| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We are being too hard on ourselves.
I recently undertook an event very special to me. A few weeks ago, I and two others knelt with a monk and adopted the five precepts of Buddhism. As I reviewed the precepts and reflected on them, I was reminded of course, as I am also a lifelong roleplayer, of the infamous "paladin code."
I then shifted and began to think of other codes of morality that I have studied, such as that of the Lutherans or the Methodists. I have some history with these faiths and as a child had spent countless hours memorizing the Catechism, though today I would need to pull out the old documents to tell you what precisely its words were.
So, and here I will get to the point of this, yet I should also say that this is something I am still exploring, and still coming to understand.
I also wish to state that at no point do I wish to imply that my understanding of other faiths is absolute, nor am I implying anyone's interpretation of theirs is correct or incorrect in any way. Nor am I implying these beliefs are correct or incorrect. What am implying, and have been considering for my own thoughts and perusals are several things:
My first thought is that we are being too hard on ourselves.
My second is that nothing exists within a vacuum, that few of these codes as we know or study them "stand alone." Luther's Catechism comes with its own vaults of explanatory text, and makes for an easy example in this case. When undertaking the Catechism, the student is not expected to "understand" any single of the 10 Commandments on their own, but are given paragraphs and teachings of interpretation along with them. Again, I am not advocating or arguing for or against; it is simply illustrative.
What this suggests to me is that in much a similar way, the PRD should or could be seen as merely an outline of rules, that a setting and its flavour is meant to fill in the details. If we take this interpretation, then the paladin's code is merely statement--the interpretation, understanding, and details to be filled in later.
My third thought is that perhaps some of the real world codes and guides are actually more restrictive than what we're given as part of a game. For example, the paladin is not restricted from divorce or even explicitly, sexual misconduct (though you could argue this perhaps, depending on your setting). There is no celibacy clause, no clause against killing or in the case of the precepts: no clause against the harm of minerals.
These are examples only, and I would need to go through my books to pull more of them. The lists of do and do nots however, of various moral codes and institutions, break shelves beneath their weightedness, whereas the paladin's is but three lines.
The risk of breaking various guidelines and rules may be that of bad karma, to damnation or discoloration of the eternal soul, to eternal suffering, to extended suffering in purgatory as a means of cleansing. Some indeed are quite harsh (and please do not take my words as advocation, insult, or argument for or against). These are serious topics and worthy of both respect and consideration.
My fourth thought is that, the cure of misdeeds is often a form of atonement...though this varies and changes according to region, culture, and so forth. For example, atoning may be good works, may be confessionals, may be the recitation of prayers. In some ages, there was no cure: but there were however, the more severe punishments of various kinds, such as stoning...perhaps just as often where the answer was a heartfelt apology. We are then, already familiar with the concept and see it practiced both currently and throughout history.
...those are strong words, and again and again, I mean no insult. This is merely curious to me, an exploration of thought as I said.
The -fifth- thought is that again, we are too harsh on ourselves in interpreting these codes, at times. For example, I chose this name with deliberation: there is nothing within the precepts which prevents me from having a sense of humour. I am, however, asked not to partake in killing, which...the paladin is absolutely not. We face many codes and vows within life which appear to me more restrictive than what is found as part of a game.
The final thought is that "despite" undertaking many of these beliefs, precepts, vows and so forth...and even seeking or facing atonement when tenets are breached, the followers of these various codes are perfectly normal people.
They are perfectly playable PCs and NPCs.
Ahem. :) Okay, forgive my small joke there, but for those of you who have read this far, I hope I have not offended. I also hope you've enjoyed this thought exercise, and that perhaps it means something to you, as well. I also hope that none of you are offended, or take this as my advocation of any one particular belief, or another. To me, this is only a reflection on what can be learned from ourselves, our nature, and history.
It is also a reflection of the absolutely rich and wonderful backdrop we have to draw from for our roleplay, and perhaps should. That we should encourage ourselves to view the PRD as what it is here, an outline of rules...to be filled in by our own tapestries. Finally, that given our own history as a race or species...to realize that the code is not as restrictive as we are led to think or are wont to interpret. We have within our own histories longer documents, expectations.
Don't you understand you aren't allowed to do anything but take the exact literal words written on the page, interpret them as literally as possible, and add in no context, common sense, or outside sources?
I mean, what if this using context and common sense thing catches on? We might all be in big trouble with the RAW lawyers ...
Thank you for your kind words.
It keeps circling in my mind, and I've to the conclusion that we are too hard on ourselves, that even my precepts are harsher than the three lines of what is found in a game book. To place this in perspective, I could be asked to not sleep on a high bed, or not to engage in song or dance...or to commit harm against minerals. I've seen this trend within other faiths and vows. Comparatively, those three lines seem very small.
Atonement is that way, too. Within the practice of some faith systems, confession is a common practice which allows us to absolve ourselves, not unlike atonement. Yet we see this world-wide, as well as the practice of donation or ritual, such as letter-burning which sends our fears to the heavens. Or, ritual performance and prayer, done for self-cleansing.
This is not an argument for or against a particular practice--it is merely reflective that what becomes a point of upset as regards the paladin is also either more common practice, or more restrictive practice, within belief systems worldwide. In other words, the game is easier.
Few systems either, ask their practitioners to interpret a line of code on their own. They provide most commonly a paragraph of explanatory text. Within even one system, there is debate as to the core of a statement. There's nothing to help it: this is human tradition.
What the PRD could say: You must work with your GM to interpret what those elements mean to your setting, but you must abide by them.
|
The OP's post is neat, but it shows the interaction of real humans with real codes.
While in play, we have the interaction of murderhobos with the Paladin's code ;-)
That said, I believe that any character who has to follow a code has had hours, if not days, of having this code explained to him in much detail and with examples. Something that players do not have and that many GMs actually use against the PC :-/