Mercule
Adventurer
What do I think? I think he's dead wrong.
Random samping of points follows. (Note, I am granting him the notion that Christianity is right and Wicca, Islam, Shintoism, etc. are 'wrong' because otherwise, the quick answer is "So what if RPGs are detrimental to Christianity." Oh, and I'm a Christian myself, so I'm more interested in looking at this from a Christian point of view.)
1) He notes that Wiccan books, groups, etc. have become more popular (or even only come into existance) since D&D hit the stores. Nowhere does he show causality. This is a classic post hoc ergo propter hoc ('after this, therefore from this') fallacy.
I got married after Bill Clinton was elected to office. Were his sexual escapades responsible for my wedded bliss?
The success of things like Harry Potter falls into the same category. I'd be looking more for common causality than a 'one causes the other' situation.
2) The language of Christians apologizing was apparently less than perfect. So what? I've yet to see a foul word in any D&D book (meaning TSR or WotC). I've also heard pastor's wives cuss/curse.
Besides, taking the Lord's name in vain is the only act prohibited by God's Law. Personally, I'm quite offended when I hear someone do that, curse someone ('damn'), etc.; but scatological (and similar) references register as simply a bit lowbrow and crude.
All that is to say that I'm not sure what he means by foul language. For all I know, someone called him a 'pompous ass', and he's decided that is a damnable offense.
3) While I'm quite impressed that he appears to have read a fair amount of the rules, he doesn't appear to always understand them, or to care. Take, for instance, his impeachment of Alignment.
His first claim is "that quite often, players will pick an alignment that is more evil or chaotic". Upon what does he base this claim? My experience has shown me that for more groups prohibit Evil characters than encourage them. That isn't saying my experience is exhaustive, but it is a more sound basis than anything he presents.
3a) Why the dissing for Chaotic? This is something that annoys me, not just from him, but from within the RP community, too. I fail to see how Chaos, as listed in the books, is any less Good than Law. Yet, he presents this idea without any rationale or explanation.
Well, so long as he views the American Founding Fathers with contempt for their Chaotic and depraved ways, I suppose that he is at least consistant.
4) He asserts, "the Necronomicon and the Cthulhu mythos are quite real." This is wholly untrue, but I'm willing to grant that he was misinformed rather than intentionally misleading. The Cthulhu myths were found only in the fictional writings of HP Lovecraft and the Necronomicon is part of those myths. Sure, you can go into Waldenbooks and buy a copy of the Necronomicon (I've got one on my shelf at home), but it post-dates Lovecraft and is obviously a knock-off.
5) He says, "They make this mistake because they equate Roman Catholicism and its robed clerics for Christians," which is downright insulting. For someone who likes waving his Bible around and making reference to it (not that there's anything wrong with that), he might want to have an understanding of which group stapled together the first copy.
I should note that I've got some pretty big disagreements with Catholicism, but to call them non-Christian without any rationale (do I see a pattern?), is a pretty big stretch for this guy to make.
6) He discusses the absence of Christ as a power in the default D&D game. Personally, I see this as a strength of the game. As DM, I have to determine the motivations and actions of the "powers that be". If that power happens to be Christ, it becomes a catch 22 -- I can't imagine NPCing Jesus as a holy and respectful thing.
If you're a Christian, it is a simple thing to say "for some reason, unfathomable to me or anyone else, this particular universe was set up a bit differently and God does not make His presence known directly. He exists and is superior to anything you'll be interacting with, though." I should know. That's been the statement in my game for two decades.
7) He quotes a passage from the "Freeman article" that stakes a complete lack of evidence in any known report that gaming and suicide are related. Then he asks for evidence of this claim. That is a totally non-sensical retort. It is akin to:
-"My car will go 150 miles per hour."
-"That sounds unlikely, can you show me that?"
-"Nope. You have to prove that it doesn't."
7a) He does similar things throughout the discussion of Dallas Egbert.
7b) His response to the impeachment of Dr. Thomas Radecki (an 'authority' cited by RPG foes) having his liscence suspended was to say, that it may be true, but that does not mean we shouldn't listen to his professional opinion. The author may want to understand that having a license suspended pretty much does mean that someone has no professional credibility.
8) In response to, "Of course, one might be forgiven for suspecting an investigation paid for by the FRPG industry itself. That would be like asking the fox to guard the henhouse," one could ask for an alternate study. One could also ask if the accused should be allowed to speak at their own trial.
Or, we could just sum up the whole thing by saying, "Of course, one might be forgiven for suspecting an article by a fringe group religious zealots itself. That would be like asking the fox to guard the henhouse."
