Tracy Hickman's view of the Dragon #300 sealed section

[The Sigil]

Equating him to a Latter Day Saint is not only rude but it is against the rules of this board and is derogatory to tLDS - why not insinuate he is a Muslim, maybe Jew or Minnonite would work better.

Reactionary is as reactionary does. I do not agree with Hickmans opinion but I am embarassed by the behavior here.

*applauds* Kudos to you, Eosin, for selecting the proper response - "I do not agree with your behavior."

And shame on everyone who dragged Hickman's religion into this... Eosin's comments are right on the mark. How is saying, "oh, he's just a reactionary Latter-Day Saint/Mormon" better than saying, "oh, he's just a reactionary Jew/Feminist/Muslim/Nazi."

Answer: It's not.

--The Sigil

 

[Walker N. Waistz]

Tracy posted the following on the DL-list:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Before I begin, I just want to say how grateful I have been at the tone of the responses on the list today. While I understand that many of you may not agree with my position on this subject, your responses have been thoughtful and well presented. Well done, everyone.

==========

NYFD and the Terrorists, in an extreme sense, typify the archetypes of heroic good and vile evil. As such, I thought the analogy was reasonable. The point being made was which of these archetypes to we aspire to emulate.

My argument stems from my belief that archetypes, down through the ages, have existed to help us understand not only who we were historically but who we aspire to be. Heroes inspire man to achieve higher ideals. Villains conquer, oppress and threaten to drag us backward.

My position is that role-playing -- and for that matter all other entertainments -- teach us something by speaking to the mythological hard-coding of our beings. Role-playing especially affects us.

(Yes, this is a subject requiring a LOT more space than this email. I suppose next month's newsletter would be as good a place as any.)

I do not believe in the so-called 'catharsis' of evil play. It is a
phantom.

I guess it is best summed up by saying that I believe we become whom we pretend to be -- which is why I do take this entirely too seriously and personally.

One last note: NYFD Firemen were not hired to die. Billions of the rest of us do not walk into hell, knowing full well that it is hell, in order to save someone else from that hell ... even with our own lives ... out of honor and duty. No, I do not believe they were doing their jobs like the rest of us; they went far beyond their jobs FOR the rest of us.

That is who I aspire to be.

Tracy Hickman

 

[drnuncheon]

His sense of morality was offended by seeing an entire magazine that is mailed to a wide-audience dedicated to "evil." A magazine where there are subscribers who are kids. A magazine with a "sealed" section to supposedly prevent children from reading it. Come on now, a sealed section? Who do you know didn't unseal that section? Do you think any of these same people who may not be able to get into an R-rated movie without being escorted by an adult asked permission from their parents before they unsealed that section?

So, now the magazine is at fault because the parents aren't doing their job? Please. If I were a parent and I saw that my kid was getting a magazine with a special "sealed section" I'd want to look it over before letting them read it. That's part of a parent's job, and I have little patience with the people who think that everybody else should do their job for them.

As for your comments about Tracy "daring" to disagree with Monte Cook - as near as I can tell, the vast majority of the people on this thread think Tracy has an absolute right to believe as he does. If anyone says he has no right to be offended by the content of the magazine, I'll stand right up and argue for him, because he's got the right to decide what he feels is appropriate for himself and his games.

What they - and I - object to is the way he chose to express himself - the way he equated a game designer with a terrorist. If I were Monte, or Jesse Decker, or any of the folks at Dragon, I would be incredibly, mortally offended. I would feel like I was being attacked by someone who had lost all sense of proportion.

I'm sure Tracy would feel exactly the same way if someone compared him to a terrorist.

I appreciate your desire to defend your friend and co-worker, but do you really think that comparing an issue of a magazine to the death and destruction in New York is appropriate? Do you really think that that shows any kind of respect for the heroes and the victims of that day? Would you walk up to someone who has lost a spouse, parent or child and say, "I know just how you feel, the latest issue of Dragon was morally repulsive to me."

I don't think so, and I hope that Tracy wouldn't either.

J

 

[The Sigil]

I also feel that Hickman's equation of Dragon 300's "vile" content to terrorism to be unwise. It's along the lines of people who label as "nazis" anyone with whom they disagree - it cheapens the currency of the word.

Too late... I already claimed the corollary to Godwin's Law.

--The Sigil

 

[ruleslawyer]

You also have to take this at face value. Tracy's reaction is a rant. Rant's are often pointless expressions of deep frustrations and anger than the actual subject.

No; I really think this rant goes a little beyond the typical hyperbolic, emotional expression of anger at a particular issue.

As an international lawyer and (former) WTC neighbor, I get angry enough when Dubya attempts to draw irrational parallels between Saddam Hussein and the September 11th attack. For someone to bring this into an assault on a particular role-playing game marketing strategy isn't only patently absurd, but also extraordinary painful and offensive to those affected by the attack.

