Geas

Interesting exchange from another thread:

Hearst wrote:Gwen and Asral: I remember someone claiming to follow Gwen that was "married" to someone claiming to follow Asral. I suppose it never married that Asral and Gwen were enemies. The fact that there were "married" was considered RP enough by them.

gojin wrote:This is a good example of too much emphasis being put on religion in Geas. You are basically saying you think its poor rp for your char to care more for another char than for the god it follows? I just have to disagree. If I were an Asralite I would not think twice about getting some Gwennite tail. Is it even the popular opinion that Asral would look down on this?

tessa wrote:Yes. Asral quite vocally decrees Gwen as an archnemesis and all her followers as scum. Gwen feels similar about Asral, as the things they stand for are pretty opposite. It's not really much different than Evren/Sathonys or Taniel/Lilith, except these two are forced to co-exist together in same places. Code-wise, however, it seems to be exactly the same.

But yes, Asral would smite any alleged devotee of war for sleeping with a blasphemer. In hypotheticals at least.

This made me think about what motivations drive living things in the fantasy world of Geas. Having given it some brief thought ive come up with a few motivating factors and archetypes. Keep in mind this would the average human from Arborea(not an Asral Priest or Crusader) and the average elf from Elvandar(not a Taniel Cleric).

Factors - Food&Water, Sex, Religion, Wealth&Power, Recreation, Following Societal Norms/Peer Acceptance.

Human Archetype -
1)Food&Water 2)Sex 3)Wealth&Power 4)Peer Acceptance 5)Religion 6)Recreation

Elven Archetype -
1)Food&Water 2)Societal Norms 3)Religion 4)Sex 5)Recreation 6)Wealth&Power

These are my summations but I would be very interested in hearing how others' view on what drive Geasians.

PO Gojin

1) Fear. I believe it's one of the idea strongest "ingredients" in a decision.

Well Triska being a romantic at heart would say that two people 'falling in love'(not just having sex or tail as it was put by someone) would not be able to help it , its not something they would choose to do but something that happens.

It would of course give role play , the knowing it would be frowned on by the deities they belong to the mental and physical torment of knowing their hearts took over where brains failed... but at the end of the day I do think that what a couple do in the privacy of their own room is THEIR business and then up to them. How they role play the rest of the damnation the world puts on them is yet another form of role play.

So to sum up the role play from this would be

1. Ongoing role play for the event of the falling for each other
2. Further role play when they realise and the role play from can we, will we, shall we or the anguish of trying to live apart and obey their gods ruling on the union
3. More role play finding they cant and dealing with the 'personal role play that follows'
4. Even more role play when the rest of the world see the couple and chip their two coppers worth into their relationship.
5. Ongoing role play and marriage or breakup.

Often the none hack and slash characters spend a lot of time alone and so this is possibly a very intense time of role play for two people that would otherwise not get the same interaction that team hunters get when planning raids or defending their homelands.

triska wrote:Well Triska being a romantic at heart would say that two people 'falling in love'(not just having sex or tail as it was put by someone) would not be able to help it , its not something they would choose to do but something that happens.

It would of course give role play , the knowing it would be frowned on by the deities they belong to the mental and physical torment of knowing their hearts took over where brains failed... but at the end of the day I do think that what a couple do in the privacy of their own room is THEIR business and then up to them. How they role play the rest of the damnation the world puts on them is yet another form of role play.

I believe you are trying to bring OOC morality and modern day thinking into Triskas thinking here.

Triska lives in a world that everyone knows the gods are real. Triska lives in a world that everyone knows the Gods are all knowing. Triska lives in a world that everyone knows the gods are all seeing. So to think that you can get away with such blasphemy and total betrayal of your god just because "the door is closed" should not even cross her or anyone else mind. Everyone should be afraid of their God seeing it, and if they aren't they might as well do it in public. They should fear the deities much more than the mere mortals running around, but since the deities hardly ever punish someone they ignore this fact.

