Synonyms for Beliefs

[kruug]

Maybe new players have problems coming up with Beliefs because of the term used. We tend to "believe" in big, abstract concepts, like God, Country, Freedom, Loyalty, Peace, Love, etc. which leads us to immediately come up with similar beliefs for our characters. Maybe we need a list of synonyms for the types of Beliefs we're looking for in Burning Wheel.

In addition to the common sense of the word, Beliefs are:
Goals
Ambitions
Perspectives
Dreams
Aims
Intents
Missions

I think these words emphasize the ideal of actionable Beliefs. Thoughts, input?

[TimP]

Well, that's definitely been a problem with our group. We tend to go too big on our Beliefs, to the point where we have problems using them to drive the nitty gritty of actual play.

You could certainly use some of your words to describe the concept (Thor's?) of having one immediately applicable Belief, one mid-term Belief, and one long term Belief.

Tim

[luke]

Sure, but it's a balancing act. You want characters to have goals and missions, but they must be framed within the very personal context of personal beliefs.

Once you start saying "Goals" you get stuff like "To kill the prince" and that's just as bad as a flat Belief. "I will destroy the prince (and humiliate him in the process) for what he's done to my family" is more personal and more playable.

Yes, there's a reason they're called Beliefs. While I know it's mildly problematic, I think the term fixes more problems than it causes.

Also, moved to Spark.
-L

[Kublai]

You also have to think of what you're doing to the acronym. "MITs" just doesn't souind very cool, but I suppose "GITs" does!

[Angaros]

I've struggled a lot with beliefs and so has my players. It seems every time I log on to the forum I discover new bits of information about beliefs and how to use them in the game. It was only a couple of weeks ago (at most) that I had my latest epiphany and I don't think it was the last one. I can rant about beliefs for hours when meeting the other players at a café or when we're just hanging out and still not get it all out.

I don't think synonyms will get you where you want though. Each of the words listed ("belief" included) only paints a part of the picture. It's not until you give plenty of examples (or hire one of the BWHQ guys to come lecture) and sit down with the players and experiment that you're all gonna be getting somewhere IMO. There isn't a word that sums up all that Beliefs are in BW. I agree with Luke that it's a balancing act and where the sweet spot lies depends on variable factors such as the topic the belief is covering, the GM, the nature of the campaign, the setting, the player and much more.

[Fourth Horseman]

Don't call it goals, call it, "why I breath". WIBITs

[kruug]

Don't call it goals, call it, "why I breath". WIBITs

I like that. WIBITs. Though you sound like a frog when you say it out loud.


I don't think synonyms will get you where you want though. Each of the words listed ("belief" included) only paints a part of the picture.

Yeah, I agree. I guess I was hoping for a list of terms/short phrases to fire off in rapid succession during character creation, so people don't get hung up on the word Belief. Followed of course with examples, and why they are so important.

[Angaros]

(cheesy comparison alert)

You can always look at the game as a long journey where the journey itself is the goal*. The GM is your travel agent and beliefs is what you tell him about the vacation. Let's say you're going from Stockholm to Corleone, Sicily. If you just say that you want to go to Italy and that you want good pictures then the agent doesn't have much to go on. The ending might be nice but he could still put you in a shabby bus going through Hungarian backroads having you meet people you couldn't care less about. To get the most out of this vacation you need to say how you want to get where you're going too. Give the man a starting point. "I'm afraid of flying: I want to take the train to Copenhagen, gateway to the continent". Maybe you want to make a stop in Rome? Tell him that then. And of course, you'll need to remind him about the specific location you want to end up in. Perhaps even tell him what's important about getting there. He might know more than you about the place and can hook you up with interesting stuff in line with what you like.

