Not that I can really tell you why, but I never cared for Greek and Roman mythology. IMO having a lot of different gods is more of a hinderance than an aid to storytelling. Unless the story is really about the gods themselves, I would much rather have deep characters that move the story along.

Since religion has played such a huge role in midieval times, it does make sense to include some religeous factors into any feudal era game.

Interestingly, much of the European wars of that era were not in the name of opposing gods, rather in the name of the same god but because of differences in how the people believe the god should be worshipped.

For me religion is a seasoning. Sprinkle in for flavor, but don''t overpower the natural goodness of the story.

CDV

quote: Polytheistic:....(NeverWinter Nights, I fear, chose this model, which makes the characters seem a little... empty-headed).

I don''t think so because in computer RPGs the Gods are real and you usually meet a few and fight one at the end.

The classic good versus evil struggle is always good. You could even do without creating names for specific diety, and just have a "moral" conflict rather than religious one.

On the other hand, I developed a system for my old MUD that had about 12 dieties. Each diety had a story, and had control over an aspect of the world. For instance, one diety controlled magic. Followers could (under extremely rare, random circumstances) benefit from following the diety by having their mana-cost reduced, or spell-casting times reduced etc... We called it "divine intervention". After running for a short time in game, we removed it, as it was somewhat resource intensive.

Always remember, some players will get offended because you have gods or a "God". Some players will get offended because you don''t have gods. There is no right answer, but IMHO being blatantly evil in your portrayal of religions is about the only situation that will turn any players away.

Good luck.

Well, if we learn anything from Jesus, the how of religion isn''t as important as the why. You "clean the outside of the cup" so to speak, but what about the inside?

That said, I can see that implementing religion as part of a game does help to emphasize, or parody - if you will -, the problem of religion that Jesus pointed out.

quote:Zoroastrianism would definitely be dup-theistic as both Ahura Mazda and the bad guy (forgot his name) were equal in power.

Actually, by historians, Zoroastrianism is considered the first ethical monotheism (before Judaism). Angro Manya (sp?), while equally powerful to Ahura Mazda, is still just satan in disguise (different role) and thus just as monotheistic as Christianity/Judaism.

I prefer multitheistic. It gives another dimension to every character, a focus point. You know that a follower of Tyr is going to be somewhat militaristic, but that he will have a definite sense of fairness and honesty. The same could be said of a follower of Odin (Wotan, whatever), but it''s hard to say how he will act in a particular situation.

It may seem to make characters more... transparent or ''empty-headed'', but that''s the player, not the character. The character is only what the player makes him. Of course, NWN might make the NPCs rather transparent, but they are NPCs, not PCs in that case and need to be somewhat... dumb. AI is VERY hard to program well and it isn''t uncommon for games to be delayed months or even years because the AI for NPCs just isn''t doing what the makers want it to do.

I do agree that religion is sometimes used in place of actual personality by gamers though. Too often followers of one diety will consider it a "with me or against me" situation, not realizing that even Loki was a trusted son of Odin. Odin wouldn''t want you to run around killing Loki''s followers, just imposing law and order upon them and teaching them the error of their ways, sometimes through force, but never through murder.

One thing to remember though, every pantheon has it''s head honcho and what he says goes. If Zeus tells Poseidon to do something, he will do it 99% of the time, just find a way to warp it to his own means. It''s the way of things. The unfortunate thing about most completely fictional religions (non-historic) is that they never have this facet. In Everquest there is no ''head honcho'' deity, they''re all generally equal and work against or with whoever they see fit. Mystara (D&D''s Forgotten Realms world) doesn''t have a deity who makes the all encompassing decisions that the darker deities warp to their purposes. This is usually how you can tell the difference between fictional religions and history based religions. Historical religions are organized, hierarchical entities while fictional ones are almost chaotic creations with little order.

When conflicting religions (pantheons) are encountered, one of two things happened throughout history: Either the religion is conquered and incorporated or it is incorporated as a derivation of itself. One only need look as early as the Egyptian mythoi (originally 3 separate, smaller pantheons) to notice this, or as recent as the Christian religion''s incorporation of any vast number of pagan rituals, celebrations (holidays) and persona into their religion. The rituals were made a part of the good part of the religion, while the personas were made equivalent to satan worship. Thus, you can have a spring fertility celebration and stick bunnies and eggs in it (obvious symbols of fertility), but you have to call it Easter and associate it with the rebirth of the savior... You can have a Winter equinox celebration, but you have to associate it with the actual birth of the savior. It''s the oldest trick in the book, targeted at the lack of communal memory from generation to generation, but it''s also been proven to work almost every time it was used.

You want a pantheon? Either do a little research and do it right or make one based upon an actual historical pantheon. You want a simple good/evil battle? Those are a dime a dozen.

Well, as usual I took a planned 3 paragraph post and turned it into an essay...