Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 9224570" data-attributes="member: 177">So, you're lading the conversation with emotional weight with words like &quot;shackle&quot;.As several have already said YOU CAN DO WHAT YOU WANT IN YOUR GAME.&nbsp; You are not, personally, shackled to anything.&nbsp; Okay?&nbsp; Now, as far as a published game is concerned, there are reasons to go with fairly traditional ideas of what is right and wrong.&nbsp; It boils down to a very basic tenet of good writing - know the rules, generally follow the rules, and then break the rules selectively, for the impact that specific break has.Taken to the (somewhat absurd) extreme - If you create a fictional world that is entirely decoupled from real-world assumptions of morality, the world will not be coherent to an audience without resetting them into the completely new moral framework.&nbsp; That puts a huge burden on the player, to set aside everything they know about morality, absorb the new framework, and rethink the moral and ethical value of every action.&nbsp; And that's without noting how few moral philosophers there are in RPGs, such that coming up with entire moral frameworks that actually hang together under scrutiny is unlikely.So, of course, creators just don't come up with entire frameworks - they use something like a traditional framework, and tweak it in a couple of interesting ways.Thus, games are going to largely stick to moral concepts the audience understands, with only occasional deviations for specific effects.If you want a world where there isn't a stigma against using the corpses of the dead for stuff, go to - if you embed that into a standard moral framework, you get to see all the interesting bits where that new assumption rubs up on the rest of the framework.&nbsp; That's a fine &quot;what if&quot; scenario to explore.But, each creator is going to pick and choose which rules they are going to break.&nbsp; It isn't a failure if they haven't chosen this specific one to focus on.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Umbran, post: 9224570, member: 177"] So, you're lading the conversation with emotional weight with words like "shackle". As several have already said [I]YOU CAN DO WHAT YOU WANT IN YOUR GAME[/I]. You are not, personally, shackled to anything. Okay? Now, as far as a published game is concerned, there are reasons to go with fairly traditional ideas of what is right and wrong. It boils down to a very basic tenet of good writing - know the rules, generally follow the rules, and then break the rules [I]selectively[/I], for the impact that specific break has. Taken to the (somewhat absurd) extreme - If you create a fictional world that is entirely decoupled from real-world assumptions of morality, the world will not be coherent to an audience without resetting them into the completely new moral framework. That puts a [I]huge[/I] burden on the player, to set aside [I]everything[/I] they know about morality, absorb the new framework, and rethink the moral and ethical value of every action. And that's without noting how few moral philosophers there are in RPGs, such that coming up with entire moral frameworks that actually hang together under scrutiny is unlikely. So, of course, creators just don't come up with entire frameworks - they use something like a traditional framework, and tweak it in a couple of interesting ways. Thus, games are going to largely stick to moral concepts the audience understands, with only occasional deviations for specific effects. If you want a world where there isn't a stigma against using the corpses of the dead for stuff, go to - if you embed that into a standard moral framework, you get to see all the interesting bits where that new assumption rubs up on the rest of the framework. That's a fine "what if" scenario to explore. But, each creator is going to pick and choose which rules they are going to break. It isn't a failure if they haven't chosen this specific one to focus on. [/QUOTE]

Verification