Modern day thinking shouldn't govern anything in this RP world, but thinking the all knowing gods won't see it "because the door is closed" seems very close to that. It seems like a statement a lawyer would use in a court trial tomorrow.

I don't think it's bringing modern thinking into it.

A love that must not be, for whatever reason, is classic drama stuff. And it will happen even in a world in which everyone knows that gods exist and dislike certain relationships.

This is not bad roleplay but rather an opportunity for a good one: imagine love between gwenite and asralite, with doubt and fear of the reaction from society and gods. If you think this must have consequences, play it that way!

So don't make the drama about the appropriateness of such roleplay, but bring the drama into the relationship itself.

Herst wrote:Triska lives in a world that everyone knows the gods are real. Triska lives in a world that everyone knows the Gods are all knowing. Triska lives in a world that everyone knows the gods are all seeing. So to think that you can get away with such blasphemy and total betrayal of your god just because "the door is closed" should not even cross her or anyone else mind. Everyone should be afraid of their God seeing it, and if they aren't they might as well do it in public. They should fear the deities much more than the mere mortals running around, but since the deities hardly ever punish someone they ignore this fact.

My char will agree with you that there are beings who claim to be gods.
My char knows that they're not omniscient, and he's fairly certain that they don't
see everything. My char is aware that one 'god' or another might zap him for his
thoughts, but since they didn't do so for the last few decades he's pretty sure that
they won't do it. If they'd be as omniscient as most others believe them to be, then
he would have been 'zapped' at his birth, and not 133 years afterwards.

She was not actually meaning hiding it from the gods so much since we all know they can see and do see but from other players.

What a couple do behind closed doors is nothing to do with the other couple in the next room with the glass to the wall spying on them or trying.

Nothing to do with other players opinions of how they have sex when they have sex or even if they are having sex. What goes behind a closed door is private and even in forostar I think. Now the other players finding out they are in a room in private and guessing and being moralistic to the couple is indeed a different aspect of the role play.

If they get away with being in a room for a few times before being found out well good luck to them and I hope their role play is superb to them personally.

If we are still talking about two characters that are in a religion where their gods are enemies, then I believe it is up to the players to have enough responsibility not to go against the fundamental principles of which the mud was created on.

Quick examples: Evrenite and Sathonite love affair. Nonsense!
Gwennie and Asralite love affair: Rubbish!
Tanielite and Lilithian love affair: Possible, if she seduced
him well enough!

This is what I was on the subject of.

That is good commonsense indeed, but not something that should be 110% foolproof. Enemies just MIGHT fall in love. How it is handled is a different matter entirely.

Though I understand the concern of seeing too much of that as people might think of it as kinda cool and stuff. You all know how you feel when you meet your nth Drizz Do'Urden wannabe or something similar...

Bah, I hate it when all you emo kids try to turn this mud into a soap opera!

Yes, everyone wanted to be a Drizzt. They wanted all the perks and the "coolness" of looking like a darkelf/etc....but they did not want any off the consequences.

Kind of like how someone thinks they can be "fluffy evil"

Yes, I follow Sathonys/Lilith but I am really just a nice guy! Here have a flower!

I don't know I think you can be an asshole and a Taniel at the same time, I've seen it done, hell even I've done it. Most Sathonites are assholes and Most Taniels are nice. One would think that the opposite could also exist no matter how strange. Was Drizzt that darkelf who was accepted by people? I heard about that from someone.

Honestly though if a Gwenite and an Asral got together, their Gods should favour neither of them, and they should abandon their Gods. This is TRUE love after all.... isn't it? =) Then again not everyone was as devoted as Luminier was.

You guys are confusing motivations for actions with outcomes of said actions.

Drizzt was essentially a chaotic good darkelf. Protector of innocents and nature and yada yada against the evil forces, despite being born in one of the nastiest places in (or under) Faerun.

