: what is obvious to you (as an old player) is not always obvious to others. Why otherwise have this debate?


//clerics, Paladins and champs

[DMOE]

@ Varka

Yep...an additional bit in the Lore section regarding the fact there will be consequences for not playing your deity relations correctly might not be a bad idea.

I don't actually see how they can be made more visible than the Lore page that you should be reading if your submitting that kind of character though

And hey....I was a new player once you know and it was pretty obvious what it meant to me when I was

[ShiffDrgnhrt]

Also remember that shiff and Rose (shiff being a sorta Berylite) are friends too...  Who says Beryl and Toran arent mad at them...

[Dalila]

*waves* HI, Maybe I should speak for myself so people know where I am coming from.

I totaly understand where the DM's and other players are coming from.  A cleric, one who is chosen by a god to uphold their standards and rules would frown upon one of them becoming friends with someone who follows an enemy or unfriendly deity.  I am sure there can be very rare cases where a cleric can become friends with a person that is unfriendly to Toran but only through Heavy RP and argument.  There are so many circumstances and such and we can't have a rule for every one of them or we would spend the whole time reading the rules and not playing.  This is an RP world and everything we do should be for RP reasons.  Not what would I do, but what would Rose do.  I know there have been some times when I have maybe not have played the way I should because for me, the person behind the char, I have a hard time being "mean" ,for lack of a better word, to another player.  Toran, I am sure would not want his clerics running around with people who totaly deny or go against everything he stands for.  It is very hard to play a cleric because you have so many rules.  I am still learning them.  Thanks for helping me to understand the rules better.  I understand that you can't have rules for everything and you have to use your judgment.  People make mistakes and we have to learn from them and move on.  Using it to make our RP better.

[akata]

Corath is the enemy of both Toran and Kithairien.  As a druid, Nye seems himself as a protector of the great cycle and destroyer of undead.  "Returning them to the cycle" as he says.

 

This is one of the reasons why this IC friendship exists.  I do play my character this way, so a lot of the deity relation conflicts have not existed, while some have and have been played out to a great extent.

Simply put, Nye can't go into the situations this group does with out a cleric backing him up.  Like, if he gets severely wounded, he dies if he changes shape to heal him self.  While yah I am not getting sympathy about the heal potions, a lot of place are built to kill characters that don't have a cleric casting heal spells.

The problem that I am having is not that these characters should have some conflicts. These problems have gone to the extent that Nye has walked away and left the group in the middle of adventures, and at one time he was almost asked not to adventure with them any more because he was fighting so much over leadership and decision making issues.


AeonBlues

sorry but it seems to me your looking at this wrong, the conflicts isn't between Nye and Toran but between Rose/Clarissa and Toran, or Kithairien and Nye. Meaning between the cleric and his/hers own deity. This may come off a little blunt but no harm is intended, if Rose, Clarissa and Nye did go and fight undead and Nye happens to fall, why should Toran care to bring him back? Kithairien is still an enemy of Toran, in my eyes it would more make him go.. yes double score a druid of my enemy down while protecting my devoted.

as it have all ready been stated no one has said your not allowed to rp or adventure with a enemy of your god, but if your using powers granted by your deity, then there -can- be a price to pay.


about places build to kill parties without a cleric then that is not true, Layonara is build as a rp server so yes places are build for groups, there are still potions scrolls and item in game that will allow you to travel in a group without a cleric, I play in a timezone that have nearly none cleric's and I agree with you on it being a pain, but it dont mean you cant go!

[Varka]

hhhmmm a short diversity, something that came to my mind but surely everyone will see this as a simply excuse to use.
You have a group:
1Cleric (Pyro)
1Mage (Neutral)
1Bard (Neutral)
5 figther/rouges (vorax, mist, pyro, Katia, Dorand followers)

After a battle the follwoing are dead.
2 figther/rouges (mist, vorax)

Now the allied Cleric can raise the mist follower due to alignment (a guess) but what about the voraxian?
Simply answer would be No.

Consider though now the alignment of the Cleric and the particular situation.
What if the voraxian claiming what he does serve vorax but actually in the eyes of the Cleric he simply (smiling inside of himself) sees the havoc and destruction that our dumb voraxian does? Maybe our cleric has to heal our voraxian now and then but just see the benefits he gets from it. (as long the expenses are low and the profit is high).
Would the Cleric simply leave the voraxian dead, maybe risking dying in UD because without that ekstra hand it will be too tough?

My point is:
A) Of course it is simply to look at the deity relationship. Done.
B) But what about the situation, the motive for the clerics action, Alignment could maybe have an saying etc etc
The right way would be B) in my point of view but A) is so much easier.


//Simply trying to see it from the grey zone instead of simply black and white

[DMOE]

I don't think the team are saying there isn't a grey area....

My Misty cleric was desperate and I mean desperate to raise Dezza's Rofi paladin....

She wanted to do it because she knew it would totally throw him....That it would challenge all he believed in and make him question....In esence it would cause chaos in his life, his emotions and his beliefs.

Had she ever had the chance.....She would have raised him, taken the XP hit BUT also taken any other punishment Mist saw fit to give her for using her divine talents on one of Mist's enemies.

Most importantly though.....She would have only done it ONCE....Once would have been enough to achieve her goals.

I think what the team wishes to ensure doesn't happen is a complete fluffy bunny love fest where clerics constantly heal and raise those enemy or unfriendly with NO thought to how their God/Goddess would react.  Where Paladin's don't comment and allow it to happen or use their divine powers to aid their enemies.

No one is saying you can never aid someone who is enemy or unfriendly....Just that your God/Goddess is ALWAYS watching and don't come crying to us if they react so THINK before you do it and accept that even if you think you do have a good RP reason you may still get 'punished' it just maybe that your punishment is less if your RP reason is good.

[Eorendil]

Ah.. but see, there is conflict there.  And RPd properly I think it might just be okay.. his god may not be terribly please but the choice is there and it is neither habitual nor casual.  There's actually a lot of area for decision making on the part of divine characters so long as its RPd well.

Divinely charged characters don't have to be played like cookie cutter people or paper dolls to hold in reverence the teachings and decisions of their god; to recognize and realize that their actions may have very real consequences.  Its all about choices and as long as the player is willing to accept the consequences that may happen to the character, its good.

Honestly, if a few faithfull didn't falter, fall or convert now and again it'd be a really boring world and there isn't a single rule at creation that says that can't happen.  It just needs RP and if you can, document the process by keeping a character journal.

[DMOE]

Oh Muir didn't give a monkey's what Rofi thought....She'd just worked out through repeated RP interaction it would totally rock Tarradon's personal world and she worked on the principle that Mist might understand but even if Mist didn't....It would be worth it!

[LynnJuniper]

Alright, Though Im totally agreed on this I have a question:

GM Quest. Character Falls in battle. Only cleric that can do the raising has a god that is the enemy of the god of the char that fell.

What happens?

I only ask because I'd hate to see a character miss a quest for falling in battle when there's someone there that can raise them