Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="roguerouge" data-source="post: 4052318" data-attributes="member: 13855">To clarify the last post, which was made rather late at night:I agree that there are ways to put slavery in a game where it is not an evil thing. It's in my game right now, as my one PC campaign just tracked down a slave ship that had hit the PC's island. But it's handled very delicately and I keep lines of communication open on any issue like this.&nbsp;That's good. I've played an assassin that took out an orc day care. That was that character hitting bottom at the start of the campaign, with the intended arc of moving towards the light. &nbsp;I'm not saying that that's badwrongfun; I'm saying that you need to be careful. ONE of the effects of role playing games is that you find aspects of the character inside yourself. Sometimes that's enormously positive. One actress who played Medea said that she found it to be enormously cleansing; she said she was like a kitten after shows. This doesn't apply to everybody, however. In my profession (media studies), it's fairly widely-held that fiction rewards certain ways of thinking and feeling through pleasure (especially fictions that are interactive or immersive.) You get used to it, as Renoir said in The Rules of the Game. What's worse, we're not perfectly aware of our own motivations and what can start as an attempt at verisimilitude can start to shift over time. And a setting can force a DM to role play certain behaviors for a long time. So, yeah, if I had a DM who made the most costly slave a &quot;comely female elf&quot; rather than, say, a wizard that could make magic items that could be sold for a 100% markup and came with no XP penalty to the owner, I would DEFINITELY think that it revealed something unpleasant about the DM and what his fantasies had unleashed in him. If I continued to play with him, I'd definitely give that aspect of his campaign a wide berth.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="roguerouge, post: 4052318, member: 13855"] To clarify the last post, which was made rather late at night: I agree that there are ways to put slavery in a game where it is not an evil thing. It's in my game right now, as my one PC campaign just tracked down a slave ship that had hit the PC's island. But it's handled very delicately and I keep lines of communication open on any issue like this. That's good. I've played an assassin that took out an orc day care. That was that character hitting bottom at the start of the campaign, with the intended arc of moving towards the light. I'm not saying that that's badwrongfun; I'm saying that you need to be careful. ONE of the effects of role playing games is that you find aspects of the character inside yourself. Sometimes that's enormously positive. One actress who played Medea said that she found it to be enormously cleansing; she said she was like a kitten after shows. This doesn't apply to everybody, however. In my profession (media studies), it's fairly widely-held that fiction rewards certain ways of thinking and feeling through pleasure (especially fictions that are interactive or immersive.) You get used to it, as Renoir said in The Rules of the Game. What's worse, we're not perfectly aware of our own motivations and what can start as an attempt at verisimilitude can start to shift over time. And a setting can force a DM to role play certain behaviors for a long time. So, yeah, if I had a DM who made the most costly slave a "comely female elf" rather than, say, a wizard that could make magic items that could be sold for a 100% markup and came with no XP penalty to the owner, I would DEFINITELY think that it revealed something unpleasant about the DM and what his fantasies had unleashed in him. If I continued to play with him, I'd definitely give that aspect of his campaign a wide berth. [/QUOTE]

Verification