The World of Layonara  Forums

Author Topic: Alignment/Dogma conflicts  (Read 1161 times)

Dorganath

Re: Alignment/Dogma conflicts
« Reply #40 on: April 21, 2007, 12:39:10 am »
OK everyone, we're straying into the off-topic zone a bit here.  I'm going to make a statement, and then from that statement respond to a few of the posts/questions/comments since my last.

Of the various dogmas we have for our 28 deities, pretty much all of them are undergoing at least some clarification and in some cases some significant shifts.  There are a few main reasons for this. One important, and rather discontinuous reason is to divorce ourselves from the IP, trademarks and copyrights of D&D/FR/WotC/NWN and whatever else and produce something that is uniquely Layonara. In other cases, there were dogmas which just didn't fit quite right, and still others are shifting as a direct result of in-game events.

In the latter case, there are things that happened that caused or precipitated these changes, but they are not necessarily common knowledge to the player base.  I understand that this is confusing to some, and much will be clarified when EdTheKet and others can complete the Handbook, Pantheon book and so on.

A few of the deities and dogmas that shifted due to in-game events are Toran and Aeridin, to name two off the top of my head.

Now, getting onto my responses...

Quote from: Tanman
@Dorganath: How would the Aeridinite Church view the Hierophant and Druids  power in shapeshifting in general... keeping in mind that the Hierophant is the keeper of the Great Oak which keeps Layonara alive?

At certain times  he  has shapeshifted into a tree...

Rhizome is an Aeridinite. So how would they look upon him because of his ability to shapeshift?

Again, Rhizome is not a member of the Church of Aeridin.  He holds no rank other than his druidic rank of the Heirophant. And yes, he cares for the Great Oak.  Aeridin's dogmatic shift regarding the alteration of forms is a new development, due to in-game actions mentioned above.  

How would the church would look upon Rhizome...well, they wouldn't tell him he can't profess a belief. Surely they would disapprove of his shapeshifting, but then he might view it as not really altering his form so much as expressing yet another natural variation of his form.

But how Rhizome would view this shift is really not my place to answer

Quote from: Stephen_Zuckerman
You know... I understand all the work that's gone into the new dogma, but I'm really just not feeling this new spin on Aeridin. I had always seen him as Aid Above All, who hated Necromancy because it damaged the rightful Cycle of Life. A shapeshifter, while changing their form, is not damaging the Cycle, as they're still living, and will still die and return to the earth.

I guess I just don't agree with the shift from focusing on preserving the Cycle to preserving the "purity" of life.

Am I just looking at this the wrong way?

Don't take this the wrong way, but yes, I think you are looking at it the wrong way. Aeridin's updated dogma is a direct result of things that happened in-game.  I'm not going to go into those details, so please don't ask, but suffice it to say, in the light of those events, a de-emphasis on the Cycle and a greater emphasis on Life and it's purity is a very appropriate outcome.  I'm not trying to be secretive, but as I said, it's not my place to give out these details.  Furthermore, there's no reason why these events should be common knowledge, even among followers of Aeridin.

Quote from: LynnJuniper
Dorg: When people choose deities for their characters, especially those who play clerics, paladins and champions, they should be prepared to tailor their RP to be in line with the dogma. No one has ever said that one must play in lock-step with every written word, with every dot of punctuation and do so in a mindless way. It is certaintly not against the spirit of this server to subscribe to the dogma of a deity.

What you say there is fine. But what about when the Dogma is changed after the character is created and in many cases well established?

EDIT: Thanks for standing up for us writers ;)

Well, there's a few things here....

If the dogma was changed due to IC and IG reasons, then characters need to roll with the changes. By that I don't mean just roll over and accept them as if nothing has happened...more like deciding ICly if they can still continue their belief in said deity or if the change is simply too great.  I know at least one character who follows Aeridin, and a cleric at that, who is having a crisis of faith at the moment, though more because of the in-game actions that precipitated this change more than the change itself.

If the dogma change was not necessarily due to in-game actions but perhaps due to conflict in the heavens, this may seem like an OOC change, and perhaps to a degree it is, but it is still a shift that happens in game-time, and as such so too should the actions and attitudes of their followers. And if that strays too far away from what the character can stomach, then IC actions should change as a result.

A few changes will be rather OOC.  These changes are being made simply because they have to be.  We would have prefered to do everything in a way that makes IC sense with those in-game who know what went on, but time and resources makes that difficult to unlikely...even impossible.  All I can say here is we're sorry it had to work out like this, but again...the changes had to occur.  For those changes which are very OOC, there will be an OOC way for existing characters to adjust as a result. Don't ask me what that is.  Just please everyone be patient.

And sure...no problem!  You writers are doing a fantastic job. :)
 

Witch Hunter

Re: Alignment/Dogma conflicts
« Reply #41 on: April 21, 2007, 03:24:53 am »
Alright! woah, that's some serious responds I got here! so now to address some and ask more questions and confuse the lot of us!
 
 First, because he made me really mad! Praylor.
 The dogmas are well written, they are guide-lines and basiclly provide you a background on what the faith is about which is all I need in order to craft my characters roleplay regarding that - if you don't like them then stop playing a bloody paladin! no offense. A+ for the writers and the dev team in general.
 
