Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Consequences of playing "EVIL" races
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 7926278" data-attributes="member: 4937"><p>I'm totally sympathetic to that position. And, even if I don't necessarily agree, I think the exploration itself is interesting. For reasons I'll outline, I don't do things that way, but part of me is thinking, "Actually, that would be interesting ground to explore. How far can you take the idea that anything that isn't an incarnate idea, and which is sentient, has free will and is therefore a person? And, what would be the actual consequences of that being true?" So by all means, explore that territory. It's interesting conceptual territory, even if I'm not at all sure that it is correct, reflects reality, won't result in self-contradiction if you push it far enough, or is all the mental territory that is worth exploring. By all means, explore it. Part of me wants to do it now just to see where it goes.</p><p></p><p>But there is a difference between me saying, "Explore that territory.", and people who are saying, "Anyone who explores territory that makes me feel uncomfortable is a racist." or even "Anyone that explores territory that makes me feel uncomfortable is promoting racism, and as such needs to be called out by the community as a bad actor."</p><p></p><p>As for why I don't assume all sentient beings have moral free will, it's ultimately because I think that's a bit less interesting. It removes some possibilities from the space of things that exist. It's not just that it removes some speculative purely fantasy territory - not everyone believe there is a possibility of real demons for example. It's that you can show that it removes even real possibilities from the space of hard science fiction - I've sited species from Mass Effect that are plausible within hard SF (even if not all of Mass Effect is) or the alien xenomorphs from the Aliens series, or sentient computer viruses, or the classic self-aware homogenizing nanite weapon as examples. So one of those "hard questions" that I'm interested in asking could be thought of as, "Do the Krogan, or Rachni, or Reapers, or the Insects of Shaggai, or the Alien Xenomorphs bother you because you think that they are racist or encourage racist thinking, or do they bother you because you don't want to believe in even the possibility of monsters?" Or perhaps another hard question could be, "Are you asserting that there is no such thing as objective evil, because you'd rather believe nothing you do is objectively wrong?"</p><p></p><p>To me those questions put a different spin on things. Are grimdark fantasies asking hard questions about good and evil, are they telling it like it really is, or are they simply rationalizing that since everything is evil, nothing really is? Are you humanizing all the monsters as a way of sensitizing yourself to how you treat everyone, or are you humanizing all the monsters as a way to say there is no right or wrong. Or to put a more gaming focus on it, did playing Vampire the Masquerade lead most players of the game to be revolted by the monster inside them, or to be less sensitive to monstrosity and to even revel a bit in it?</p><p></p><p>Or maybe even, if you are condemning someone for killing orcs because "they deserve it", how different really is your gameplay from that? What do you have in your games where "they deserve it" without reflection? Have you really got rid of your narrative need for "orcs", or just given yourself a new excuse for yours?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 7926278, member: 4937"] I'm totally sympathetic to that position. And, even if I don't necessarily agree, I think the exploration itself is interesting. For reasons I'll outline, I don't do things that way, but part of me is thinking, "Actually, that would be interesting ground to explore. How far can you take the idea that anything that isn't an incarnate idea, and which is sentient, has free will and is therefore a person? And, what would be the actual consequences of that being true?" So by all means, explore that territory. It's interesting conceptual territory, even if I'm not at all sure that it is correct, reflects reality, won't result in self-contradiction if you push it far enough, or is all the mental territory that is worth exploring. By all means, explore it. Part of me wants to do it now just to see where it goes. But there is a difference between me saying, "Explore that territory.", and people who are saying, "Anyone who explores territory that makes me feel uncomfortable is a racist." or even "Anyone that explores territory that makes me feel uncomfortable is promoting racism, and as such needs to be called out by the community as a bad actor." As for why I don't assume all sentient beings have moral free will, it's ultimately because I think that's a bit less interesting. It removes some possibilities from the space of things that exist. It's not just that it removes some speculative purely fantasy territory - not everyone believe there is a possibility of real demons for example. It's that you can show that it removes even real possibilities from the space of hard science fiction - I've sited species from Mass Effect that are plausible within hard SF (even if not all of Mass Effect is) or the alien xenomorphs from the Aliens series, or sentient computer viruses, or the classic self-aware homogenizing nanite weapon as examples. So one of those "hard questions" that I'm interested in asking could be thought of as, "Do the Krogan, or Rachni, or Reapers, or the Insects of Shaggai, or the Alien Xenomorphs bother you because you think that they are racist or encourage racist thinking, or do they bother you because you don't want to believe in even the possibility of monsters?" Or perhaps another hard question could be, "Are you asserting that there is no such thing as objective evil, because you'd rather believe nothing you do is objectively wrong?" To me those questions put a different spin on things. Are grimdark fantasies asking hard questions about good and evil, are they telling it like it really is, or are they simply rationalizing that since everything is evil, nothing really is? Are you humanizing all the monsters as a way of sensitizing yourself to how you treat everyone, or are you humanizing all the monsters as a way to say there is no right or wrong. Or to put a more gaming focus on it, did playing Vampire the Masquerade lead most players of the game to be revolted by the monster inside them, or to be less sensitive to monstrosity and to even revel a bit in it? Or maybe even, if you are condemning someone for killing orcs because "they deserve it", how different really is your gameplay from that? What do you have in your games where "they deserve it" without reflection? Have you really got rid of your narrative need for "orcs", or just given yourself a new excuse for yours? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Consequences of playing "EVIL" races
Top