Dream Park! I remember seeing that on the shelves of the FLGS back in the day. Was it any good?

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;914346You''re also imposing modern secular humanism on a fantasy medieval society. I'm a secular humanist, I donate each month to Amnesty International. But that's not the world of D&D.

The world of D&D is not even medieval except in technology. A world of Neutralist Symbiotic Henotheism, without Athens, Jerusalem, or Christ, is not going to resemble the real Middle Ages except in costuming.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;914349Thus, in your game there are no choices. You either do what the DM thinks is morally right, or the DM takes his book and dice and goes home.

Well, that sounds like fun.

The usual bullshit, I see. I said it clearly that it's your attitude I dislike, not the one in game!
The actual decision only tells me stuff about the characters, but when you presume to teach the GM your way of adventure design, it's you that needs a new Referee!

No.

I'm being horrifically facetious here; the conceit of Dream Park was that you weren't playing actual inhabitants of a fantasy realm, but rather modern-day punters playing characters of their own in a massive holographic VR simulation of a fantasy realm.

In much the same way that people arguing this point seem to be playing themselves - with their modern mores and ethics - inserted into a fantasy realm, rather than actual inhabitants of such a realm whose views on such things would be rather different, I'd wager.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;914358A world of Neutralist Symbiotic Henotheism, without Athens, Jerusalem, or Christ, is not going to resemble the real Middle Ages except in costuming.

And yet Middle Earth seems to fake it all right.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;914346In the D&D alignment system if you change alignments you lose a level. So in most cases everything is the way it is, and nobody can be redeemed. And you obviously don't know the story of Gygax's game where a paladin made some captured prisoners convert, and then slew them "to prevent any backsliding" - and faced no DM sanction from Gygax.

You''re also imposing modern secular humanism on a fantasy medieval society. I'm a secular humanist, I donate each month to Amnesty International. But that's not the world of D&D.

In my game, I essentially ignore the alignments; they inform but do not determine choices. But "evil" behaviour will tend to come back to you - people just can't trust you or work with you long-term. And non-"lawful" behaviour will piss off the authorities. The players thus have more than enough moral rope to hang themselves. But I don't put in goblin babies. If I did, I might want to complain about the players' choice about what to do with them.

Humanism is for humans. If you want humanistic moral dilemmas, just have humans. The whole point of having goblins is so that you have someone to kill and not feel guilty about it.

Right the whole point of goblins is for someone to kill and not feel guilty about it.   So don't ask me about the children to try and make me feel guilty about it.  

Or humanism is for Humans, and goblins are obvioulys short ugly humans jst like Dwarves are.  They think they feel, they speak, they are aware of them selves, humans.  So secular humanism applies.  I think the teachings if Christ Budda and Kant apply to.  

Are there any good published modules that flip the Heros?  Where you plays as orcs and goblins tring to push back encroaching human (so called) civilization?  Start by burning crops end by fighting against the Heros you played in the last campaign?

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;914348No. But we should suggest to them that something like Dogs in the Vineyard would suit them a shitload better than D&D.

Nonsense and poppycock. By that line of reasoning, Gary and crew should have stuck with Chainmail, instead of jamming all that Arr Pee junk in a wargame.

Quote from: Headless;914363Are there any good published modules that flip the Heros?  Where you plays as orcs and goblins tring to push back encroaching human (so called) civilization?  Start by burning crops end by fighting against the Heros you played in the last campaign?

Nearest thing I can think of is the Orcs of Thar for BD&D, but it was written in a more humorous angle.

Quote from: daniel_ream;914360No.

I'm being horrifically facetious here; the conceit of Dream Park was that you weren't playing actual inhabitants of a fantasy realm, but rather modern-day punters playing characters of their own in a massive holographic VR simulation of a fantasy realm.

In much the same way that people arguing this point seem to be playing themselves - with their modern mores and ethics - inserted into a fantasy realm, rather than actual inhabitants of such a realm whose views on such things would be rather different, I'd wager.

