Anyroad, we’re moving away from unwarranted persecution (hmm, is that an oxymoron?) here and moving into religious debate.
Thanks for pulling that brake. I won´t continue in that direction, as it might get ugly.
Stefan
|
[
I don't know that there is any way to deal with a fanatic other than through avoidance (or death, but that's not necessarily an option here).
In the end, Sobelia, I'd suggest that you try to be calm, reasonable, and patient. Once calm, rationality, and patience fail you can rely on avoidance, blind rage, and violence to solve your problems (well, maybe).
If I have to deal with them 9and sometimes I do), I go one of two routes.
1: take them down with logic. Logic is kryptonite to any fanatic. Fanaticism requires faith divorcised from ligoc. (I have no problem with faith. I have no problem with faith that defies logic. I have such faith. fanaticism requires your faith ignore logic, rather than accept things knowing they aren;t lgocial, and being ready for the world to act appropriately).
2: Seduce them. This has yet to ever fail. They either come around, or go away.
Aha! So now we see the true perils of D&D - it turns you into a demented sex maniac. Get behind me, Satan!
Aha! So now we see the true perils of D&D - it turns you into a demented sex maniac. Get behind me, Satan!
Is it wise to put a demented sex maniac “behind” you?
(yes, I’m aware of the prose, but it ruins the joke)
|
|
If I have to deal with them 9and sometimes I do), I go one of two routes.1: take them down with logic. Logic is kryptonite to any fanatic. Fanaticism requires faith divorcised from ligoc. (I have no problem with faith. I have no problem with faith that defies logic. I have such faith. fanaticism requires your faith ignore logic, rather than accept things knowing they aren;t lgocial, and being ready for the world to act appropriately).
2: Seduce them. This has yet to ever fail. They either come around, or go away.
Alas, the fanatics I've dealt with are immune to logic, reason, rationality, and all related forms of mental exercise. They're not necessarily immune to kryptonite if it's applied repeatedly with excessive force, though.
And seduction isn't my strong point. But if it works for you, great!
Unfortunately, I agree with Lathiira. Logic can be used to "prove" all sorts of nonsense - it depends with your starting axioms. "Belief" is nothing to do with logic, nor are the axioms from which you derive your views. It can probably be demonstrated to be perfectly logical to demonise D&D given a set of (ignorant, blinkered) axioms to start with. The only real was to do it might be to invite them to a gaming session and showing what happens, but that is an empirical demonstration rather than an appeal to logic. (But the problem of induction makes it clear even that is not "proof" to the contrary that someone, somewhere is exalting the name of the Horned One while playing.)
While it is true that logic can be used to argue anything, faulty logic tends to be fairly obvious if you are familiar with the subject.
I saw through the "D&D makes you loose touch with reality" arguement as a kid. It was faulty logic.
My suggestion if you get caught in a conversion conversation is to pay attention to how the other person argues their point. If they argue emotionally, you likely will not win. An emotional arguement can be torn down by logic, but the person making the arguement will hold on to it even as it crumbles because they have a vested emotional interest.
A logical arguement (even if it is faulty logic) is harder to break, but the person making the arguement will more likely be willing to acknowledge cracks in their point of view.
Now some will try to use faulty logic to back up emotional arguements. These are still emotional arguements. These tend to devolve into personal attacks when their arguement crumbles.
Alas, the fanatics I've dealt with are immune to logic, reason, rationality, and all related forms of mental exercise. They're not necessarily immune to kryptonite if it's applied repeatedly with excessive force, though.
Thankfully I have not had to deal with fanatics in a long time, but my girlfriend is not so lucky. She works for a university that gets regular visits from a small church group that preaches the evils of those that don't believe exactly what they do.
After being accosted by them once to often, she has taken to using her lunch break to protest them. She is polite and very well read (she is a librarian). While she cannot win an arguement, she has managed to blunt their emotional attacks on others.
Fanatics are hard to deal with. They tend to take attacks on their beliefs as personal attacks. That kind of mentality cannot be easily overcome.
Fanatics are hard to deal with. They tend to take attacks on their beliefs as personal attacks. That kind of mentality cannot be easily overcome.