Even if I didn't completely disagree with Mr. Hickman's point (which I do), his comparison to terrorism would have discredited his complaints in my eyes. Quite plainly, Mr. Hickman's "rant" constitutes conduct which I find perhaps the most impermissible reference to 9/11 that I've ever read.

Moreover, I do completely disagree with Mr. Hickman's points, as they constitute the worst sort of socially-conservative pro-censorship moralism. Namely, Mr. Hickman equates portrayal of particular conduct with implicit endorsement of that conduct. I think that it's clear that BoVD and its attendant issue of Dragon, far from promoting or even condoning acts of torture, sexual violence, or drug use, labels these acts "evil" and is providing some mechanics and description of such acts as ways for DMs to illustrate the true horror of evil in their campaigns. Following Mr. Hickman's argument, we might say that Call of Cthulhu promotes insane conduct, or that Schindler's List promotes Nazism.

Finally, it's clear that WotC did make a strong attempt to keep the concepts in BoVD out of the hands of younger gamers. The sections in Dragon 300 are sealed, which makes it difficult for younger gamers to flip through them at the store and signals parents that something less-than-appropriate for their young children is contained there; and Monte even includes an article on how to follow a "ratings" system for a campaign, which would be extremely useful for DMs dealing with younger gamers.

Finally, I do agree with Kibo that BoVD is handing quite a bit of ammo to the anti-D&D kooks. However, I might also point out that in all honesty, those kooks would be anti-D&D to begin with, and are unlikely even to notice the issuance of a new sourcebook, since I really doubt that Jack Chick and his ilk actually read or even look at the books. Tracy's post does concern me, though, since apparently we do have some self-confessed ultra-conservative gamers (Furn here, for example), who might be alienated by the issuance of products like BoVD. To those, all I can say is: Don't buy it. I myself will, and will use the information therein to illustrate the "tragic cautionary tale" of those who fall to evil. It's a means of reinforcing certain kinds of morality, not eroding them.

 

[Omega Lord]

Considering Mr. Hickman is the co-author of one of my favorite fantasy series of all time, it saddens me greatly to see him ranting and raving without making a point. Such extremist impulsive ravings I would expect from Jack Chick or a similar fundamental extrimist, but to hear it from Mr. Hickman is dissapointing to say the least. Also I find the comparison of an article in a magazine to what happened on 9-11 disgusting. By making such a comparison Mr. Hickman trivializes one of the most devestating events in recent history. I am not begrudging Mr. Hickman's right to an opinon but really that is going too far. I personally am going to buy the BoVD and use it as a tool for creating realistic and truly despicable villans for my players to confront and destroy.

 

[Kibo]

Really? As a non-certified member of the ultra-conservatives, I would let you know it has always been our theory it has been those quote opposite of us in charge of the FCC.



FD

Collin Powell's son heads the FCC. You should see some of the things they've handed fines out for lately. Including but not limited to a teenage asking health related questions. Meanwhile if I wanted to say anything was particularly cruel, and grossly inappropriate about the gay and lesbian community under the guise of my religious beliefes that would be ok.

A tyranny of the minority over the majority.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

Too late... I already claimed the corollary to Godwin's Law.

--The Sigil

Sorry; I tried to read the thread, but I guess I missed that.

 

[JacktheRabbit]

Not at all. I did not equate a few pages in a magazine with the murder of 3000 people through the destruction of the Wold Trade Center. I merely called him out on his cheap tactic of so horribly demonizing something merely because he didnt like it.

Good. It seems to be the kewl fad today to be "offended" by comments of others- and to mock those offended by an actual product. I did not want to be left out.

You don't think suggesting Hickman had a "reactionary and narrow mind" or suggesting his comments were like "the kind of crap I expect from religous extremists and other wackos" isn't demonizing the comments of Hickman that you happen to disagree with?

I guess it depends which side of the issue you are on.

FD

 

[drnuncheon]

I see an awful lot of condemnation for Hickman and his thoughts and beliefs, his comparing the BoVD to Terrorism and the like, but not a lot of discussion of the central point of the arguement.

That is the damger of using the kind of inflammatory rhetoric that he chose to use. Had he approached the subject in a calm and rational manner, there would have been far more chance at a calm and rational discussion.

I've seen one post of someone declaring he will never purchase anything Tracy writes ever again because he compared a section of Dragon magazine to terrorists. I haven't seen anyone declare they will do the same for Monte Cook for introducing spells based on necrophilia to the game.

Please get your facts straight. The spell (singular) based on necrophilia is in an article by James Jacobs, not Monte Cook. If you're going to assign "blame" assign it to the proper people.

J