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
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Goblins and their "Curse of Strife"
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="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 8027639" data-attributes="member: 7006"><p>The problem everyone will face in any game that involves fantastical elements is that any of those fantastical elements could be seen as allegory to some part of real life situation. When that happens... a certain segment of the population will take issue with it because it can be seen as problematic for certain people and from certain points of view. It's impossible to not have that occur. I mean, even a simple standard magical spell like 'Charm Person'... when taken apart and analyzed it is incredibly simple to see how the idea of it can be problematic when taken at face value and attributed to real life. We actually already had that occur with the 'Love Domain' bruehaha several months ago.</p><p></p><p>What is inevitable in situations like this is that some people will point out how something is problematic/bad when looked at in a certain direction through a certain prism. Usually, they have a point that it could be seen that way from a certain point of view. But that is when the rest of society takes a look at it and comes to a group conclusion as to whether it is a view that most people see and agree with, or if it takes such a roundabout way to get there most people will determine it's really too much of a stretch to make it into something actionable. And what that happens, society as a whole just sort of says "We can understand the potential for concern, but most people can tell the difference between the thing and what could be considered a problem. And thus it isn't as much of a concern right now as you are telling us."</p><p></p><p>So in the case of Charm Person... I think most of society has come to the conclusion that the spell is "magic" and thus not possible, it's a part of a fantastical "game" and thus does not represent actual life, and it is written in such a way as to not align with whatever real-life techniques are used for gaslighting or domestic abuse or cult behavior etc. We might be able to agree from a certain point of view that if Charm Person was a real thing that it could certainly be used to commit atrocities... but just the existence of the idea of the spell is far enough away from reality that it can't be seen as potentially harmful or hurtful to 99.99% of the world, and thus we can and will all just brush it off. Now could there be someone in the 11 billion people of Earth wherein just the idea of the spell Charm Person is a triggering event for them? Sure. But that is true for every single thing possible and we can't eliminate everything. That's just statistically not possible. So at some point society just says "Sorry, but the view you are seeing this with is just too far afield for most of us and what you are asking the rest of us to accommodate you for is just too much" and we collectively choose not to act on it.</p><p></p><p>In the case of Wildemount... sure the Curse of Strife could be seen as problematic from a certain point of view. But as that is the case potentially with <em>everything</em> in the game... picking and choosing this one thing over anything else would need to really pick up steam with players for the rest of society to agree with them. And I don't personally see this <em>specific</em> thing in the game achieving that right now. There are a lot of other stuff in the game that I suspect will get touched upon first before Curse of Strife (but then again, I could be wrong.)</p><p></p><p>Now that societal voice that decides collectively whether something is worth keeping or not keeping obviously can and will change over time. And what was considered fine or at least <em>ignorable</em> by most people at one point in time might no longer be seen as such later on. And that's where we get all the complaints we see of "Well, if it wasn't bad then, why is it bad now?!?" And the answer of course is that the group that was seeing this thing from a certain point of view and found it problematic had a much smaller voice. But that voice can always grow louder. And when it does, society can choose to make the change. Now granted, it usually helps when the change gets tied to economic reasons-- companies and corporations follow the almighty dollar and if the group of voices that is getting larger fall into the 18-45 demographic of purchasing power, then the companies are more apt to listen to them than the 60+ age group ranting about how the "kids today" don't know what they're talking about. So it isn't always altruism that pushes change forward... but if at the end of the day if you get where you are going, does it matter what spurred on the horses to get you there?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="DEFCON 1, post: 8027639, member: 7006"] The problem everyone will face in any game that involves fantastical elements is that any of those fantastical elements could be seen as allegory to some part of real life situation. When that happens... a certain segment of the population will take issue with it because it can be seen as problematic for certain people and from certain points of view. It's impossible to not have that occur. I mean, even a simple standard magical spell like 'Charm Person'... when taken apart and analyzed it is incredibly simple to see how the idea of it can be problematic when taken at face value and attributed to real life. We actually already had that occur with the 'Love Domain' bruehaha several months ago. What is inevitable in situations like this is that some people will point out how something is problematic/bad when looked at in a certain direction through a certain prism. Usually, they have a point that it could be seen that way from a certain point of view. But that is when the rest of society takes a look at it and comes to a group conclusion as to whether it is a view that most people see and agree with, or if it takes such a roundabout way to get there most people will determine it's really too much of a stretch to make it into something actionable. And what that happens, society as a whole just sort of says "We can understand the potential for concern, but most people can tell the difference between the thing and what could be considered a problem. And thus it isn't as much of a concern right now as you are telling us." So in the case of Charm Person... I think most of society has come to the conclusion that the spell is "magic" and thus not possible, it's a part of a fantastical "game" and thus does not represent actual life, and it is written in such a way as to not align with whatever real-life techniques are used for gaslighting or domestic abuse or cult behavior etc. We might be able to agree from a certain point of view that if Charm Person was a real thing that it could certainly be used to commit atrocities... but just the existence of the idea of the spell is far enough away from reality that it can't be seen as potentially harmful or hurtful to 99.99% of the world, and thus we can and will all just brush it off. Now could there be someone in the 11 billion people of Earth wherein just the idea of the spell Charm Person is a triggering event for them? Sure. But that is true for every single thing possible and we can't eliminate everything. That's just statistically not possible. So at some point society just says "Sorry, but the view you are seeing this with is just too far afield for most of us and what you are asking the rest of us to accommodate you for is just too much" and we collectively choose not to act on it. In the case of Wildemount... sure the Curse of Strife could be seen as problematic from a certain point of view. But as that is the case potentially with [I]everything[/I] in the game... picking and choosing this one thing over anything else would need to really pick up steam with players for the rest of society to agree with them. And I don't personally see this [I]specific[/I] thing in the game achieving that right now. There are a lot of other stuff in the game that I suspect will get touched upon first before Curse of Strife (but then again, I could be wrong.) Now that societal voice that decides collectively whether something is worth keeping or not keeping obviously can and will change over time. And what was considered fine or at least [I]ignorable[/I] by most people at one point in time might no longer be seen as such later on. And that's where we get all the complaints we see of "Well, if it wasn't bad then, why is it bad now?!?" And the answer of course is that the group that was seeing this thing from a certain point of view and found it problematic had a much smaller voice. But that voice can always grow louder. And when it does, society can choose to make the change. Now granted, it usually helps when the change gets tied to economic reasons-- companies and corporations follow the almighty dollar and if the group of voices that is getting larger fall into the 18-45 demographic of purchasing power, then the companies are more apt to listen to them than the 60+ age group ranting about how the "kids today" don't know what they're talking about. So it isn't always altruism that pushes change forward... but if at the end of the day if you get where you are going, does it matter what spurred on the horses to get you there? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Goblins and their "Curse of Strife"
Top