 As for waiting for your god to speak with you.. oh uh... I reckon every time you cast a divine spell your god is paying SOME attention to you (Not going over the line and saying he speaks with you because Dorg said that hardly ever happens) - but he acknowledges you are channeling his powers I bet... But just like you don't abuse NPC AI (You don't, right? ;) ) you shouldn't abuse the fact Aeridin cannot drain your powers if you say... cast slay living on an innocent child :) If I was Aeridin, regardless of how much I speak with you.. I'd smite 'yer butt all the way to Dregar.
 
 
 Clarissa - You're right about the dogma being a bit "nazi" for the lack of better terms, it is! But that's where the fun roleplay comes from... You have a really extreme, a bit evil and overall crazy dogma stitched to someone whos meant to be a paragon of good will - it's crazy! crazy!!!
 
 But these dilemmas make the best roleplay, especially for those that assume more than the characters form but also his mind - I can say that while having the tomato girl issue I was arguing with myself quite a bit in my characters name, and still am - It's bloody fun, and possible due to this forum.
 
 As for the changes with the new dogma, I personally like them.
 Sure theres a bit more to hate but theres also a bit more room to wiggle around with, not saying that one should *cough* But somewhere in our hearts we're all chaotic, to a degree... That is until said god smites us down!
 As for a new question... I'm still wondering, can someone gain an alignment shift for following his dogma and doing something that MIGHT be considered evil?
 
 
 
 Overall I enjoy playing my new character and his dogma, especially since I have tools like the roleplay forum to ask whatever question bothers me, keeps the dilemmas IC it does.
 So... thanks to anyone who responded!
 

Weeblie

Re: Alignment/Dogma conflicts
« Reply #42 on: April 21, 2007, 05:16:17 am »
If the act is evil, why not?

The IC-perception of what's an act of evil or what's not an act of evil has nothing to do with alignment shifts. It's the OOC-perception, the reasoning behind the kill, the story behind why it was done, that matters for alignment shifts.

The alignments is -not- what other characters perceives you as.

It is what you -are-.
 

Witch Hunter

Re: Alignment/Dogma conflicts
« Reply #43 on: April 21, 2007, 06:14:44 am »
Because Aeridin is a good god with a dogma that might support evil acts (Such as ending tomato girl).
 
 My OOC perception of ending her (If.. didn't do it yet right?) Is evil, but it's supported by the dogma of a good god.
 

Weeblie

Re: Alignment/Dogma conflicts
« Reply #44 on: April 21, 2007, 06:24:10 am »
The alignment of the "act" itself ranges from evil to good. It's definitely not a clear cut case:

Good: Would you like to live such a life? As a weed? Without being able to think? Maybe the act of slowly let her life pass is just an act of mercy instead? To let her soul free at last?
Neutral: Maybe this is something that has to be done? Neither evil nor good. It just has to be done. For the strive of balance... or whatever!
Evil: Well... yeah... what gives you the right to take the life of another's? It -is- killing after all and harming an "innocent" is never a good thing.

Heh, I would leave the decision of whether this act is a one of evil, good or neither, up to the DM handling the event.

Only one way to find these sort of things out: Do it and see!
 

Tanman

Re: Alignment/Dogma conflicts
« Reply #45 on: April 21, 2007, 06:41:46 am »
Getting back to the actual topic. . . I would have to agree with Weeblie. This is a 'game', it doesn't hurt to try anything with your character that you think is logical and appropriate. Character relationships with your Aeridinite cleric and with the church may change....but hey...this is a game.

So do what you think your character would do, and enjoy the outcome whatever it maybe.
Quote from: Weeblie
Heh, I would leave the decision of whether this act is a one of evil, good or neither, up to the DM handling the event.
 
Only one way to find these sort of things out: Do it and see!
 

LynnJuniper

Re: Alignment/Dogma conflicts
« Reply #46 on: April 21, 2007, 08:45:08 am »
I just wanted to thank Dorg for answering my questions (And Tanman's Cause It was making me curious for a while after reading the Aeridin stuff (No I won't tell what's in there ;) ). I know the team will provide help and an OOC way to change things if the changes seem to OOC for a character to cope with, and I know that things ideally would've been done IG in quests if there was time. :) So Yeah, just thanks for clearing that up.

*Realises the thanks button would've probably sufficed*
 

lonnarin

Re: Alignment/Dogma conflicts
« Reply #47 on: April 22, 2007, 10:25:53 am »
Quote from: Praylor Falcus

 
  Seriously i have had this dilima myself with the iil-concived and poor thought out "Dogmas" of the these so called religions, But then i remember it's a game and as they are just someones thoughts on a perticular concept.


I remember the time I raised the issue with Sulterio being allied with Dorand, despite his creed of bitterness against the surface dwarves, and that deity relationship was knocked down to neutral.  Ed and Leanthar are more than willing to debate and even make changes to their pantheon and source material when one makes their point constructively.  Ad-hoc calling their entire efforts thus far ill-concieved and poorly thought out is probably not the best path to that end.