Well, in a way, attacks on their beliefs are personal attacks, as fanatics (no matter for what cause) define themselves at least partially via their belief. If you truly believe that 3.5 is the greatest RPG ever, then even the thought of having a 4.0 is heresy. (Which can be observed on these and WotC´s boards ;-)).
Stefan
Well, in a way, attacks on their beliefs are personal attacks, as fanatics (no matter for what cause) define themselves at least partially via their belief. If you truly believe that 3.5 is the greatest RPG ever, then even the thought of having a 4.0 is heresy. (Which can be observed on these and WotC´s boards ;-)).
Stefan
True enough, but that arguement cuts both ways and is best left to those boards.
Though I have no doubt that cover of the 4.0 Player's Handbook alone will fan the D&D is evil arguement (see I got back on topic). I can just hear someone saying, "See, they want you to pretend to be demons!"
Though I have no doubt that cover of the 4.0 Player's Handbook alone will fan the D&D is evil arguement (see I got back on topic). I can just hear someone saying, "See, they want you to pretend to be demons!"
Ahhh that is because its true(-ish). Tieflings. Not going to do the "but we play role models and champions of justice" crowd any good.
Aha! So now we see the true perils of D&D - it turns you into a demented sex maniac. Get behind me, Satan!
No, I had a healthy sex drive before I got into DnD. I do incorporate DnD into sex play with good friends/lovers, but that's not a cause and effect thing
Plus I am rarely the one behind people
TMI.
On-topic please.
Oh indeed! Better get her quick, before Vomit Guy wins her heart.
Blaaaarrrrrpppphhhh?
There was a topic?TMI.
On-topic please.
Curses! Foiled again!
I started playing D&D to become a satanist, and was extremely disappointed to discover they weren't connected. ;)Well, you're not doing it right then. First you gotta create a character called Black Leaf, then you gotta find a DM named Ms. Frost. Once you hit 8th level, she'll teach you how to "really cast spells". Its all downhill from there.
;)
LOL!!!!
"If you die in the game, you must fetch us Mountain Dew!"
In our house, it means you have to make a Starbucks run.
GRRRRR! i just read this article! It made me so mad! I have no idea why I read this stuff. Honestly.
Ugh! Crap like this makes my head hurt! These people who write these rants have way too much time on their hands.
|
What I want to know is why does he get so defensive when in christianity your supposed to turned the other cheek. Oh wait I do know it's not about Jesus the One True God. Last I heard Jesus was the son of God, NOT God. Plus I don't remember Jesus basically yelling and screaming at the Jews that since they didn't follow him they were all going to hell. Guess all the forgiveness is used up. When they get a new shipment in they should let us know!
Many, many, many moons ago when I was still living at home, my older brother had a friend who needed a place to crash one night. The only extra bed was in the back office where I painted my D&D figs. The next morning we found him asleep clutching an illustrated childrens bible. Turns out, he was afraid that my dragons were going to come to life in the night and attack him and the bible was the only thing that would protect him. We were rolling.
1) Silliest thing I've ever heard
2) None of them were more than 2 inches tall--how much damage could they do? Light a bithday candle with their breath weapon?
3) I don't think you can perform an exorcism with an illustrated childrens bible
For the last time! It is Dragon worship in a Dungeon! Get it right!
~grins~
HA!!! This made me chuckle out loud. ;) When they say "I need a young priest and an old priest" they don't mean THAT young. ;D
"The Exorcist" quote FOR THE WIN!!!
BTW: I obviously missed all references to Hitler in D&D material he alludes to several times. Can somebody give me pointer?I've got it right here: Do the Dungeons & Dragons books really venerate Adolf Hitler?
He also mentions rape in the same sentence, so for good measure: Do the Dungeons & Dragons books really mention rape as an activity that characters would partake in frequently?
Hope this helps.
Thanks for the links, I´ll have to dig out the old books to reread these passages myself. Theescapist scrutinizes the accusations closely and disproves them thoroughly by proving that the texts themselves (the sources) don´t suggest or even imply the points made into an accusation. (I have to say that using Adolf Hitler of all people in this context is not a wise choice, however. Come to think of it, using Hitler at all besides in a historical textbook is never a good idea.)
