Subject: I know.
Author:
Posted on: 2013-06-27 11:37:00 UTC
1) I was saying that having a World One religious figure be replaced would mean that she or she might need to be killed, which would cause problems for several different reasons. I suppose they could always be recruited, if they were only severely OOC and not Sued when they were replaced, but it would be really weird talking to someone at the lunch table who says "Yeah, I'm Buddha. I try to stay away from roads as much as possible." Your mission had an OOC World One religious figure, but he wasn't replaced, which sidestepped a few points of precedent, but did so while simultaneously avoiding a lot of potential mess, so I'm hardly saying it was bad that you decided not to have a Yahweh vs. Wentway Slamdown. Yours was a better choice, considering the alternatives.
2) Ah, so yours was the only religion-based mission, and is now the only one ever to exist due to a rule change. I did not know that. I thought that there might have been more, but I hadn't read them if there were. That's that cleared up.
The "we don't want to disrespect others or their religions" angle was what I was trying to go for, but I may have phrased it poorly. I was using an extreme example, the volcano-dropping, out of a whole myriad of problems that might offend people to try and reiterate why going up against religious figures would not be a good idea. Sorry for the miscommunication there.