"Christianity, the revolution, the abolition of slavery, equal rights, philanthropy, love of peace, justice, truth: all these big words have value only in a fight, as flags: not as realities but as showy words for something quite different (indeed, opposite!)"
- Nietzsche
How do you or how would you incorporate Nietzsche's slave-master morality split and distinction in your campaign worlds? Nietzsche's slave-master morality framework outlines two opposing ethical systems rooted in social power dynamics. In master morality, the strong and noble define "good" as strength, pride, and power, while labeling weakness and mediocrity as "bad." Conversely, slave morality, emerging from the oppressed, equates "good" with humility, kindness, and sympathy, and brands oppression or the oppressors as "evil." This moral inversion stems from the resentment of the subjugated, who react to the masters' values by flipping them to favor the weak. Historically, Nietzsche viewed the rise of slave morality, epitomized by Christianity, as a cultural shift that overtook master morality, critiquing it for its life-denying resentment while noting master morality's life-affirming creativity.
I wouldn't implement it at all. I don't think it's helpful or true (particularly in regard to Christianity), and it's supposed to be descriptive of what already happened in real life, not a prescriptive method of writing fiction. You could do something like the Conan the Barbarian movie I guess, but that would just be running a normal swords and sorcery game.
Makes good rhetoric for fiends and evil cultists, or for Dark Siders in Star Wars games. :)
Nietzsche was both very intelligent and a complete sociopath, so you're going to wind up with it becoming a hot mess.
The one time I can think of Master/ Slave morality working is Star Wars, and even then I would argue that it wasn't really Lucas's intent to write this into the work. Rather, certain works in the EU introduced it, and as it matched well with official Star Wars to that point, the fanbase adopted it as a way of thinking about Jedi vs Sith. Yes, this did factor into the downfall of the Sequel Trilogy, although it wasn't exactly a primary cause the way bad management was.
The problem with master vs slave morality is that master morality is self-destructive. The GM has to manually override the actual logic of the situation to set up the setting or to keep certain forces in place, so you kind of wind up with the clockmaker GM and the worldbuilder GM being at odds. It isn't like this is impossible, but I imagine that most groups will reinterpret it into tribalism to make it easier to play.
Quote from: FishMeisterSupreme on April 06, 2025, 03:42:02 PM"Christianity, the revolution, the abolition of slavery, equal rights, philanthropy, love of peace, justice, truth: all these big words have value only in a fight, as flags: not as realities but as showy words for something quite different (indeed, opposite!)"
- Nietzsche
How do you or how would you incorporate Nietzsche's slave-master morality split and distinction in your campaign worlds? Nietzsche's slave-master morality framework outlines two opposing ethical systems rooted in social power dynamics. In master morality, the strong and noble define "good" as strength, pride, and power, while labeling weakness and mediocrity as "bad." Conversely, slave morality, emerging from the oppressed, equates "good" with humility, kindness, and sympathy, and brands oppression or the oppressors as "evil." This moral inversion stems from the resentment of the subjugated, who react to the masters' values by flipping them to favor the weak. Historically, Nietzsche viewed the rise of slave morality, epitomized by Christianity, as a cultural shift that overtook master morality, critiquing it for its life-denying resentment while noting master morality's life-affirming creativity.
I'd never thought of incorporating Nietzsche in any of my games because I find the idea stupid.
EDIT: Seriously, where is the fun in using Nietzsche in a role-playing game?
Nietzsche has the same problem with Christainty (and thus most western values) as the Romans had about it. "That it was a religion for woman and slaves"
As C.S Lewis might put it, Nietzsche was in some sense trying to raise from its grave (its shallow and unquiet grave...) the pre-Christian ferocity of Achilles by a "modern invocation".
He like many others mistook "the meek shall inherit the earth" as we English speaking folk think of it, weak, cowardly. the literal translation there would be "πραεῖς" (praus). which is closer to a stoic idea of focused power, quiet and strong and assertive, not someone who is needlessly aggressive.
Nietzsche is correct about one thing, one very big primary thing, Power does not corrupt, power attracts the corruptible. power amplifies what was already there. men who don't want power know well enough what may be amplified within themselves.