Stefan
I never had problems with playing D&D in high school. One of my English teachers played and we frequently had discussions about the game (favorite characters, unlucky deaths, adventures we had played). In fact, after I graduated I joined his game during the summers when I was home from university. My mother was not afraid that the game was evil but she still thought it was a little off; to this day she refers to it as “playing cards.” On a side note, I was first introduced to D&D during a Boy Scout camping trip, ahhhhhh good times.
I can't believe this thread actually went to the archives. You'd think it'd stay up for a while, what with the happenings.
Which happeneings?
Do you mean the bank robbing couple who SHOCK played rpgs and HORROR played Halo?
man, that sucks Fizzban; sounds like her parents need to grow up and get right with God; have them read the meaning behind the 2nd and I think the 8th commandment, if that is the one about false witness, both of which by your words they are breaking. We can talk about it on another thread if you like; it is the typical pointing at a splinter in anothers eye while a plank is in your own - another Biblical metaphor.
Am wondering if it will come up in my child custody hearing during my divorce that I play D&D and what effect that may have; will let you all know if it is applicable.
Which happeneings?
Really, the Golden Compass becoming a movie. I imagine that everyone is going to be having something to say about that, negative or positive.
|
Really, the Golden Compass becoming a movie. I imagine that everyone is going to be having something to say about that, negative or positive.
I was wondering when this might get brought up...
I have not read the books. My wife has. All the research that I have done with these books seem to point that the author (Phillip Pullman) really, really, really has something against Christians. Even most non-christians that have read the 3rd book in the series feel that it really is a bit over the top.
There are a lot of other elements in the book(s) that I am sure will provide a lot of controversy (12 year olds having sex is a 'good' thing, familiars being called "demons", priests killing babies, etc.), but I don't know that I really care about any of that -- it is a fantasy story after all. I personally don't care what he writes -- I just will find it difficult to support someone that has that much of an agenda against Christians. (Which is really too bad because I am sure that it will be a fantastic movie.)
I actually worship the Credit Card companies! They demand a monthly sacrifce out of me and if I miss it, I am punished! ~grins~
OK, just to go into a few points - it is not explicitly stated that Lyra and Will have sex. They experience a moment of joyful union but the author himself says that can mean whatever you want it to mean. I don't remember priests killing babies in the book, and besides the 'priests' of the Magesterium don't worship God per se, they follow a being that masquerades as God.
They aren't 'demons' they're 'daemons'; and they aren't familiars. They are the physical manifestation of a person's soul in Lyra's world. They are as much a part of a human being as a soul is in our world (leaving aside whether one believes in such a thing). They are a reflection and extension of the spirit, will, and personality of the human they are part of. There are moments in each of the books where I cried with the poignancy of the daemon/animal/soul imagery.
It is true that Pullman is an atheist, and he doesn't pull any punches, but his books are written to be a direct counterpoint to Lewis' Narnia books, which Pullman views as abhorrent, or as he (Pullman) puts it "the good boys and girls are rewarded by being killed".
The Golden Compass (or Northern Lights to give it its original, UK title) and its companion volumes are some of the most powerful literature I have read. They moved me in so many ways. I'm not sure I could read them again, some of the imagery was so heart-wrenchingly beautiful and awe-inspiring.
Really, the Golden Compass becoming a movie. I imagine that everyone is going to be having something to say about that, negative or positive.I was wondering when this might get brought up...
I have not read the books. My wife has. All the research that I have done with these books seem to point that the author (Phillip Pullman) really, really, really has something against Christians. Even most non-christians that have read the 3rd book in the series feel that it really is a bit over the top.
There are a lot of other elements in the book(s) that I am sure will provide a lot of controversy (12 year olds having sex is a 'good' thing, familiars being called "demons", priests killing babies, etc.), but I don't know that I really care about any of that -- it is a fantasy story after all. I personally don't care what he writes -- I just will find it difficult to support someone that has that much of an agenda against Christians. (Which is really too bad because I am sure that it will be a fantastic movie.)
I've read all three books and consider myself a Christian. The first book was decent and I liked it, even though the 'Church' in it are the bad guys right from the start. The second and third books took this and hit you over the head with it harder than a mule kick. All in all, not impressed, not just because of my own beliefs, but because of the heavy handed treatment of the book. I like subtlety. Guy Gavrial Kay is my favourite writer. he is good at subtle, and is good at religious conflict and has a religion that is Christian in some lights. He does it well. Pullman, I don't know.
