How to Tell if Your Fun is Wrong

[Umbran]

Don't tell people what kinds of roleplaying are okay for them. If they're having fun, it is presumptively okay, UNLESS it's exploitative, coercive, or insulting to the participants themselves. Is that good enough? Have I cleared your hurdles yet?

So, if someone posted that they recently had a game in which they played KKK members, and in the fiction they... did things the KKK was known for, or maybe they had a game in which they all tortured puppies and kittens, and everyone at the table was okay with it and they had an outstanding good time...

I think folks would be justified in telling them that was badwrongfun. We would get several requests to discipline them, or ban them from the boards. We have, in fact, banned accounts for less.

Now, you might give an argument that it was not the play itself that was bad, but speaking about it in public may cause harm to people who hear about it. But, really, if you can't talk about it in public without hurting someone... maybe it was a bad idea in the first place.

 

[TheSword]

It also wasn't critically acclaimed in nearly the same way as Gone With The Wind. Or, at all, really. Way of the WIcked was generally panned as a film when it came out, much less today.

Oh, you mean as a game product? Never even heard of it... so not nearly as acclaimed as Gone With the Wind, which is at least a household name

Lol. As much as I like Christian Slater, I’ve not seen it.

It was released for Pathfinder so maybe not so well known on the D&D side. I only pointed it out as it was fairly well known among evil campaigns as being quality.

 

[TheSword]

I think folks would be justified in telling them that was badwrongfun. We would get several requests to discipline them, or ban them from the boards. We have, in fact, banned accounts for less.

Now we know who the final arbiters of taste are...

There was me struggling with that ethical question.

 

[Fenris-77]

I am the final arbiter of taste and decency. I didn't want the job, but mine was the name picked out of the hat and someone needs to fill the role. So, if your fun isn't the same as my fun, or if I disapprove of your fun in anyway, then your fun is badwrongfun. Complaints can be submitted to management in triplicate and will be subject to the standard 6 month review process.

 

[MGibster]

So, if someone posted that they recently had a game in which they played KKK members, and in the fiction they... did things the KKK was known for, or maybe they had a game in which they all tortured puppies and kittens, and everyone at the table was okay with it and they had an outstanding good time...

There's a problem when using hypothetical situations in that we can come up with egregious examples most reasonable people would condemn, middle of the road situations where the answer isn't quite clear, and still other examples most reasonable people would say was fine. But the upside is that your case study shows us the flaw in our "if everyone is comfortable with the subject and is having fun it's okay" argument.

Social dynamics are complicated and I find it best to have general guidelines and judge each situation on its own merits. There's no blanket answer that will cover every situation. Generally speaking, if everyone's comfortable and having a good time then it's probably okay. But you've got to open up that Tupperware and give it a good sniff to know whether it's good or bad.

 

[Umbran]

There's a problem when using hypothetical situations in that we can come up with egregious examples most reasonable people would condemn, middle of the road situations where the answer isn't quite clear...

The point isn't that there is always clarity. The point is that flat statements to the effect of, "nothing among consenting players can be considered at all wrong," are suspect, and that we are really quibbling over where the line ought to be.

 

[MGibster]

The point isn't that there is always clarity. The point is that flat statements to the effect of, "nothing among consenting players can be considered at all wrong," are suspect, and that we are really quibbling over where the line ought to be.

Well, yeah. And I pointed out that your case study pointed out that particular flaw. I was in agreement with you.

 

[Umbran]

Well, yeah. And I pointed out that your case study pointed out that particular flaw. I was in agreement with you.

Yeah, but I realized I hadn't actually said it, and wanted to make it clear.

 

[Voadam]

or maybe they had a game in which they all tortured puppies and kittens, and everyone at the table was okay with it and they had an outstanding good time...

I think folks would be justified in telling them that was badwrongfun. We would get several requests to discipline them, or ban them from the boards. We have, in fact, banned accounts for less.

FYI Kill Puppies for Satan is an actual RPG by the guy who created Apocalypse World.

 

[FrogReaver]

I think harm falls into 3 categories.

Physical
Psychological
Social

The later 2 are much easier to view as “imagined” even if they are very real.

I also think that just like no man is an island that no group of gamers is an island. We are constantly importing and exporting things to society at large. As such the concept of harm can become a bit more nebulous as something may be totally inert to our small local group while potentially harming society by contributing to it being a worse place.

This philosophy gives rise to the concept of laws to dictate morality. The problem is that this is a double edged sword because no where do we find internal to this philosophy what kind of society should be desired.

Which means that any group can claim things which don’t result in a society to its liking are harmful and many of the worst atrocities in human history have been similarly justified.

Its almost always the do-gooders wanting to enforce social norms that make the world hell for anyone else.

I would say this same concept applies to the gaming world as well.