These kind of comparisons are flawed in many ways, but what I'm getting at is that you need to have a longer discussion during the character/world/campaign burning session about the belief mechanic. You can always start with a test-burn. Use something really small and contained, like the Sword scenario, and fiddle around with beliefs for this. Then discuss how they interact with the story, what the GM can do (so they understand your side as well) and how rewards work. :)

--
*: I think this may be the greatest difference between character and player beliefs and may also be what is causing troubles at least in our group. For the character, the goal is what matters. They want to secure their family, become the greatest smith alive or whatever. In most cases they just want the journey there to be as smooth as possible. For the players, the goal is nice to reach but if there isn't any conflict on the way, if the goal isn't hard to reach, playing it out will be as fun as cheating in a computer game. For the players it's all about the journey. That's where the meat is. Does anyone else feel this way?

[kruug]

That's an excellent comparison. It's easily grasped, even by inexperienced players, and it gets to the heart of the issue. Nice.

It's about the journey, not the destination. That's why Lord of the Rings would have sucked if Isildur (correct name?) had just tossed the ring into the crack of doom after he cut off Sauron's hand. It makes us groan every time we think about it, but the story would have sucked if he had actually succeeded.

You have to have interesting stopping points, otherwise it's too broad, and probably boring...at least hard to work with.

[Angaros]

I can hear Luke moaning, saying "there is no character!"... ;) What I meant was there is a difference in our (my) mindset when looking at the game from our own perspective and when using the imaginary character's eyes. Sometimes getting in character gets in your way whether you like it or not. I love deep immersion, trying to feel what the character feels, replacing my priorities with those of the character. Sure, I'm the one who made the character what he is but that doesn't alter the fact that I see him (or her) as another person. Someone whose dispositions are different from mine.

I've also always disliked having information as a player that the character hasn't got. It's not difficult to distinguish between what I know and what my character knows, but it does cause me to lose focus. Finding a balanced path to walk where players know enough to create driving goals and propel the story forward but also little enough not to be hindered in their immersion isn't always easy.

I'm not as fond of the "put it all on the table"-style that most HQ people seem to like, but that's a matter of preference. I still remember how disappointed one of my players was when he learned stuff about the campaign that I felt was necessary for him as a player to know in order to write beliefs tied to the story. I don't know how vague you can be during the campaign burning session about what the campaign goals and themes should be. How much do you have to know as a player to create interesting stakes for your character that doesn't run dry after 2-3 sessions? What I'm saying is: can you start off with something very hands-on, very mundane and tie the beliefs to that knowing that something bigger is lurking in the background?

For example: say the players state they want to play out how a family is torn apart by a nation-wide conflict of some sort. This could be a natural disaster, war, political campaign or whatever. The players don't want to know. They still know it's all about the family though and they decide that they will begin the campaign at the annual gathering at the clan hold where they will be trying to influence the clanhead in some way. They could write beliefs that state their general disposition about family/clan relations and have two other beliefs that more immediately tie them to this gathering and what they hope to get out of it. The first belief would be a placeholder and once the greater conflict is revealed it would get rewritten or at least distilled into something more to the point. In the meantime it will still show the group what's important to this character even if it's a general disposition that before it's rewritten probably won't get played out or challenged (and won't lead to much in the way of artha rewards). Why not have the first belief tie into the situation at hand? Well I like the idea of having something that reaches beyond what the character is focusing on now. Something that sets the general "tone" or "feel" of the character. ("I have no love for my blood relatives -- my proven comrades is all the family I need" could be an example.)

Would that be a workable solution?

[khelek]

When discussing beliefs for new characters. If the player comes up with this huge awsome belief that is hard to tackle, I ask them "What is the First Step toward that belief" and make a belief off of that. Then when that is complete "What is the Second Step?" etc... they have their huge belief underlying their actions, but resolvable beliefs that can be the focus of a session.

[kruug]

I pulled this straight from the wikipedia article about The Riddle of Steel. I have no shame.

religious faith (defending religion)
passions (love, hate or other strong emotions for someone or something)
conscience (personal ethics)
drive (a particularly strong intent or purpose)
destiny (a future foretold)

These could be seen as the ideals, which should be further fleshed out by pairing the ideal with an "actionable" item.