As for the D&D bothers, my dad has issues, but as he has said, it is my life, and i can do what I want. Where I have had more problems has been from working for Games Workshop. We had people continuously asking us if we were Nazis. It really gets to you after a while. We also had the evil demon worshiping spawn, and Warhammer and Warhammer 40k aren't even role playing games.
So to summarize, I understand where everyone here is coming from, but at the same time, a lot of the negative energy against gaming is due to lack of education, and in return, not wanting to be educated. After all, as we have seen in gaming, the story is better if there is a bad guy.
WC
*EDIT
Call me a hypocrite but I will probably see the movie, if for anything, the armoured bears.
Since this thread has be pulled back up from the abyss, I am going to raise a question. Through the 1980s and into the 1990s, D&D had a bad reputation in the US. Some people still claim it leads to devil worship. Now, after years of digging its way out from that stigma, WOTC plans to include Tieflings as a core race (with a more sinister history as decended from an empire that made pacts with the 9 Hells). How do you guys think this will affect the reputation of the game? Do you think it will cause more headaches for gamers?
Hmm...that is actually two questions. Oh well.
Please, lets not turn this into a 4e bashing thread. There are enough of those. I am just curious if you guys think this will stir up crap that was better left buried.
With fantasy going mainstream (Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings), like science fiction in the late 1970s/early 1980s (Star Wars, Star Trek), I believe the level of negativity each product receives will depend on 1) the community and 2) the content. In communities where religious fundamentalism is powerful, pretty much anything not associated with the fundamentalist teachings will be frowned upon. How much of a reaction a product receives will depend on how greatly different from the fundamentalist teachings it is. Something like Golden Compass, which can be taken as an attack on religion, will draw a much stronger response than Stardust, for example.
D&D, like many other products, will probably fall somewhere in-between. It might even be lumped in with WoW in today's society, instead of serving as a focus for all RPGs as it did in the 1980s.
Since this thread has be pulled back up from the abyss, I am going to raise a question. Through the 1980s and into the 1990s, D&D had a bad reputation in the US. Some people still claim it leads to devil worship. Now, after years of digging its way out from that stigma, WOTC plans to include Tieflings as a core race (with a more sinister history as decended from an empire that made pacts with the 9 Hells). How do you guys think this will affect the reputation of the game? Do you think it will cause more headaches for gamers?
Well.. I doubt it will help. But then again, the people who are critical of DnD are either Ignorant, or stupid. Ignorant being those who just don't know enough about it, and stupid being those who know they are ignorant and don't care to change it.
I doubt it will be a big deal in the long run. People who are determined to hate it and everyone who play it will find a reason no matter what.
I guess I was lucky. I grew up in a very very small town in Wyoming and was surrounded by very conservative close-minded people (my parents included, though i still love them!), but for some reason everyone was okay with me being a very liberal, skateboarding, Buddhist who also happens to write fantasy and play rpgs. My group even gave a presentation on this very topic (D&Ds bad rep) in English in high school and we had everyone in the class make characters including the english teacher who created a storytelling bard. Afterwards people you wouldnt think would be into D&D would always want to make more characters during home room and stuff. We didnt even have a geeky bent to us as we all had girlfriends, some of which played rpgs with us, hosted parties that jocks and "the cool chicks" and everyone else came to. My mom was only concerned that the excessive dice-rollng would dent her precious wooden dining room table. How heavy did she think a D20 was? And by the way rpgs havent conflicted with my Buddhist beliefs in any way shape or form.
Well.. I doubt it will help. But then again, the people who are critical of DnD are either Ignorant, or stupid. Ignorant being those who just don't know enough about it, and stupid being those who know they are ignorant and don't care to change it.
I doubt it will be a big deal in the long run. People who are determined to hate it and everyone who play it will find a reason no matter what.
I Agree about ignorant and stupid people. I asked the question because it has been suggested that WOTC is marketing 4e to bring in new players. While I think this will happen to some degree, I do wonder how the new edition will be viewed in the short term.
I suspect that you are right about it not mattering in the long run.
