Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Servant Corps]

Why should religion have all the fun?

It would make sense that there would be "philosophies" out there, that (in-game) would behave the same as religions, but with one difference: They do not worship a diety.

Example:

New guild: Endarkenment Movement
The Endarkenment Movement view itself as a vanguard of Reason and Logic. Of course, they don't view themselves as religious, but rather that they desire that people should not accept traditions on face value and instead do research and studies to learn the 'truth' for themselves. People in the "Endarkenment Movement" can create new books and ideas that will help generate a Positive Mood to most people, or at a very least, to themselves, which is always nice. However, to the very religious, the Endarkenment Movement can create a Negative Mood, due to their rejection of Faith. At the same time, members of the Endarkenment Movement gets a negative Mood whenever exposed to religious properganda, because the properganda does not use the logic that the Movement prefers.

Being a member of the Endarkenment Movement does not mean that you are automatically atheist/deitistc/etc.  Rather, those with no faith in any God are more likely to enter into the Enlightenment Movement, assuming they don't belong to other guilds. People who do believe in Gods or in other Powers are less likely to enter into the Guild, but they can still enter into it.

A drawf who does not believe in any God but does not join the Endarkenment Movement is just a common person who doesn't worry about the faith/logic arguments, and cares instead of the more important things in life, like getting drunk. A drawf who believes in Gods but join the Endarkenment Movement believes that the Gods want people to use the gifts of Logic in order to determine how best to organize their society, and that using reason is the best way of worshipping God.

*Philosophies are to be randomly generated.

Upon thinking about this a little more, perhaps you could have a set of religious. . .ummm. . .categories (I'm talking monotheism, atheism, etc.) and a set of philosophical principles.  Then you could mix and match the two.  So you'd get dwarves in a monotheistic religion that have certain pythagorist elements.  Or perhaps individual dwarves that follow a certain religion would have differing philosophies.  That would also allow for conflict between dwarves even if they're of the same religion.

This would allow for atheist rationalists, atheist humanists (or perhaps dwarfists) as well as animist existentialists or nihilists.

There we go. Good idea? Bad idea? Etc.? One rule: Do not let this topic drift into discussing real life. Rather, discuss purely in terms of how changes could affect the "Drawf Fortress" world.

EDIT: Name of thread changed so that the word "philosophies" is spelt correctly.

[Neonivek]

Uhh

While Religion and "Philosophy" are not the same thing. Why are we seperating them?

It could be a great idea to make Philosphies and beliefs seperate from Religion but not a religion in themselves. Religions and Governments could chose to adopt them

Though it isn't so much a Philosophy as they are a lot like Entity Definitions.

Edit Addition: Reading further it seems a BIT like Sunday thought of that somewhat... but kinda stepped back and applied it to Atheism.

[Kilo24]

I suppose that direct worship of spheres rather than gods might allow similar effects.

Nature for druids, reason for your above example, pleasure for hedonists, etc.  Maybe with a few variables on how romanticized they consider it to be, with gods being created, prayers being uttered, and sacrifices being made at high levels, and it simply affecting their values at low levels.

[Lonewolf]

Those who've played Arcanum know that dwarves have their own philosophy there.

The Stone and Shape

I'm talking about the stuff of dwarven souls, the tenets we live by, our moral fiber... though morality plays no part in it. Not morality as most know it. What I speak of, friend, is what is known as the Stone and the Shape...

To be a Dwarf... what does this mean? Our character is defined through the immovability, the solidity of stone. We dwarves see the soul not as something ephemeral or transient... but as rooted in this reality as the mountains from which we carve our homes... do you understand?

I speak both metaphorically and literally... we are dwarves, and there is much about us that is like the stone. We feel no more at home than when it surrounds us, and it carries to us the roar of the great molten flows, or the slow whine of subterannean ocean-rivers, or, when all is quiet, mountain-whispers so steeped in age that even the stars were young when they were first spoken.

And so... to understand this is to understand a part of what makes us dwarves... these loves are immovable and unchangeable, and so we are like the Stone. A stone yields what is already within, and so we, as Dwarves, look within and see what it is we are to become.

The Shape is what FORMS us, what defines our being and our purpose and the things we say and do. As there are many types of stone, so are there as many shapes. Granite for bricks, and shale for oilstones, and marble for statues, and crystal for the fragile and precise.

(where Stone refers to the commonalities between dwarves, Shape refers to the differences)

The most important concept - it is the Shape that defines what the Stone becomes. One cannot exist without the other. To a certain degree, Shape does define what the Stone becomes... flint makes a good striking stick... but the reverse is just as true... you can't make a good striking stick without flint. Shape arises from Stone, but Stone is dependent upon Shape...

