D&D General Two underlying truths: D&D heritage and inclusivity

[Maxperson]

Gygax was religious. His putting them in the game was religious in part.

And? Have you never heard that some people are more religious than others? That they have different views on the same religion?

Which is why he was disappointed.

I can understand that.

If people thought it wrong. They should remove it from the game. Not attack the game. Not attack people who like the game.
One is reasonable. The other is extremely unreasonable.

Pretend for a moment that you are very religious and believe that D&D is literally corrupting the souls of children and leading them to eternal damnation in Hell. Are you going to try and stop the game or not? Agree or not, they did have a foundation for their offense. And for the record, I do not agree with them.

 

[Xenonnonex]

And? Have you never heard that some people are more religious than others?

Speak for him do you.

Pretend for a moment that you are very religious and believe that D&D is literally corrupting the souls of children and leading them to eternal damnation in Hell. Are you going to try and stop the game or not? Agree or not, they did have a foundation for their offense. And for the record, I do not agree with them.

Would try to understand the game I would. Would sit down and watch a game. Or would supervise games. First. Before making unreasonable points. Before taking unreasonable actions. Is that too much.

 

[Maxperson]

Speak for him do you.

Who? That makes no sense as a response to what you quoted.

Would try to understand the game I would. Would sit down and watch a game. Or would supervise games. First. Before making unreasonable points. Before taking unreasonable actions. Is that too much.

Then you are less religious than those I'm asking you to pretend to be. Try putting yourself in THEIR shoes, not your own.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

And? Have you never heard that some people are more religious than others?

Let's not go down this route. You just stated that if you're more religious, you shouldn't like demons and devils in D&D and should have been on the side of the people who wanted to destroy D&D.

Pretend for a moment that you are very religious and believe that D&D is literally corrupting the souls of children and leading them to eternal damnation in Hell. Are you going to try and stop the game or not? Agree or not, they did have a foundation for their offense. And for the record, I do not agree with them.

They had a foundation, but it was irrelevant and ignorant. If they knew literally anything about the game except "Pastor X said that it has demons and devils in it, and that it makes kids worship Satan!" they wouldn't have wanted to destroy it. Their argument was ignorant, unreasonable, and they were trying to push for something without knowing the full story.
I can't believe this thread has devolved into defending the Satanic Panic or saying that it was wrong.

 

[Xenonnonex]

Who? That makes no sense as a response to what you quoted.

Gygax. Have you forgotten.
Point is. People can be equally religious and into gaming. Not up to you to determine degrees. Not up to you to decide whether people are more or less religious.

Then you are less religious than those I'm asking you to pretend to be. Try putting yourself in THEIR shoes, not your own.

Is extremism what you are asking.
Have given reasonable alternatives. People who refuse to even consider them. Before taking extreme measures. That is on them.

 

[Maxperson]

Let's not go down this route. You just stated that if you're more religious, you shouldn't like demons and devils in D&D and should have been on the side of the people who wanted to destroy D&D.

That isn't at all what I said. Please don't put words in my mouth.

They had a foundation, but it was irrelevant and ignorant. If they knew literally anything about the game except "Pastor X said that it has demons and devils in it, and that it makes kids worship Satan!" they wouldn't have wanted to destroy it. Their argument was ignorant, unreasonable, and they were trying to push for something without knowing the full story.

I'm done. You can't see how you're being as dismissive of them as you say others are of people who want orcs changed. That's fine. I'm not going to argue it any further.

I can't believe this thread has devolved into defending the Satanic Panic or saying that it was wrong.

Neither can I. Probably because it hasn't happened.

 

[Xenonnonex]

That isn't at all what I said. Please don't put words in my mouth.



I'm done. You can't see how you're being as dismissive of them as you say others are of people who want orcs changed. That's fine. I'm not going to argue it any further.


Neither can I. Probably because it hasn't happened.

Nothing was unreasonable in his argument.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

That isn't at all what I said. Please don't put words in my mouth.

I didn't, you literally posted twice saying people who are more religious are more likely to be offended by the demons and devils.

You can't see how you're being as dismissive of them as you say others are of people who want orcs changed. That's fine. I'm not going to argue it any further.

I am being dismissive of the Satanic Panic because it had no base, and should not have offended anyone. The Vistani are offensive and should be changed. If the orcs are being offensive, they should be changed. If you haven't had the experiences that the people complaining about these race depictions have, don't fight against the change because it doesn't change anything for you, and is a valid complaint.
Please stop being a strawman.

Neither can I. Probably because it hasn't happened.

Except for your multiple posts supporting them. If you can't read your own words, I don't know what to tell you.

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

They had a foundation, but it was irrelevant and ignorant. If they knew literally anything about the game except "Pastor X said that it has demons and devils in it, and that it makes kids worship Satan!" they wouldn't have wanted to destroy it. Their argument was ignorant, unreasonable, and they were trying to push for something without knowing the full story.
I can't believe this thread has devolved into defending the Satanic Panic or saying that it was wrong.

@AcererakTriple6 I know I quoted you twice in a row, but I'm not arguing with you directly. just trying to make a point.

Nobody is defending Satanic Panic. I don't think a single person on this forum has. I think you're correct that people, back then, (over)reacted to something they didn't understand and took unreasonable actions to prevent what they thought was harmful so that others wouldn't be hurt. (As an aside, it is possible that other people took advantage of the situation for their own gain but I honestly don't know the whole story)

But, for those who actually had concerns, people shouldn't reduce their concern as nothing. It wouldn't be tolerated if we were talking about people's concerns about the Vistani. It's fair to say "I don't understand why they'd have been concerned."

 

[Mercurius]

I am being dismissive of the Satanic Panic because it had no base, and should not have offended anyone. The Vistani are offensive and should be changed. If the orcs are being offensive, they should be changed. If you haven't had the experiences that the people complaining about these race depictions have, don't fight against the change because it doesn't change anything for you, and is a valid complaint.

I probably shouldn't step into this one, but there's a logical inconsistency that should be pointed out--that may be at the heart of what Maxperson is trying to express, and where the impasse lies. I can't speak for Max, but I don't think the issue is what it or is not worthy of being offended by, but suggesting that if we're going to respect one person's right to be offended, why not respect another's, even if we disagree on whether or not it is inherently offensive or offensive to us.

Now I personally think the Satanic Panic was absurd. I think the orc thing is over the top and misguided, but not (as) absurd. Meaning, I get it, I just think it is misguided and based upon a false equivalency. The Vistani is actually directly based upon a real group, and thus warrants more of a examination. But I don't want to rehash all that again, just putting my cards on the table.

But isn't the logic behind, "offense is real, even if unintentional or misguided," that we respect and don't rationalize what they're offended by, even if we see it differently? Isn't taking offense a subjective thing, based upon a subjective interpretation, so why not respect everyone's sense of being offended, regardless of what it is based on?

Again, understand that I am not defending the Satanic Panic and think that it was silly (to put it charitably). But you're drawing a clear line between two categories, and saying that one isn't worthy of offense and should be disregarded, while the other is -- based upon your own values. Whether or not I agree with you is beside the point, which is that you are choosing what others should or should not be offended by, which is exactly the same complaint waged against those who don't think orcs are offensive, and "should not have offended anyone."