D&D haters???

[Thornir Alekeg]

In general I don't talk about gaming with people who don't also game. If work people ask about weekend plans on a gaming weekend, I just say I'm getting together with friends.

When a couple my wife and I used to hang out with found out about our playing D&D, they wanted to talk to us because they were concerned for us on a religious basis. We explained to them what D&D was (a social game), why we enjoyed playing (friends and a fun story) and how it didn't in any way conflict with our religious beliefs (no sacrificing animals, or worshipping evil or any of that crap). They asked a lot of questions and were convinced that the game wasn't a dark mechanism of evil temptation as they had thought, although I couldn't ever convince them to sit in on a game.

 

[palleomortis]

Hmm. As I recall, she wasn't allowed to watch us play. I don't know that for sure, that's, simply what I'm told. She was hanging out with us one day, and we decided to play a little. Before we actually got to play, or even started, she had to leave. Her leaving didn't have anything to do with our playing, she actually had planned on leaving then earlier, but I heard somthing of the sort afterwards. Is this somthing I should realy involve myself in, or should I let it ride for a bit between her and her mother before actually approaching the issue?

 

[johnsemlak]

Finally, IMO D&D has never done itself the best of service by borrowing so much material from occult sources. Greek myths are fairly safe material because only a small small group of people take them seriously. The number of people who think occult material is morally offensive and/or something to be taken seriously is not small.

Not to completely disagree, but the 'occult sources' issue is rather complex. Films such as 'The DaVinci Code' borrow similar stuff and are massively successful in the mainstream.

 

[Celebrim]

How did the "Bad Rep" come around anyways? How did they come to the conclusion that D&D was "devil warship" and "Increased suicidal thoughts" or whatever?

Because D&D has always heavily borrowed from occult sources.

The most blatant recent example in the Binder from D&D were the material is almost straight out of 'The Lesser Key of Solomon', one of the most famous books on demonology.

Like I said, I've been playing the game for 25 years and that sort of thing even bothers me. I simply wouldn't participate in a game were that material played a big role in the game because even though I don't think you can actually do magic and that's its mostly rubbish, I think its pretty serious material and unsuited for a game.

 

[Darkwolf71]

How did the "Bad Rep" come around anyways? How did they come to the conclusion that D&D was "devil warship" and "Increased suicidal thoughts" or whatever?

Well, We have the wonderful Jack Chick tracts to thank for much of the religious issues. I refuse to post a link, but google Dark Dungeons for more info.

The suicidal issues stem from a made for tv movie called Mazes and Monsters. It's based on a book that was based on a true story. Problem is, the author was less than accurate inthe first place and the movie went even farther astray. That said, the movie is not a bad one. Honestly. It stars a very young Tom Hanks and he has always been a great actor. Sadly, however the game took a beating.
Wiki entry onMazes and Monsters

 

[Celebrim]

Films such as 'The DaVinci Code' borrow similar stuff and are massively successful in the mainstream.

And massively contriversial in the mainstream as well. Gibson's 'Passion of the Christ' was also massively successful in the mainstream, just maybe not with the same streams.

Leaving completely aside the moral issues involved, when you borrow material like that you are basically deciding that the economic value of offending a large group of people and generating contriversy is positive.

As a corporation then, WotC shouldn't be surprised that they've people frequently experiencing what the OP describes.

So, yes, the issue is complicated.

 

[Prince of Happiness]

Well, We have the wonderful Jack Chick tracts to thank for much of the religious issues. I refuse to post a link, but google Dark Dungeons for more info.

The suicidal issues stem from a made for tv movie called Mazes and Monsters. It's based on a book that was based on a true story. Problem is, the author was less than accurate inthe first place and the movie went even farther astray. That said, the movie is not a bad one. Honestly. It stars a very young Tom Hanks and he has always been a great actor. Sadly, however the game took a beating.
Wiki entry onMazes and Monsters

Ironically, when I saw that movie I thought to myself, "Wow! I wouldn't mind playing that!"

 

[Celebrim]

Well, We have the wonderful Jack Chick tracts to thank for much of the religious issues.

I don't think Jack Chick would even be a name any of us knew, if it wasn't for things like the cover of 'Eldritch Wizardry' or the fact that the first hardcover book for the D&D game had entries for things like Beelzabub and Asmodeus.

I'm in no way defending Jack Chick. He's a nut case. I'm not going to defend Pat Robinson either. But the fact is, neither of them would have gotten any signficant traction on the 'D&D is immoral and dangerous' front or even necessarily spent much time on the subject if the game hadn't started out using material gauranteed to offend and frighten parents.

If I hadn't been playing D&D and my kid brought home 'Eldritch Wizardry' or the 1st edition Monster Manual with its various bits of demonology and purile fascination with naked female breasts, I'd have been fairly skeptical too.

The game came along way IMO under Tracy Hickman's influence. If it had started under his influence, there never would have been a D&D contriversy to speak of in the first place.

 

[Darkwolf71]

I don't think Jack Chick would even be a name any of us knew, if it wasn't for things like the cover of 'Eldritch Wizardry' or the fact that the first hardcover book for the D&D game had entries for things like Beelzabub and Asmodeus.

Probobaly true. I actually mentioned that, but apparently it got edited out with some other stuff I cut.

 

[johnsemlak]

I don't think Jack Chick would even be a name any of us knew, if it wasn't for things like the cover of 'Eldritch Wizardry' or the fact that the first hardcover book for the D&D game had entries for things like Beelzabub and Asmodeus.

I'm in no way defending Jack Chick. He's a nut case. I'm not going to defend Pat Robinson either. But the fact is, neither of them would have gotten any signficant traction on the 'D&D is immoral and dangerous' front or even necessarily spent much time on the subject if the game hadn't started out using material gauranteed to offend and frighten parents.

If I hadn't been playing D&D and my kid brought home 'Eldritch Wizardry' or the 1st edition Monster Manual with its various bits of demonology and purile fascination with naked female breasts, I'd have been fairly skeptical too.

The game came along way IMO under Tracy Hickman's influence. If it had started under his influence, there never would have been a D&D contriversy to speak of in the first place.

Hmm, I'm not sure I'd go as far as what you're saying. You're right, some D&D material offends a significant group of people. However, that same offensive material is highly valued by many of the core fan base of D&D players. Put simply, occult material/demons/devils or whatever is exactly what a lot of D&D players want. As you said above, WotC has to make a choice between not offending one group and pleasing a large contingent of its fans. Remember, TSR angered a lot of core fans when they took a lot of the objectionable material out in the later 80s.