I guess I was lucky. I grew up in a very very small town in Wyoming and was surrounded by very conservative close-minded people (my parents included, though i still love them!), but for some reason everyone was okay with me being a very liberal, skateboarding, Buddhist who also happens to write fantasy and play rpgs. My group even gave a presentation on this very topic (D&Ds bad rep) in English in high school and we had everyone in the class make characters including the english teacher who created a storytelling bard. Afterwards people you wouldnt think would be into D&D would always want to make more characters during home room and stuff. We didnt even have a geeky bent to us as we all had girlfriends, some of which played rpgs with us, hosted parties that jocks and "the cool chicks" and everyone else came to. My mom was only concerned that the excessive dice-rollng would dent her precious wooden dining room table. How heavy did she think a D20 was? And by the way rpgs havent conflicted with my Buddhist beliefs in any way shape or form.
I am always amused at how gamers are sterotyped. My current group includes a librarian, a lawyer, a legal assistant, a computer programer, a CAD operator (myself), and a store manager. Other gamers that have played include 2 scientist, a lab tech, and another programer.
I am always amused at how gamers are sterotyped. My current group includes a librarian, a lawyer, a legal assistant, a computer programer, a CAD operator (myself), and a store manager. Other gamers that have played include 2 scientist, a lab tech, and another programer.
As someone who grew up in the 1980s, I'm amused at how attitudes have changed in the last 20 years. Computers and science fiction have gone mainsteam, fantasy is following in the same tracks, computer/console/online gaming is big business, and (despite some lingering stereotypes) geeks and nerds are no longer automatically considered to socially inept.
|
I started playing D&D in 1984 and went through the contraversy of the game. The game was blamed for a couple of suicides because some kids killed themselves after their characters died in game. The game was also accused of being an introduction into the occult.
When I started playing I bought my books and miniatures at Toys R Us but the stigma got so bad they stopped carrying D&D.
But I could always show people my game books and no where did it have you pick a character that served or worshipped devils.
I am worried that 4th Ed is going to bring the whole stigma back. Having the Tiefling race that made a pact with devils through "darkness and blood" is bad enough but I have the Races & Classes book and the Warlock is so much worse. Those who are against D&D will be able to point to that class description and say D&D encourages kids to make bargains with dark powers. The proof they were lacking before will be given to them.
I'm old enough now that no one elses opinion can stop me from playing (except my wife's) but I'm worried that the choice of Tiefling and Warlock will hurt recruiting new players to the game.
|
|
OK, just to go into a few points - it is not explicitly stated that Lyra and Will have sex. They experience a moment of joyful union but the author himself says that can mean whatever you want it to mean. I don't remember priests killing babies in the book, and besides the 'priests' of the Magesterium don't worship God per se, they follow a being that masquerades as God.
Most of that (as I understand) happens "off camera" so to speak. In addition, most things that I have seen/read about the books all seem to agree that the kids were "freed" because they had sex and that the priests were evil (largely) because they killed babies. Perhaps a lot of that was implied, but it seemed to be implied enough that quite a few people got the same ideas.
They aren't 'demons' they're 'daemons'; and they aren't familiars. They are the physical manifestation of a person's soul in Lyra's world. They are as much a part of a human being as a soul is in our world (leaving aside whether one believes in such a thing). They are a reflection and extension of the spirit, will, and personality of the human they are part of. There are moments in each of the books where I cried with the poignancy of the daemon/animal/soul imagery.
First of all, I don't know what difference the spelling makes in this case. Would it have been better if he called them "devils"? I think that there would have still been an issue if he had called them "angels", but the issue would have been different. However, again I don't really care what he called them. It is a fantasy world -- he can call them whatever he likes. My point was that there are most likely some people that may have issue with that and I feel that he did it deliberately for that reason.
In addition, what you described is to me how I view "familiars" in D&D. Granted a bit more than that, but basically a manifestation of the person in an animal form that helps the person and if it dies the person loses some (all) of themself.
It is true that Pullman is an atheist, and he doesn't pull any punches, but his books are written to be a direct counterpoint to Lewis' Narnia books, which Pullman views as abhorrent, or as he (Pullman) puts it "the good boys and girls are rewarded by being killed".
