Dragon 300 a bad idea

[Dr_Rictus]

It is well documented that these two children had and developed theses murder/suicided fantasies.

And yet, are you going to claim that the existence of people with pathological murder/suicide fantasies is an argument against all artistic expression where the participants enact those themes? Because that is the topic at hand.

If your point is instead that it would be good if we all showed more sensitivity to such painful issues, I can certainly agree with you. But the post you were responding to was, at worst, flip. To suggest that his post amounts to criminal pathology was unfair.

I doubt the parents and family of the victims would take issue with my pointing out where these two started to go wrong.

And I'm sympathetic to their loss, while believing that as the grief-stricken victims of a terrible crime they should not be the sole determiners of public policy.

Simply put, I don't think you've made your case, and I think it was simply imflammatory to attempt to make it with such a one-liner.

 

[The_Gneech]

My 2 cp...

1) Making villains vile-er is simplicity itself. Making them sympathetic is what I find more challenging, and would prefer helpful info on.

2) The "sealed section" is an obnoxious marketing gimmick and insults the buyer's intelligence.

3) Y'know, if I wanted this kind of stuff, I'd be playing Darkness: The Darkosity.

Folks who want BoVD and Dragon 300 are welcome to 'em. I'll spend my gaming dollar elsewhere.

-The Gneech

 

[barsoomcore]

SemperJase:

I have a question. What about DMs? I run a non-evil campaign. My players play reasonably noble heroes, a little conflicted maybe but they try to do the right thing.

Now as the DM I am OBLIGATED to play the bad guys. And play them I do. My bad guys are horrible people. They do unbelievably terrible things. They rape, they commit genocide (often successfully), they torture and terrorize the entire world. And I play them as completely and as truthfully as I can because I believe that a compelling story requires memorable and believable characters. So I roleplay evil people every time we game. That's my primary role.

Am I therefore a troubled person? Am I in danger of hurting others from my dark fantasies? I don't think I am, but I'm wondering what you think.

Oh, and for those who asked:

MORE CORPSE NOOKIE!

 

[Tsyr]

Playing evil PCs has you practicing mistreatment of others. You may not end up committing murder, but you will have practiced and by extension become better at mistreating others. That may lead to something as seemingly trivial at cutting in line at the theater. Still that action has disrespected others and is not an improvement in the world.

Or, it could result in absolutely no tangible effect on the real world. You sorta forgot to include that option, but, gosh, I know it was right there in your mind, you just messed up, right?

 

[SemperJase]

this is getting emberassing, it seems that you are making the argument that many who wanted to ban the game take.

i have cast many a spell in game, none in real life. i have chopped up many bad guys in game without becoming an axe-weilding maniac. i have worshipped many a god thru my charcters but remain an atheist.

maybe you should reconsider this statement.

You are ignoring the point. I may travel Faerun in my fantasies. Obviously I won't do that in real life. I can run 80' in six seconds in my game. I don't run at all in real life. Those example are superfluous.

What roleplaying effects is the way you interact with people. If it didn't work, than every therapist in the world is off their rockers.

The fact that you are attacking bad guys in your games leads me to believe that you are playing a heroic character. In that case you are defending weaker people and standing up against evil. Those are good attributes to develop.

 

[The Sigil]

Geez... let's take a look at the three posts that precipitated the mess that may well cause the thread to be locked...

I play evil because I find it FUN! It is fun to have absolute power over others, over those weaklings that tremble before you, fun to rule , to posess, to fullfill one`s desires, to ruthlessly destroy those that dare to stand on your way and all other things that I can`t do in real life!

Spare me. It demeans and cheapens the death of all of the victims of those poor, twisted kids to use them for such a transparently fallacious forensic trick. Shame on you. I'm sorry, but I really just can't put it in any more diplomatic terms than that. [/B]

My response to this whole thing?

I personally feel that Melkor's quote was in slightly poor taste - I don't know that "fun" is quite the right word.

It was probably in poor taste to bring up Columbine.

It was in still poorer taste to dismiss the Columbine incident out of hand as "irrelevant."

IMO, the difference between RPing evil characters - especially because "I find it fun" - and the Columbine shooters is merely one of degree. Granted, there is a rather hefty gap between them, but it's merely a different distance travelled down the same road.

Discussing Columbine doesn't disturb me.

Calling evil "fun" DOES disturb me.

I don't know about a lot of other DMs, but I consider playing evil NPCs a "necessary part of my job" - it's fun because I'm giving the (good and heroic) PCs a challenge to overcome and I have fun seeing them overcome it - not because I get to lord my power over others.

I have posted similar thoughts in other areas, but I think it bears repeating here...

