Bonding

Questions and suggestions relating to deities and temples

Moderators: Stormbringer, Ehlanna

Bonding

Postby Myra on Fri Jun 18, 2010 3:20 am

What I remember of bonding...

was that it was between two characters and that their union was approved by the gods. It meant something, a connection that was sacred and approved by the gods and the empire. It was celebrated and hard to find. A partnership between TWO characters that was unbreakable because the gods had chosen to acknowledge them and give their blessings. They had a partnership.. a connection beyond what lovers have.

Its come to my attention that some characters are bonding multiple times with multiple characters. To me.. this is something that breaks what a bonding ceremony means. That it has taken what is suppose to mean something beyond a lover and basically given bonding no status at all. If you can bond to anybody.. and everybody what truly is significant about it?

What i want to know.. is if bonding is looked upon the same way I do...

AND

An option in doing this is to make bonding more... sacred. That only a high priest can do that ceremony and which religions would be more willing to do so.(ie.. moriels.. CoDL.. could be questionable bonding religion but so could they all.. depending on beliefs)

FEEDBACK PLEASE!!!!!!!
User avatar
Myra
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 146
Joined: Mon May 26, 2008 10:15 pm
Location: Iowa

Re: Bonding

Postby Isla on Fri Jun 18, 2010 3:33 am

I agree with that Myra, bonding is supposed to be something sacred, meaningful, like real life marriage. Its something looked upon by some with reverence no matter how upset one would get at their spouse the idea of being split from them.. is actually quiet painful. I couldn't imagine being bonded to more than one person.. its like ripping yourself in two.. Anyway...


I like the idea of only high priests being allowed to do the ceremonies, it would of course make things a little more difficult for one to get the ceremony done but on the other hand it wouldn't be able to be done by every Tom Dick and Harry that happened to be available.
User avatar
Isla
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 128
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 2:11 pm

Re: Bonding

Postby Dalahlaleeah on Fri Jun 18, 2010 6:20 am

I have always viewed the actual bonding done by the High Priests/Priestess as that sacred vow between two people that the Gods/Goddesses have blessed. A joining of the two that says that no matter the lovers, no matter the slaves - these two will always come first for each other.

So in essence, Lily bonds with Bob - vowing that he will always come first, he holds that special meaning in her life and vice versa. A sacred union. Now, if Bob goes and bonds with Trish, he is making the same vow to her, thus reducing Lily to nothing more than a lover. And then goes and bonds with Christie, he reduces Trish to the level of lover. So on and so forth.

Basically - you can only have one that comes first and foremost. Only one that you love above all others. Only one that the thought of not being with in such an intimate relationship causes pain. Taking more than one bonded mate just cheapens it all the way around and makes it pointless.

My two cents on it.
Image
User avatar
Dalahlaleeah
Novice
Novice
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 3:03 am

Re: Bonding

Postby Twerlinger on Fri Jun 18, 2010 7:25 am

Bonding.. means so many different things to different people at the end of the day

I know the rules about it used to be, that revenge could only be called upon by Bonded mates and owners of slaves, to prevent the whole Joe Blow attacked me, I'll get all of my friends to smite him for no reason. But with the relaxing of the OOC Consent rules, there is now the ability to do just that, in theory. I think that Bonding should be limited to 1 person. Yes you can call others Mate/Husband/Wife/Whatever but for the true definition it should be one Bonding to one person.

As is stated elsewhere

'While bonding does not receive Imperial sanction, it is recognized in that, without posted bonding, received through the Temples, there is no way to claim "Mated" relations with another character. Meaning in revenge storylines, if the mating ritual isn't posted, it cannot be used. One mate per character as well. Slaves cannot and will not be married. Slaves are property and are allowed to have only one Master or Mistress. The slave must first be decollared before one can marry otherwise its a conflict of interest. Also it should be noted, that if you, IC, do not follow on of the recognized religions, you can chose one to receive the Bonding at, and then hold your own ceremony to bless the God or Goddess you do follow.'

I haven't seen or heard of this ruling being shifted or ammended beyond the relaxing of the OOC Consent rules.
Image
User avatar
Twerlinger
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1403
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 4:07 pm
Location: Wherever I am

Re: Bonding

Postby Stormbringer on Fri Jun 18, 2010 12:28 pm

I already spoke to Myra about this and explained that, with the changes in the rules on consequences for actions, a bonding was no longer appropriate as a way to define acceptable revenge actions and so it has no real relevance in the actual mechs of the game.