Are you suggesting that in fantasy role play moral delimas should be answered from the in charcter perspective of the charcter?  Ok sure.  But while social morals change, right and wrong, in the extream cases don't.  It is always wrong to kill innocent sentiants against their will.  Slavery is always wrong.  Historical context doesn't matter.   There is no context fantasy or other wise where they become right.   So if your are saying play the social up bringing of the charcter and quict mucking it up with this moral stuff.  Fine, great that's what you want and it sounds quite fun.  But don't say we are missing the point.  We see your point and are choosing a different one.

If you want play a charcter with different morality.  Again cool no one says you have to be the good guy all the time.  But if you pretend to kill innocents you can't also pretend to be good for doing so.

Quote from: daniel_ream;914361And yet Middle Earth seems to fake it all right.

Middle Earth is not quite medieval, and is fundamentally proto-Christian, if only implicitly so. A D&D world based on the rules and tropes that have evolved really should resemble the pulp sword & sorcery influences more, IMO.

Quote from: Headless;914363Are there any good published modules that flip the Heros?  Where you plays as orcs and goblins tring to push back encroaching human (so called) civilization?  Start by burning crops end by fighting against the Heros you played in the last campaign?

Reverse Dungeon was published in the waning days of 2E, but I can't speak to its quality.

Well we can allways go kill demons and devils. We KNOW those are horrible and irredeemable.

"PLANESCAPE"

awww Hell...

"9 of em. Now this devil, er, "Baatezu"... wants to show you the doilies its been knitting. Would you like one?"

noooooo!

Quote from: Ratman_tf;914364Nonsense and poppycock. By that line of reasoning, Gary and crew should have stuck with Chainmail, instead of jamming all that Arr Pee junk in a wargame.

You know what word does not appear anywhere in these books? That's right, it's "roleplaying."



In fact "role" was used essentially interchangeably with "class." You were the Fighting-Man, or the Magic-User, much as a soldier is a scout or a machinegunner; being the radio guy does not imply anything about your personality or morals or worldview, you're just the guy who carries and knows how to use the radio. The "role" you played was simply someone with a certain set of abilities, anything you added to that was cosmetic. Put another way, roleplaying beyond "I hit him with my sword" or "with my magic missile" was an emergent property of the game session, not something inherent in the game design (unlike a storygame). Roleplaying as we now conceive of it - playing a person - was something that emerged in play over the years. So in fact they didn't design it into the thing.

Note that it's not until 3rd edition or so that any mention is given in the game books of developing a personality beyond the alignment system and any cosmetic stuff (ie not affecting gameplay) players may choose to do, eg "he has a large red beard and likes ale and playing tiddlywinks." So the roots of the hobby are not terribly thespy.

If you want a storygame, then there are many games which do that admirably. I've done it with fate and the like. D&D of any edition is ill-suited to it as its whole design shows its fantasy wargaming origins, for example in the alignment system, "you are on the side of X."

Quote from: Headless;914363Are there any good published modules that flip the Heros?  Where you plays as orcs and goblins tring to push back encroaching human (so called) civilization?  Start by burning crops end by fighting against the Heros you played in the last campaign?

Runequest Glorantha did a few back in the RQ2 and RQ3 days. I've got to think that somebody, somewhere did a version for D&D.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;914398You know what word does not appear anywhere in these books? That's right, it's "roleplaying."

Obviously that gap can't have anything to do with the term "roleplaying" not actually being a term used in gaming until years after those booklets were published now could it? :rolleyes: And the activity necessarily preceded the need for a term to describe it.

Quote from: Bren;914410Obviously that gap can't have anything to do with the term "roleplaying" not actually being a term used in gaming until years after those booklets were published now could it? :rolleyes: And the activity necessarily preceded the need for a term to describe it.

And the term used was the first reasonable sounding one that somebody pulled out of his ass, not the result of years of exhaustive linguistic analysis.