Does D&D provide a decent moral compass?

[takyris]

Serious: The main worry I'd have is that D&D, like television, makes violence too easy as an option. It's like Kung Fu -- this guy is dedicated to peace and harmony and enlightenment and he gets into like five fights an episode? Sure, it's entertaining, but it's not always the best way to deal with the situation.

Not Serious: I think that D&D is giving children today the wrong idea. Illithid-American citizens can't walk down the street without being pointed at -- without people covering their noses, perpetuating the myth that Illithids eat brains. Telepathic communication is part of the vibrant culture of Illithids, and to imply that we would use this sacred cultural experience just to kill people and eat their brains is to reduce our rich traditions to some sort of dogmatic stereotype. You agree with me, do you not? Yes, you do. You do agree with me. Yeeeeeeeees....

-Tacky

 

[jgbrowning]

no, mostly

i'd have to say no because its just a game. The amount of conectivity and cause/effect anyone has with a game environment is nowhere near the amount of a real environment. in a game i have no problems making my characters march for 6 hours in mountainous terrain.. in RL.. you'd have blisters, twisted ankles, people constantly bitching for good and bad reasons.. etc.. there's a richness and depth lacking in any game. Especially when you consider the majority of games are about increasing personal power and prestige, which in RL has usually led more to negative than positive examples.

this lack of richness makes certain concepts appear more black and white than they are in RL. this in and of it self, i think, is detrimental to understanding morality. in the western parts of the world, using violence in and of itself is viewed as bad. extenuating circumstances may allow (self defense, etc), but the basic belief is violence is bad.

however, DnD is good because it provides at least SOME visceral attachment to the various morality plays that occur in every game. If a peasant gets killed by a bad guy in a game, it has more effect than the typical moral hypothetical situations. it allows complex moral situations to be created and gives players reason NOT to just be, how can i say this, "party pooper?" who say they think this way is right. the people who play devils advocate in arguments just to be butt-heads but act differently in situations... those people...



joe b.

 

[Rel]

Interesting topic. I've discovered that since I am now a father, I think about things like this quite a bit. What I've surmised is this:

Morality as a concept can be introduced through and explained via entertainment including D&D, fables and Veggie Tales. And I believe that the moral quandries illustrated in such stories is good food for thought for the young mind.

BUT, I think that the principal way that kids learn what is right and wrong is by observing the behavior that their parents exhibit and tolerate.

I think that a kid learns more bad morality by seeing his father get caught (legitimately) for speeding and then complaining about getting the ticket (instead of accepting responsibility for his behavior) than he could learn from D&D or other forms of entertainment.

I think that a kid learns more good morality by seeing his father get more change than he is supposed to by the clerk at the fast food restaurant and giving back the money that he isn't owed than he could learn from D&D or other forms of entertainment.

What I do think a kid can gain from D&D is critical thinking skills, a better grasp of language, a larger vocabulary, better math skills, the ability to negotiate for something they want and a sense of "initiative". What I mean by that last one is not "roll for initiative", but a sense that most problems won't just solve themselves and those who are willing to try and solve them by their own actions will probably come out ahead in the long run, even if it means that sometimes they will fail.

So at the bottom of it, I think that D&D will most often be a positive influence on children but you shouldn't look for it to accomplish their moral education.

 

[Celebrim]

Very thoughtful post, Rel.

 

[Eosin the Red]

First, my credentials Father of three none of which game...yet.

Wonderful question and one that can have lots of different answers. Everyone so far has great points.

I think it can, but with the cavet that it is done well. A mortal combat style game [kill, kill, kill] really is not going to do much for moral education. One done in the vein of a moral tale or a parable generally can do great things. <Insert my story about the bible parable ran by my best friend.>

I also think it conditions us to accept that bravery is a choice, as is evil or good. Only people with brain damage are born brave, or good, or evil, or selfless. The rest of us learn these behaviors through literature, movies, modeling, dramas, and perhaps even gaming. I am hesitant to say one is better than the other, because generally it will depend on circumstances. Most of these things happen at a level that most of us are unaware of and somewhat after the years where we learn to share and play nice. Subjectively, I think we get most of this molding in our early teens, prescisly when most gamers start playing.

Some people put forth the "moral struggle" aspect of the story as the reason we find games so alluring [WW]. I don't know if I would go that far but the idea has some merit. This is one of those things that you think on and never come up with a really consice answer.

My answer will be "it CAN be."

 

[Mark]

It would take a pretty special DM and campaign to teach much else.

You're very kind... *blush*

Seriously, I think it is very important to strive and create situations where the PCs have an opportunity to do what is right or what is wrong and to know the difference but always have a choice. Ultimately, I find it best to reward doing what is right. The parameters of what is right may certainly vary from parent to parent but overall I think the broadest definitions encompass most faiths and ideologies.

 

[mmadsen]

No comments from s/LaSH?

No comments from s/LaSH?

 

[Col_Pladoh]

When I described the alignments in the OAD&D DMG I did my best to present in precis form the general ethos and mindet of those of each alignment. This is a sort of compass for play, but it is also, I believe, a reasonably valid assessment of the matter in regards to philosophical treatment based on European-American thinking.

That said, I don't think it provides more than a pointer to direct a person to more critical studies

Cheerio,
Gary

 

[Rel]

When I described the alignments in the OAD&D DMG I did my best to present in precis form the general ethos and mindet of those of each alignment. This is a sort of compass for play, but it is also, I believe, a reasonably valid assessment of the matter in regards to philosophical treatment based on European-American thinking.

That said, I don't think it provides more than a pointer to direct a person to more critical studies

Cheerio,
Gary

Well here's the guy to ask.

So, Gary, did you attempt to use D&D as a tool to teach morality to your kids growing up? If so, how effective a tool do you think it was compared to the more "traditional" methods of trying to convey a sense of morality to children?

 

[Desdichado]

When I described the alignments in the OAD&D DMG I did my best to present in precis form the general ethos and mindet of those of each alignment. This is a sort of compass for play, but it is also, I believe, a reasonably valid assessment of the matter in regards to philosophical treatment based on European-American thinking.

That said, I don't think it provides more than a pointer to direct a person to more critical studies

Cheerio,
Gary

Not only are the alignments in D&D extremely dubious when it comes to real world applicability, but their existence doesn't provide a moral compass anyway. That's up the game itself (and thus the DM) to inject that aspect into the game by in game consequences that apply to everyone, and object lessons. Without it, the alignment are just labels and don't serve as a moral compass of any kind whatsoever.

Oh, and I don't think the distinction between law and chaos has any resemblance to Euro-American philosophy. If it did, players in general wouldn't have such a hard time quantifying it. Good and evil we may argue about, but it's essentially in familiar territory. Law and Chaos typically just throw the average player for a loop, and you get all kinds of crazy interpretations, like chaotic characters just doing things at random and the like. I've yet to talk to more than about half a dozen players that really had a handle on the philosophical merits of law vs. chaos.