I think as time goes on, our perceptions of what is - and is not - in good taste and socially acceptable change based on life experience.

Personally, I find thoughts such as "It is fun to have absolute power over others, over those weaklings that tremble before you" rather disturbing. Perhaps it is fun for you, but that is a destructive sort of fun rather than a creative sort of fun. It's fun to ride a roller coaster and get an adrenaline rush (creative fun). It's fun to build a treehouse and play in it (constructive fun). To some, it is fun to pull a gun on someone, watch them plead for mercy, and then blow their head off (destructive fun).

There is a difference between wholesome/healthy and fun. That something is fun does not necessarily make it wholesome/healthy.

"fun to rule , to posess, to fullfill one`s desires, to ruthlessly destroy those that dare to stand on your way"

Again, destructive "fun." Personally, I think destructive fun is a sign of immaturity at best and personal problems at worst.

"and all other things that I can`t do in real life!" Now, I'll admit, I've felt this way from time to time (usually when I'm in Southern California traffic). I believe it is natural to have these urges and desires for absolute control.

However, I guess my definition of what is healthy as relates to "what do I do with these urges and desires for control and domination" is different than some peoples' definitions.

I believe that the healthy response is to work to eliminate these urges without acting on them (through self-discipline, religion, meditation, or whatever form of "elimination" you choose).

I believe that the unhealthy response is to act them out - even in fantasy.

It is quite true that nobody ever did a great evil without imagining himself doing it first. That does NOT mean that if you imagine yourself doing evil, you will then go and do evil (duh). It DOES mean that if you do not imagine yourself doing evil, you will not go and do evil.

What about a DM? I believe most DMs see their adventures through the eyes of the PCs, not the villains - the DM is not imagining himself doing evil, it's "someone else." I believe this is so simply because if the DM saw things through the villain's eyes, he wouldn't see the PCs that often - they'd be too busy whomping on his cronies instead - and he wouldn't appreciate the game.

That's about all I have. All three quotes were objectionable to me for various reasons, and I hope I have made clear why in a tactful and well-reasoned manner.

--The Sigil

 

[SemperJase]

And yet, are you going to claim that the existence of people with pathological murder/suicide fantasies is an argument against all artistic expression where the participants enact those themes? Because that is the topic at hand.

I made no such claim. I am not against ALL artistic expression. However, I do think that rape, murder, and torture are not worthy of expression and I certainly would not call them art.

 

[Zappo]

Because you are practicing positive behavior. Just as a therapist has you practice overcoming your shyness, or a trainer has you roleplay taking calls in call center to become better at it. The behavior you practice becomes the behavior you display.

People in therapy have to commit their full willpower and agreement to the therapy, and still it often doesn't work. If one doesn't want to become evil, he won't, not even if he plays the evil corpse-raping necromancer for 6 hours a day. Not even under hypnosis. A normal human mind simply doesn't work like that.

Playing evil PCs has you practicing mistreatment of others. You may not end up committing murder, but you will have practiced and by extension become better at mistreating others. That may lead to something as seemingly trivial at cutting in line at the theater. Still that action has disrespected others and is not an improvement in the world.

Becoming better at something doesn't mean you will practice it. I could get very good at killing people by taking an advanced martial arts course, but that doesn't mean I will ever do it.

Ultimately, the mind is a lot harder to shape than what you think.

 

[BoGGiT]

I cannot really add anything to this conversation, since i am a die-hard materialist and thus doesn't believe in terms like "good" and "evil", but how about the (i admit few, but still not unimportant) roleplayers who finds the United States, for example, evil for it's large list of atrocities, murders and crimes against humanity commited during the last 100 or so years?

If such a person would post a thread here resembling of SemperJase's, he would no doubt be called stuff that for the sake of eventual underaged visitors shouldn't be said in loud.

 

[alsih2o]

You are ignoring the point.

incorrect, i am pointing out that you are using the same standards for your argument that people who wish to see these games banned use.

and "every" therapist doesn't use roleplaying in their work. you are making to bold a stroke with many of your statements. just because "dr. everything-be-all-right" uses a technique does not mean that ALL roleplaying will shape ones personality.

you wish to state that attitudes developped in character breed bad personality traits, but only the evil ones. i don't think this is true. in D+D many thieves are attacked and killed, but this hasn't brought my real world beliefs to this attitude, why would it happen when i play an evil character, and again you haven't addresssed the d.m.'s job. SOMEONE has to play the evil side. isn't it necessary, by your standards to have p.c.'s be evil occasionally so that the d.m.'s soul isn't eternally perverted from constantly playing the baddies?