Random samping of points follows. (Note, I am granting him the notion that Christianity is right and Wicca, Islam, Shintoism, etc. are 'wrong' because otherwise, the quick answer is "So what if RPGs are detrimental to Christianity." Oh, and I'm a Christian myself, so I'm more interested in looking at this from a Christian point of view.)
1) He notes that Wiccan books, groups, etc. have become more popular (or even only come into existance) since D&D hit the stores. Nowhere does he show causality. This is a classic post hoc ergo propter hoc ('after this, therefore from this') fallacy.
I got married after Bill Clinton was elected to office. Were his sexual escapades responsible for my wedded bliss?
The success of things like Harry Potter falls into the same category. I'd be looking more for common causality than a 'one causes the other' situation.
2) The language of Christians apologizing was apparently less than perfect. So what? I've yet to see a foul word in any D&D book (meaning TSR or WotC). I've also heard pastor's wives cuss/curse.
Besides, taking the Lord's name in vain is the only act prohibited by God's Law. Personally, I'm quite offended when I hear someone do that, curse someone ('damn'), etc.; but scatological (and similar) references register as simply a bit lowbrow and crude.
All that is to say that I'm not sure what he means by foul language. For all I know, someone called him a 'pompous ass', and he's decided that is a damnable offense.
3) While I'm quite impressed that he appears to have read a fair amount of the rules, he doesn't appear to always understand them, or to care. Take, for instance, his impeachment of Alignment.
His first claim is "that quite often, players will pick an alignment that is more evil or chaotic". Upon what does he base this claim? My experience has shown me that for more groups prohibit Evil characters than encourage them. That isn't saying my experience is exhaustive, but it is a more sound basis than anything he presents.
3a) Why the dissing for Chaotic? This is something that annoys me, not just from him, but from within the RP community, too. I fail to see how Chaos, as listed in the books, is any less Good than Law. Yet, he presents this idea without any rationale or explanation.
Well, so long as he views the American Founding Fathers with contempt for their Chaotic and depraved ways, I suppose that he is at least consistant.
4) He asserts, "the Necronomicon and the Cthulhu mythos are quite real." This is wholly untrue, but I'm willing to grant that he was misinformed rather than intentionally misleading. The Cthulhu myths were found only in the fictional writings of HP Lovecraft and the Necronomicon is part of those myths. Sure, you can go into Waldenbooks and buy a copy of the Necronomicon (I've got one on my shelf at home), but it post-dates Lovecraft and is obviously a knock-off.
5) He says, "They make this mistake because they equate Roman Catholicism and its robed clerics for Christians," which is downright insulting. For someone who likes waving his Bible around and making reference to it (not that there's anything wrong with that), he might want to have an understanding of which group stapled together the first copy.
I should note that I've got some pretty big disagreements with Catholicism, but to call them non-Christian without any rationale (do I see a pattern?), is a pretty big stretch for this guy to make.
6) He discusses the absence of Christ as a power in the default D&D game. Personally, I see this as a strength of the game. As DM, I have to determine the motivations and actions of the "powers that be". If that power happens to be Christ, it becomes a catch 22 -- I can't imagine NPCing Jesus as a holy and respectful thing.
If you're a Christian, it is a simple thing to say "for some reason, unfathomable to me or anyone else, this particular universe was set up a bit differently and God does not make His presence known directly. He exists and is superior to anything you'll be interacting with, though." I should know. That's been the statement in my game for two decades.
7) He quotes a passage from the "Freeman article" that stakes a complete lack of evidence in any known report that gaming and suicide are related. Then he asks for evidence of this claim. That is a totally non-sensical retort. It is akin to:
-"My car will go 150 miles per hour."
-"That sounds unlikely, can you show me that?"
-"Nope. You have to prove that it doesn't."
7a) He does similar things throughout the discussion of Dallas Egbert.
7b) His response to the impeachment of Dr. Thomas Radecki (an 'authority' cited by RPG foes) having his liscence suspended was to say, that it may be true, but that does not mean we shouldn't listen to his professional opinion. The author may want to understand that having a license suspended pretty much does mean that someone has no professional credibility.
8) In response to, "Of course, one might be forgiven for suspecting an investigation paid for by the FRPG industry itself. That would be like asking the fox to guard the henhouse," one could ask for an alternate study. One could also ask if the accused should be allowed to speak at their own trial.
Or, we could just sum up the whole thing by saying, "Of course, one might be forgiven for suspecting an article by a fringe group religious zealots itself. That would be like asking the fox to guard the henhouse."