It is perhaps stated most simply in this way. As slate will flake and crack under the sculptor's chisel, so will a dwarf who knows not his purpose, knows not his Shape. Dwarven morality... the choices we make... at the most basic level, is defined by us being dwarves. Work ethic, love of family, respect of wisdom... these are our morality. We seem them not as choices, because, as dwarves, it is merely being who we are. Stone is the existence of these things... Shape is their expression.

There are times when the choices we are forced to make cannot be true to both the Shape and the Stone. There is a saying among us... 'Weigh your own Stone'.

[Granite26]

I personally think that in depth details of what dwarves believe about the physical nature of their universe doesn't make a lot of sense.  Which god you worship and what ethics he expects you to uphold have a real game effect over flavor text.

I suppose a philosophy that is just an atheist moral code replacing religion (filling the 'role' of religion for that actor) would be cool.

You'd still have to define what it means when an actor 'worships' another actor.

[Kilo24]

[10 Int or a handy Essence of Intellect potion required]

Ah, Arcanum references.  Wish we had more of them; the game's worth it.

I do think that that in-depth of philosophies are out of DF's scope until well past v1.0, if they ever will be implemented (and I don't think they will.)   Toady has said several times in interviews that he doesn't expect the same depth of cultural nuances we'd find in, say, Tolkien, and that seems to be one of them.

I can't think of much applicable influence on DF's mechanics, present or future, that that... nebulous of a philosophy would have.  And systematizing that in ways that could have random aspects to it could be pretty difficult.  Do you have any ideas?

[Rowanas]

The whole religion thing can be done and have influence, no issue. The only problem with it is having two categories of beliefs that interact. screw it, says I. Dwarves should pick a random number of beliefs that are either philosophes or gods, and they all mix to create the dwarf's final character. It works just like the current system of preferences (often full of contradictions) so I see no problem there.

[Granite26]

The whole religion thing can be done and have influence, no issue. The only problem with it is having two categories of beliefs that interact. screw it, says I. Dwarves should pick a random number of beliefs that are either philosophes or gods, and they all mix to create the dwarf's final character. It works just like the current system of preferences (often full of contradictions) so I see no problem there.

Don't you think that reduces the room for religions or schools (as opposed to faiths or philosophies)?

Also:  This

Finally... OP... Go edit the OP to correct the spelling (for archival purposes)

[Rowanas]

I don't think it reduces room for those things, because it's just incorporating something else into them. renaming the whole class and slightly tweaking the effect. There are no major differences between the mechanics of religious faith as opposed to atheistic faith (before you say it's not a faith, you're wrong. Technically all atheists should be antitheists). If there are no mechanical differences, why separate them. Also, buddhism is part faith part philosophy, as are many other "religions", and most religions have caused a separate and distinct branch of secular philosphy.

[Granite26]

errm... not sure we're on the same page.  First:  I agree that Atheism is a religion.  (OK, real world, it may not be, that's debatable.  For the purposes of this game discussion, they fill the same line on the character sheet.)

If I say I am a 'Methodist' or 'Baptist' or 'Sikh' or 'Coptic' or 'Sunni', that means that I hold or probably hold a certain set of beliefs, but more importantly that I belong to a certain group.  I'm drawing a circle and saying some people are inside with me, and everyone else is outside.

I find the groups more important (in game terms) than esoteric philosophic debates like the existance of transubstantiation.  Saying a dwarf picks a certain number of these to have loyalty to... reduces the effect of them.

[Rowanas]

Well, I'm just saying that they would range from 0 to 3 (think about how many animals the average dwarf likes). Usually dwarves would just have one, but the occasional dwarf might have two, and a really indecisive dwarf would have three. A few rare dwarves would get none at all.

[Granite26]

K, sounds good to me... Just so long as most dwarves are in a 'religion' circle that affects their grouping, I'm happy...

Oh, and repeat after me ::: FILL-OSS-PO-FEES

[Rowanas]

K, sounds good to me... Just so long as most dwarves are in a 'religion' circle that affects their grouping, I'm happy...

Oh, and repeat after me ::: FILL-OSS-PO-FEES

Mwhehe. reading that always makes me laugh. Strange it hasn't been changed yet.

[Felblood]

I feel that a lot of this ties back to what I was saying over here, with religions appearing and changing over time and incorporating false and true gods together, or no gods at all, depending on weather the gods allow such things to happen, and how the dwarves feel about it.

In a sufficiently bizzare universe, a god should be able to join an agnostic religion.

[Granite26]

you're playing word games with what a 'God' means.

Sounds like your saying Zeus might not be sure Cronos ever existed?