All RPGs pretty much enforce working together in a group, seeing that you're a real group of people looking to go on an adventure. Master Morality certainly can consist of utilizing social connections, but it seems like a heavy limitation if you're really trying to go full Nietzsche.
Quote from: Socratic-DM on April 06, 2025, 06:59:51 PMmen who don't want power know well enough what may be amplified within themselves
And the mess it can bring from jealous people around you. One thing people don't realize is that paranoia from excessive dopamine (drugs, mental illness, suddenly gaining social standing, etc.) is a biological remnant of the body recognizing that if you're feeling *that* good, it might attract the wrong people and to be aware of betrayal. It just looks crazy when people don't know that you're feeling that good, but the body has its reasons even for seemingly silly reactions to things.
Quote from: jeff37923 on April 06, 2025, 06:20:35 PMQuote from: FishMeisterSupreme on April 06, 2025, 03:42:02 PM"Christianity, the revolution, the abolition of slavery, equal rights, philanthropy, love of peace, justice, truth: all these big words have value only in a fight, as flags: not as realities but as showy words for something quite different (indeed, opposite!)"
- Nietzsche
How do you or how would you incorporate Nietzsche's slave-master morality split and distinction in your campaign worlds? Nietzsche's slave-master morality framework outlines two opposing ethical systems rooted in social power dynamics. In master morality, the strong and noble define "good" as strength, pride, and power, while labeling weakness and mediocrity as "bad." Conversely, slave morality, emerging from the oppressed, equates "good" with humility, kindness, and sympathy, and brands oppression or the oppressors as "evil." This moral inversion stems from the resentment of the subjugated, who react to the masters' values by flipping them to favor the weak. Historically, Nietzsche viewed the rise of slave morality, epitomized by Christianity, as a cultural shift that overtook master morality, critiquing it for its life-denying resentment while noting master morality's life-affirming creativity.
I'd never thought of incorporating Nietzsche in any of my games because I find the idea stupid.
EDIT: Seriously, where is the fun in using Nietzsche in a role-playing game?
You want to make a fantasy world where believable player characters and NPCS would disrespect Christianity and Judaism without being cartoonishly evil.
Quote from: FishMeisterSupreme on April 06, 2025, 07:46:02 PMQuote from: jeff37923 on April 06, 2025, 06:20:35 PMQuote from: FishMeisterSupreme on April 06, 2025, 03:42:02 PM"Christianity, the revolution, the abolition of slavery, equal rights, philanthropy, love of peace, justice, truth: all these big words have value only in a fight, as flags: not as realities but as showy words for something quite different (indeed, opposite!)"
- Nietzsche
How do you or how would you incorporate Nietzsche's slave-master morality split and distinction in your campaign worlds? Nietzsche's slave-master morality framework outlines two opposing ethical systems rooted in social power dynamics. In master morality, the strong and noble define "good" as strength, pride, and power, while labeling weakness and mediocrity as "bad." Conversely, slave morality, emerging from the oppressed, equates "good" with humility, kindness, and sympathy, and brands oppression or the oppressors as "evil." This moral inversion stems from the resentment of the subjugated, who react to the masters' values by flipping them to favor the weak. Historically, Nietzsche viewed the rise of slave morality, epitomized by Christianity, as a cultural shift that overtook master morality, critiquing it for its life-denying resentment while noting master morality's life-affirming creativity.
I'd never thought of incorporating Nietzsche in any of my games because I find the idea stupid.
EDIT: Seriously, where is the fun in using Nietzsche in a role-playing game?
You want to make a fantasy world where believable player characters and NPCS would disrespect Christianity and Judaism without being cartoonishly evil.
Why would I want to make a fantasy world that deliberately disrespected Judaism and Christianity? What's the point?
"The DM is dead." - Nietzsche, probably
Nietzsche RPGs are a real niche.
I just give my masters a +2 and the slaves a -1.
Quote from: Brad on April 06, 2025, 08:28:58 PM"The DM is dead." - Nietzsche, probably
WE MUST COME UP WITH THE RULES NOW, BITCH!
Quote from: jeff37923 on April 06, 2025, 08:01:37 PMQuote from: FishMeisterSupreme on April 06, 2025, 07:46:02 PMQuote from: jeff37923 on April 06, 2025, 06:20:35 PMQuote from: FishMeisterSupreme on April 06, 2025, 03:42:02 PM"Christianity, the revolution, the abolition of slavery, equal rights, philanthropy, love of peace, justice, truth: all these big words have value only in a fight, as flags: not as realities but as showy words for something quite different (indeed, opposite!)"