I have heard this before, and I just don't get it. Lewis' point was to write an allegory. He wanted to show what Christianity was about in terms and ways that people could easily understand. I also felt that Lewis wrote it for Christians because he felt that many Christians just didn't understand what Christianity was all about. He wasn't attacking athiests, he wasn't attacking Buddhists, he wasn't attacking Muslims, etc. If his goal was to point out how wrong a group of people was, I think that his fingers were pointing at Christians.
Pullman, on the other hand seems to be much more attacking Christians. He is not trying to show what athiests believe and why. There isn't any kind of allegory. His goal is to show how wrong people who think differently from him are.
He can think that Lewis' books are abhorent. But if he really thinks that his books are a counterpoint to the Narnia books, then he really didn't understand what they were about.
The Golden Compass (or Northern Lights to give it its original, UK title) and its companion volumes are some of the most powerful literature I have read. They moved me in so many ways. I'm not sure I could read them again, some of the imagery was so heart-wrenchingly beautiful and awe-inspiring.
My wife said that she has read few books as well written as Phillip Pullman's books. The man can write and write well. He definitely has a gift with words.
Back to the real controversy...
There will ALWAYS be something for people to rally behind and try and chastise and condemn. These books and the movie that goes along with them are potentially one of the more recent things. The whole thing is silly. The truth is that I don't know of any Christians that will read the books and suddenly say "Pullman was right all along -- there is no God". My personal problem has little to nothing to do with the books or the movie(s?). My problem has to do with Pullman himself having such an incredible agenda against Christians.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
GRRRRR! i just read this article! It made me so mad! I have no idea why I read this stuff. Honestly.
Okay. I'll raise my hand and say that I thought that article was pretty reasonable, particularly given that it's written by a fundamentalist Christian, for fundamentalist Christians.
It offers three main objections to the game, and I think it gets at least one of them right.
My response to the issue of arcane magic and sorcery is that the D&D world is a specific fantasy landscape where a particular type of energy flows through reality and responds to the characters' attempts to shape it. This energy has no real-world analogue --that's what makes it fantasy-- but is part and parcel of most fantasy novels. Even STAR WARS. A science-fiction game might have space ships and energy shields and matter-transporters, and a player might pretend to be an engineer fixing those machines, but that doesn't mean that he's preparing to really travel through space. In the same way, a person playing a wizard is manipulating a non-sentient energy field in a setting with no real-world analogue.
That's the one clear miss.
The author's solid hit, I think, is the claim that characters in D&D grab weapons and powerful offensive magic spells and kill anything they disagree with. And this does have real-world analogues, and does get people acclimated to combatting, rather than compromising with, anybody who gets in their way.
When I was addressing Christian concerns in the 80's, this was a valid objection. It is still a valid objection. My response at that point was to write adventures where attacking the opponent was not always the right answer.
(The article tries to strengthen this by arguing that players can choose evil alignments. While I know a lot of people who play in evil-aligned campaigns, it's pretty clear that the RAW don't support that.)
The point that could be a hit or a miss concerns gods. Now, you'll note, this particular article does not make the claim that the actual players are out actually worshipping pagan gods. It claims that a role-playing environment gets players pretending that there are lots of pagan gods, which is true.
Which might, or might not, be a problem. Certainly, for the actual pagans here, it's not. For fundamentalist Christians, it probably is. Which is perhaps why TSR went to the trouble to rename "gods" as "powers" for a while. (Not that that helped matters any.)
If someone had a problem with people role-playing a pagan pantheon, I'd respect that objection. There are RPGs with a more-or-less Christian world-view (from the obvious to the more subtle.
GRRRRR! i just read this article! It made me so mad! I have no idea why I read this stuff. Honestly.Okay. I'll raise my hand and say that I thought that article was pretty reasonable, particularly given that it's written by a fundamentalist Christian, for fundamentalist Christians.
It offers three main objections to the game, and I think it gets at least one of them right.
My response to the issue of arcane magic and sorcery is that the D&D world is a specific fantasy landscape where a particular type of energy flows through reality and responds to the characters' attempts to shape it. This energy has no real-world analogue --that's what makes it fantasy-- but is part and parcel of most fantasy novels. Even STAR WARS. A science-fiction game might have space ships and energy shields and matter-transporters, and a player might pretend to be an engineer fixing those machines, but that doesn't mean that he's preparing to really travel through space. In the same way, a person playing a wizard is manipulating a non-sentient energy field in a setting with no real-world analogue.