However... I am personally of a similar opinion in that multiple bondings trivialise the whole concept of it in much the same way as musical collars trivialise the relationship between master and slave. It is supposed to signify a very special relationship between two characters and whatever your thoughts about polygamy and polyandry I am not of the opinion that such a relationship can exist in multiples of more than two.

So I'm throwing this to the heads of the various religions. A recognised bonding can only exist if a ceremony is performed by a significant follower of a recognised deity. The empire is tolerant of religions but it only recognises about seven (off the top of my head). These are Ishtar, Gaea, Kirva, Aden Ver, Ulcreva (sp?), Shaera and the Vulpine Lady. Maybe there's another but I can't think of it.

Each of those religions needs to define for itself what their deity's stance is on bonding first off. Then they need to define where a bonding can take place and who can perform the ceremony. This will NOT be recognised by the empire if the answer is 'anywhere by anyone'. At an absolute minimum for empire recognition a bonding will need to take place in a recognised place sacred to the deity, in accordance with the defined beliefs of that deity, by a priest or higher of that deity, when at least one of those being bonded is a follower of that deity.

I don't want to try and tell those involved in each religion what their god/ess wants their followers to do. I don't want to tell temple heads how to organise their ceremonies. But I can and do speak for the empire and unless bonding is a significant event within a recognised religion, it will carry absolutely no weight in imperial terms.
Image
--------------
Charm’d magic casements, opening on the foam
Of perilous seas, in faery lands forlorn

(John Keats)
Check your baggage at the door and bring some magic through your
window onto the world of Belariath
User avatar
Stormbringer
High Council
High Council
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2005 3:02 pm

Re: Bonding

Postby taria on Sun Jun 20, 2010 3:51 pm

It has come to my attention that it is thought that the only officiates to bond are the five main gods.. This to me at least is a bit obsurd. I mean, not everyone is going to follow the five god-heads.. IE: Draks whom are normally worshippers of their Elders.. Which brings me to my point as it was brough to me to state that Taria/Archaon's bonding isn't going to hold any imperial weight because it was officiated with the Elder Dragons.

Would the Elder Dragons be able to officiate said bonding as they are a religious head of their own house?
Beware lest you lose the substance by grasping at the shadow.
Image
User avatar
taria
Initiate
Initiate
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 10:04 pm
Location: Utah

Re: Bonding

Postby miyuka on Sun Jun 20, 2010 6:37 pm

you can be bonded to more than one person?
User avatar
miyuka
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 5116
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 6:03 pm
Location: Georgia USA baby!

Re: Bonding

Postby Twerlinger on Sun Jun 20, 2010 7:49 pm

If following what has been written so far, then.. unless there is a Drak'sen religion that the elder dragon would fit in, or that the elder dragon was actually part of one of the recognised religions.. I would say.. newp its not an recognised bonding.
Image
User avatar
Twerlinger
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1403
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 4:07 pm
Location: Wherever I am

Re: Bonding

Postby lyllamarie on Sun Jun 20, 2010 8:10 pm

recognized may also fall under the minor deities of each race on the website, provided there is a shrine, a cleric and that they define their own rules of it. Drak-Sen can either follow the true path of ancestor/Dragon worship, or follow another deity, though that deity would never truly be above their maker.

That means that, yes, a Dragon Elder could very well officiate a bonding if approved and done by an Op, and that bonding would be officially recognized as was the case with Taria and Archaon last night.
The player of
LyllaMarie{SB} || Sutara || Ebilese || Hellian Cros || Kuma || Imogene
User avatar
lyllamarie
High Council
High Council
 
Posts: 3874
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 10:48 pm
Location: lurking on the message board.

Re: Bonding

Postby Twerlinger on Sun Jun 20, 2010 8:13 pm

Erm.. hating to be a pain.. but as per SB

A recognised bonding can only exist if a ceremony is performed by a significant follower of a recognised deity. The empire is tolerant of religions but it only recognises about seven (off the top of my head). These are Ishtar, Gaea, Kirva, Aden Ver, Ulcreva (sp?), Shaera and the Vulpine Lady


If that is true, then any minor deity, isn't technically recognised for the purposes of a recognised bonding. Which means, that unless the elder dragon in question was a significant follower of one of those 7 or so religions.. it isn't valid.
Image
User avatar
Twerlinger
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1403
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 4:07 pm
Location: Wherever I am

Re: Bonding

Postby Adariel on Mon Jun 21, 2010 4:10 am

In that case go ahead and revoke any and all drak`sen (Elder Dragons), Magi (Morpheous), Minotaurs ( who hold to the mino gods) Sithians (Tepictuc) and any Wolven (who follow wolven gods and not the Empire's) bondings since the opening of the game per the rules immediately. Oh and be sure to notify they must bow down to one of those seven deities to do so.
User avatar
Adariel
Novice
Novice
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue May 04, 2010 7:53 pm