Anyway, relationships between enemies can work, but I think at least one of two ultimatums would eventually have to occur:

Break-up of the relationship.
Fall-out in their guilds/gods/social groups/whatever else.

In other words, a "pick one or the other, but you don't get both" situation.

isengoo wrote:You guys are confusing motivations for actions with outcomes of said actions.

i think u just misunderstood what i was talking about initially

Which was? It was somewhat incoherent.

isengoo wrote:Which was? It was somewhat incoherent.

eh w/e

luminier wrote:I don't know I think you can be an asshole and a Taniel at the same time, I've seen it done, hell even I've done it. Most Sathonites are assholes and Most Taniels are nice. One would think that the opposite could also exist no matter how strange. Was Drizzt that darkelf who was accepted by people? I heard about that from someone.

Honestly though if a Gwenite and an Asral got together, their Gods should favour neither of them, and they should abandon their Gods. This is TRUE love after all.... isn't it? =) Then again not everyone was as devoted as Luminier was.

Maybe this should be a new thread. Maybe it has already been covered ad nauseum in other threads, but I find it odd how "good" and "evil" are played on Geas. I am a Hemmingway fan and, "nice," is an insult. Good charcaters can be fanatics just as easliy as evil. And I would venture that "evil" characters do not see themselves as "evil."

Ok, here are my points from experience, and I will try not to give out too much IC info (and do not worry, you will not see a sathos-Ram running around):

1) Sathos make up a death cult, but I fail to understand why that makes them crazy and psychotic. Chaos is the stuff of Lilith, not Sathos. Granted Ram has not RP'ed much with the Order or the Dark Preists as usually any meeting was quickly escalated to fighting. As a player, I would like to think that is nobility and a deep seated sense of order, patience, and purpose in the Sathos just as there is in Taniel.

2) There are the sterotypical fanatic Evrenites and Tanielites (Crusade and Clergy), there are sterotypical quite patient ones (druids). Does this mean all Crusaders and Taniel Clergy are fanatics and all druids love peace and non-violence, no, but as long as the guilds favor the peripheries, those who are more moderate will need to RP their confliction.

3) If two characters feel a friendship or a love that crosses faiths or guild barriers, they ought to RP that confliction and while they may hide it from other players, they must accept the punishment form the Gods. I find it terrible RP for a Crusader to fight shoulder to shoulder and back to back with an Asralite or a merc, but since they have not "teamed" with the Asralite or the merc, it is OK. If you are fighting with another and you are fighting the same enemy (especially if by intention), it is skirting the intention of the code to not team. Likewise, if you are having an affair and do not team, you are skirting the intention of the code. You should place your character in disfavor and then do what you need to "cleanse your soul" afterwards.

Ram would intentionally team with expelled Crusaders or enemies to help them regain lost favour or allow Ram to be dupped and would RP the actions as "Ram help <blank> show Evren he/she no bad. Evren forgive Ram will." He would feel the wrath of Evren in doing so and over time this confliction led to his current spot. None was neccesarily planned, but I tried to RP a "good hearted" character in a fanatical "good" guild. I must say the consequences have been fun to play.

ramandu wrote:1) Sathos make up a death cult, but I fail to understand why that makes them crazy and psychotic.

They take pleasure in the agony and suffering of others, may it be through murder, torture, trauma-inducing torment, and so forth. Not to mention, they eat humanoid meat to let their bodies deform into abominations for the sake of power. Then we have the subject of darkelves, and how Sathos tend to be masochist and self-mutiliating and so forth.

In other words, their usual habits are those that make the average Forostar person shudder in disgust or repulsion.

tessa wrote:They take pleasure in the agony and suffering of others, may it be through murder, torture, trauma-inducing torment, and so forth. Not to mention, they eat humanoid meat to let their bodies deform into abominations for the sake of power.

These lovely Sunday afternoons.

Hey i am not an abomination, i am a pretty little elf. My green skin and red cheeks just prepare me for christmas