That's the one clear miss.
The author's solid hit, I think, is the claim that characters in D&D grab weapons and powerful offensive magic spells and kill anything they disagree with. And this does have real-world analogues, and does get people acclimated to combatting, rather than compromising with, anybody who gets in their way.
When I was addressing Christian concerns in the 80's, this was a valid objection. It is still a valid objection. My response at that point was to write adventures where attacking the opponent was not always the right answer.
(The article tries to strengthen this by arguing that players can choose evil alignments. While I know a lot of people who play in evil-aligned campaigns, it's pretty clear that the RAW don't support that.)
The point that...
You bring up great points regarding style of play and the article did as well, although the article had many assumptions into the type of person playing D&D.
I think we can all agree that if magic exists, it has absolutely NOTHING to do with how we play D&D - "I shoot a magic missile at the darkness," is not something you will ever hear in the jungles of Peru where real shamanism takes place.
But the style of play can be a concern and it is the exact same argument that rages regarding video games or any other form of entertainment - what values is it teaching a young mind? And that is up to good parenting and societies evolving views that lends itself to much further debate and scrutiny.
I think any Christian should ask themselves, as the article asked of D&D, why involve yourself? Why invole yourself in anything at all other than going to church and reading the bible?
I actually have the answer! Wait for it...
BECAUSE YOU"RE A HUMAN BEING.
As a human being you live on The Planet Earth with other human beings that may or may not be exactly like you. As a Christian and a human, it your job to live life as a good human being. Here on Earth, good poeple do things like: IDENTIFY with each other, Learn about our world, Experience what it is to be alive, ETC.
The tools of make-believe and pretend have always just been mediums for people to share their experiences, to try to "put ourselves in someone elses shoes," as Atticus Finch alwys put it.
So, while I don't agree with running games that glorify subversive content, I would say it's beneficial to you as a grown person to understand the motivations of someone evil, and playing them in a D&D campaign is one way.
Reading a book is another way.
Using the example of not involving yourself in anything that even hints of evil is like saying a novelist should never write a villian into their work because they are in danger of identifying too closely with them, thereby becoming villianous.
I don't believe D&D has EVER glorified the characters doing bad things or encouraged the players play rapist nazis that murder and steal at every turn. It seems pretty neutral to me actually.
And the complaint that the Rogue character is meant to steal or stab in the back - I don't don't see any mechanics that make the Rogue a better thief than anyone else other than Move Silent or Sleight of Hand (which any other character may take) and stabbing in the back? Well, I guess God's people the Israelites never went to war because in war you rely on ambushes and the element of surprise for many tactics...OH WAIT, THEY DID GO TO WAR! And even God himself used hit and run surprise tactics! (The Sea crashing in on Pharoah and his men.) Oh, but that wasn't FAIR was it? God wasn't playing fair was he? Like how the Rogue plays, maybe? Oooo blasphemous...
Chris Mortika, I quoted your post because I thought you brought up good points - any bitterness you read in mine is not directed at you but the associated article from Chick Publishing.
Just wanted to make sure you knew.
The author's solid hit, I think, is the claim that characters in D&D grab weapons and powerful offensive magic spells and kill anything they disagree with. And this does have real-world analogues, and does get people acclimated to combatting, rather than compromising with, anybody who gets in their way.
I will agree on that point. I once wrote an encounter where players found orcs standing over the bodies of a merchant caravan. The players attacked the orcs and, killing a few and chasing the others off. They then found out from a wounded merchant that the orcs had come to their rescue when bandits attacked.
One of the orcs wounded was the son of the tribe's chieftain. They player nearly started a war because they attack before they talked.
Since then, they have encountered good kobolds, neutral gnolls, and so on. Very few races get judged automatically anymore.
How can anyone think that D and D with friends socialising is harmful when most kids are just staring at a TV or a video game console?
I suppose some parents would prefer that their kids were quiet and just staring at a box instead of getting exited or creative over things.
Next time you can, take a step back observe people while they watch TV or play console games. How alive do they seem?
Now look at your live D and D game...
It would probably be better if we all got outside more and went camping...
Insanely enough the last time I took my step son on a wilderness mission into the real life woods he asked " How many levels in ranger do you think I will go up on this hike ? ....