Re: Bonding

Postby Adariel on Mon Jun 21, 2010 4:48 am

That and seeing as since the as far as the MB goes I saw a total of 17 or 18 *official* bondings maybe people don't want the empire involved and just have mates?
User avatar
Adariel
Novice
Novice
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue May 04, 2010 7:53 pm

Re: Bonding

Postby Stormbringer on Mon Jun 21, 2010 12:49 pm

The empire is tolerant of religions but it only recognises about seven (off the top of my head). These are Ishtar, Gaea, Kirva, Aden Ver, Ulcreva (sp?), Shaera and the Vulpine Lady. Maybe there's another but I can't think of it.


I have no objection to Drak Sen who follow their beliefs being bonded by the elder dragons provided they also listened to the other side of what I said.

Each of those religions needs to define for itself what their deity's stance is on bonding first off. Then they need to define where a bonding can take place and who can perform the ceremony.


This topic was about multiple bondings. Since the relationship between dragons and Drak sen is considered a religion, in line with the web page on the subject, then the appropriate representatives of the dragons and Draks need to define their stance on multiple bondings, don't they. I made it crystal clear that I was not going to take a stance on multiple bondings as a game rule because it doesn't affect gameplay now that consequences and retribution rules have changed. I made it equally clear that it was for each religion to make its own decisions on what their deity found acceptable.

I listed the major religions that came to mind and I have no problem adding to that list when valid suggestions are made. I don't claim infallibility and never did.

But what I'm not going to see is Joe Blow, who happens to be a member of X race demanding minor deity Y be recognised when that same deity has been almost completely ignored for years because Joe was too busy fucking anything not nailed down, but it now suits his personal storyline to have that god exist within the game.

The Draks, along with the Chirots and the Vulpines have earned recognition based on extensive roleplay by characters within the game over long periods of time. That's why I am happy to add them to the list. As for the rest - show me why I should recognise deities that in most cases only exist in skeletal form because I asked dev to fill in some missing details to flesh out each race.
Image
--------------
Charm’d magic casements, opening on the foam
Of perilous seas, in faery lands forlorn

(John Keats)
Check your baggage at the door and bring some magic through your
window onto the world of Belariath
User avatar
Stormbringer
High Council
High Council
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2005 3:02 pm

Re: Bonding

Postby Adariel on Mon Jun 21, 2010 5:56 pm

Well seeing as Sithians and magi are rare at best I can really only see Minotuars having to show why their gods would be recognized; Although a decent majority seem to have chosen one of the empire's major god/desses.

True though, if any and all god/desses were recognized it would be a bit of a nightmare to say the least; So definatly have to agree on that one. Although, I will admit seeing as there have not been many public bondings; Some having been private, I beleive that there should also be a history of IC roleplay. A bonding should hold some weight and define the relationship between two characters, not just be something to do.

Bonding shouldn't run rampant and be a special occasion reserved after some time and not something any player can just dive into because it just seems right, they feel like it, etc. Mind you I have seen that ruin some good storylines and old rp's I used to be in; Almost all gone now.

Although it could be hard, and take time, I am sure if they wish the players of minotuar characters could define the gods of their race a bit more and their views on multiple bondings. As well as other topics as well.
User avatar
Adariel
Novice
Novice
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue May 04, 2010 7:53 pm

Re: Bonding

Postby Stormbringer on Tue Jun 22, 2010 10:43 am

On Earth marriage is the norm whilst a relationship between master and slave is considered unusual at best and grounds for eternal damnation at worst. On Belariath the norm is to remain single, either taking sex where you find it (with or without consent) or forming a more permanent relationship around owner and slave. As such, in this world, it is the marriage equivalent of bonding that is considered an aberration - one that could cause raised eyebrows or sidelong glances and sniggers. So is it something that would be entered into lightly or indescriminately?

That's a rhetorical question, by the way. On Belariath, playing a character within this society instead of the common error of trying to transplant Earth conventions into a fantasy world, bonding is much, much more significant as a lifestyle choice than taking a slave. When characters make that commitment they are stepping outside convention - not something which should be easy to do in any society.
Image
--------------
Charm’d magic casements, opening on the foam
Of perilous seas, in faery lands forlorn

(John Keats)
Check your baggage at the door and bring some magic through your
window onto the world of Belariath
User avatar
Stormbringer
High Council
High Council
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2005 3:02 pm

Next

Return to Religion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


cron