Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pawsplay" data-source="post: 4658841" data-attributes="member: 15538">There are two huge fallacies in this line of argument.1. That a moral argument means there is a &quot;lesson&quot; involved. In actuality, the whole point of an RPG is to see what happens, so a game can be illuminating without imparting any specific line of moral reasoning.2. That because the purpose of game is &quot;entertainment,&quot; there cannot be other dimensions to why someone chooses to play the way they do. I read Erich Fromm's Escape From Freedom &quot;for fun,&quot; but that doesn't make it any less serious a work. I watch action movies &quot;for fun,&quot; but I am definitely going to choose ones with moral content I can accept. For instance, a pro-Stalinist action film, no matter how well wrought, is just not going to be light entertainment to me. If I enjoy it, it's because it allows me to look into the mind of its maker, not because light-hearted Stalinism makes for a good action movie. Just because D&amp;D is about certain kinds of adventures means I am required to deactivate my brain and have fun in only one of a number of prescribed fashions. Throwing in some moral content makes a fun game more fun, because a game with less moral content basically has less intelligence and just isn't going to give me what I want. That is not an argument for or against moral relativism in a game, but definitely against apathy. If someone else would rather play in a different fashion, power to them, but how can you knock someone for finding it entertaining if the GM weaves in bits and pieces of this and that picked up in literature class or ethics or Sunday school? I'm not a big fan of, say, football, but I appreciate it when I watch a movie about football and I can verify that football is accurately and intelligently presented for the purposes of the movie. Invincible is not a movie about football, it's a movie about a guy. But it would be less good a movie if football was presented in a rubbish manner. And that's how I feel about ethics. If someone runs a game and it becomes clear they couldn't be bothered to stay awake for the first 15 minutes of Ethics 101, it's just a little but of a letdown.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pawsplay, post: 4658841, member: 15538"] There are two huge fallacies in this line of argument. 1. That a moral argument means there is a "lesson" involved. In actuality, the whole point of an RPG is to see what happens, so a game can be illuminating without imparting any specific line of moral reasoning. 2. That because the purpose of game is "entertainment," there cannot be other dimensions to why someone chooses to play the way they do. I read Erich Fromm's [i]Escape From Freedom[/i] "for fun," but that doesn't make it any less serious a work. I watch action movies "for fun," but I am definitely going to choose ones with moral content I can accept. For instance, a pro-Stalinist action film, no matter how well wrought, is just not going to be light entertainment to me. If I enjoy it, it's because it allows me to look into the mind of its maker, not because light-hearted Stalinism makes for a good action movie. Just because D&D is about certain kinds of adventures means I am required to deactivate my brain and have fun in only one of a number of prescribed fashions. Throwing in some moral content makes a fun game more fun, because a game with less moral content basically has less intelligence and just isn't going to give me what I want. That is not an argument for or against moral relativism in a game, but definitely against apathy. If someone else would rather play in a different fashion, power to them, but how can you knock someone for finding it entertaining if the GM weaves in bits and pieces of this and that picked up in literature class or ethics or Sunday school? I'm not a big fan of, say, football, but I appreciate it when I watch a movie about football and I can verify that football is accurately and intelligently presented for the purposes of the movie. [i]Invincible[/i] is not a movie about football, it's a movie about a guy. But it would be less good a movie if football was presented in a rubbish manner. And that's how I feel about ethics. If someone runs a game and it becomes clear they couldn't be bothered to stay awake for the first 15 minutes of Ethics 101, it's just a little but of a letdown. [/QUOTE]

Verification