Dragon 300 a bad idea
- Thread starter SemperJase
- Start date
- Status
alsih2o
First Post
SemperJase said:
by this logic, all d.m's would want to be terrorist. also by this logic, our brave servicemen and women who practice wargames all want the "good" gov'ts of the world to fall.
very weak argument, next step is banning shakespeare and such.
playting monopoly makes noone a slumlord, and playing an evil character, be it p.c or n.p.c. is just part of the GAME
Last edited:
Furn_Darkside
First Post
Re: Re: Dragon 300 a bad idea
I want you to go back and read my post- please point out where I said I was offended. If I was offended, then I would not be a subscriber today.
There wasa full page ad with a couple of clowns drenched in blood- or something along those lines. My roommate at the time said it was a music group.
Just keep in mind- no one has to check with you anything they find disturbing or even offensive.
FD
MeepoTheMighty said:
I want you to go back and read my post- please point out where I said I was offended. If I was offended, then I would not be a subscriber today.
There wasa full page ad with a couple of clowns drenched in blood- or something along those lines. My roommate at the time said it was a music group.
Just keep in mind- no one has to check with you anything they find disturbing or even offensive.
FD
SemperJase
First Post
Re: Re: Dragon 300 a bad idea
Not if that hobby promotes that murder, rape, etc are acceptable actions as long as everyone in their group agrees they are.
So I can't encourage people to act better? I'm not saying I'm perfect. I'm saying we should practice (roleplay) treating people better. If you think that roleplaying has no effect on the rest or your life you are mistaken. If it didn't work that way, therapists and trainers would not use roleplaying as a training/therapy technique.
It may not result in your murdering and raping someone (I would suggest that for those who have such fantasies it may, look at the case studies of murderers and rapists), but it will lead to being more callus to others, perhaps passing the woman on the road with the flat instead of helping her. It is the little things that add up.
MeepoTheMighty said:
Not if that hobby promotes that murder, rape, etc are acceptable actions as long as everyone in their group agrees they are.
So I can't encourage people to act better? I'm not saying I'm perfect. I'm saying we should practice (roleplay) treating people better. If you think that roleplaying has no effect on the rest or your life you are mistaken. If it didn't work that way, therapists and trainers would not use roleplaying as a training/therapy technique.
It may not result in your murdering and raping someone (I would suggest that for those who have such fantasies it may, look at the case studies of murderers and rapists), but it will lead to being more callus to others, perhaps passing the woman on the road with the flat instead of helping her. It is the little things that add up.
Mostly, I thought that the 'vile content' in Dragon 300 was fine. I do have two complaints about it, however.
1) The advisory on the sealed section looked like a joke, with the grey splash of blood across it and the nice graphics. They should have used the same format that the music industry uses, showing in no uncertain terms that the material was not for children.
I believe that it is primarily the parent's responsibility to educate and protect their young, but if they are not used to this kind of material in Dragon magazine, why should they feel like they need to be on guard against it?
The whole idea of a sealed section was especially ironic, considering Jesse Decker's forward to the issue talks about how he was purchasing Dragon when he was 8 years old. Apparently he loved reading about the 'new spells' (see point 2, below) Now does he expect us to honestly believe he wouldn't have opened and read through a sealed section like the one in Dragon 300 when he was a kid?
2) The necrophilia reference in the new Vile spells list went too far for my personal tastes, and I wish they wouldn't have included it.
Respectfully submitted as my personal opinion, and without attempt to force my morality on anyone else..
1) The advisory on the sealed section looked like a joke, with the grey splash of blood across it and the nice graphics. They should have used the same format that the music industry uses, showing in no uncertain terms that the material was not for children.
I believe that it is primarily the parent's responsibility to educate and protect their young, but if they are not used to this kind of material in Dragon magazine, why should they feel like they need to be on guard against it?
The whole idea of a sealed section was especially ironic, considering Jesse Decker's forward to the issue talks about how he was purchasing Dragon when he was 8 years old. Apparently he loved reading about the 'new spells' (see point 2, below) Now does he expect us to honestly believe he wouldn't have opened and read through a sealed section like the one in Dragon 300 when he was a kid?
2) The necrophilia reference in the new Vile spells list went too far for my personal tastes, and I wish they wouldn't have included it.
Respectfully submitted as my personal opinion, and without attempt to force my morality on anyone else..
Last edited:
Grazzt
Demon Lord
The only thing I have to say about issue #300 is it certainly didn't live up to its hype as being an anniversary or collectors item.
Look back at issue #100 or #200. This one doesnt come close. I'm not saying there wasn't anything interesting or useful in the mag, but I just dont think it stands out as an "anniversary" issue.
Look back at issue #100 or #200. This one doesnt come close. I'm not saying there wasn't anything interesting or useful in the mag, but I just dont think it stands out as an "anniversary" issue.
Dr_Rictus
First Post
Re: Re: Re: Dragon 300 a bad idea
And yet, that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about whether role-playing those activities is acceptible in a group that is comfortable with dealing with those themes.
To suggest that the topic has to do with whether murder and rape themselves are acceptible actions is simply a straw man argument. I don't think any sensible person is going to claim that they are.
I might also note that allowing convicts to play role-playing games is a different matter than allowing them access to materials that specifically deal with role-playing antisocial actions in a non-therapeutic setting. This is a distinction you are not making, which I think is unreasonable. I believe that they probably should be allowed to play RPG's, although I've heard some valid arguments about the difficulties involved in doing so (such as convicts having positions of authority over others, and dice being used for gambling). And yet I also believe it would be reasonable to restrict access to, say, AEG's supplement "Evil" (aside from the fact that it's just not a very good book). Given that the vast majority of role-playing materials do not fall into the anti-social category, I find it hard to justify restricting access to RPG's in general.
SemperJase said:
And yet, that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about whether role-playing those activities is acceptible in a group that is comfortable with dealing with those themes.
To suggest that the topic has to do with whether murder and rape themselves are acceptible actions is simply a straw man argument. I don't think any sensible person is going to claim that they are.
I might also note that allowing convicts to play role-playing games is a different matter than allowing them access to materials that specifically deal with role-playing antisocial actions in a non-therapeutic setting. This is a distinction you are not making, which I think is unreasonable. I believe that they probably should be allowed to play RPG's, although I've heard some valid arguments about the difficulties involved in doing so (such as convicts having positions of authority over others, and dice being used for gambling). And yet I also believe it would be reasonable to restrict access to, say, AEG's supplement "Evil" (aside from the fact that it's just not a very good book). Given that the vast majority of role-playing materials do not fall into the anti-social category, I find it hard to justify restricting access to RPG's in general.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar Threads