- Nietzsche
How do you or how would you incorporate Nietzsche's slave-master morality split and distinction in your campaign worlds? Nietzsche's slave-master morality framework outlines two opposing ethical systems rooted in social power dynamics. In master morality, the strong and noble define "good" as strength, pride, and power, while labeling weakness and mediocrity as "bad." Conversely, slave morality, emerging from the oppressed, equates "good" with humility, kindness, and sympathy, and brands oppression or the oppressors as "evil." This moral inversion stems from the resentment of the subjugated, who react to the masters' values by flipping them to favor the weak. Historically, Nietzsche viewed the rise of slave morality, epitomized by Christianity, as a cultural shift that overtook master morality, critiquing it for its life-denying resentment while noting master morality's life-affirming creativity.
I'd never thought of incorporating Nietzsche in any of my games because I find the idea stupid.
EDIT: Seriously, where is the fun in using Nietzsche in a role-playing game?
You want to make a fantasy world where believable player characters and NPCS would disrespect Christianity and Judaism without being cartoonishly evil.
Why would I want to make a fantasy world that deliberately disrespected Judaism and Christianity? What's the point?
Because societies running on master morality are the norm, so to speak, it takes a revolution of sorts to spread slave morality.
So by making a setting where master morality is the norm and where slave morality would be mocked, you make a setting that is more believable than a setting in which the only people who would disagree with Christianity/Judaism/Taoism/Buddhism are either stupid or cartoonishly evil. Other than people who say 'I do not believe in such and such god'.
Quote from: FishMeisterSupreme on April 06, 2025, 08:47:24 PMQuote from: jeff37923 on April 06, 2025, 08:01:37 PMQuote from: FishMeisterSupreme on April 06, 2025, 07:46:02 PMQuote from: jeff37923 on April 06, 2025, 06:20:35 PMQuote from: FishMeisterSupreme on April 06, 2025, 03:42:02 PM"Christianity, the revolution, the abolition of slavery, equal rights, philanthropy, love of peace, justice, truth: all these big words have value only in a fight, as flags: not as realities but as showy words for something quite different (indeed, opposite!)"
- Nietzsche
How do you or how would you incorporate Nietzsche's slave-master morality split and distinction in your campaign worlds? Nietzsche's slave-master morality framework outlines two opposing ethical systems rooted in social power dynamics. In master morality, the strong and noble define "good" as strength, pride, and power, while labeling weakness and mediocrity as "bad." Conversely, slave morality, emerging from the oppressed, equates "good" with humility, kindness, and sympathy, and brands oppression or the oppressors as "evil." This moral inversion stems from the resentment of the subjugated, who react to the masters' values by flipping them to favor the weak. Historically, Nietzsche viewed the rise of slave morality, epitomized by Christianity, as a cultural shift that overtook master morality, critiquing it for its life-denying resentment while noting master morality's life-affirming creativity.
I'd never thought of incorporating Nietzsche in any of my games because I find the idea stupid.
EDIT: Seriously, where is the fun in using Nietzsche in a role-playing game?
You want to make a fantasy world where believable player characters and NPCS would disrespect Christianity and Judaism without being cartoonishly evil.
Why would I want to make a fantasy world that deliberately disrespected Judaism and Christianity? What's the point?
Because societies running on master morality are the norm, so to speak, it takes a revolution of sorts to spread slave morality.
So by making a setting where master morality is the norm and where slave morality would be mocked, you make a setting that is more believable than a setting in which the only people who would disagree with Christianity/Judaism/Taoism/Buddhism are either stupid or cartoonishly evil. Other than people who say 'I do not believe in such and such god'.
In 44 years of gaming, I've never had the concept of master morality vs slave morality come up in a game. Why bother forcing it in now?
Quote from: FishMeisterSupreme on April 06, 2025, 08:47:24 PMBecause societies running on master morality are the norm, so to speak, it takes a revolution of sorts to spread slave morality.
So by making a setting where master morality is the norm and where slave morality would be mocked, you make a setting that is more believable than a setting in which the only people who would disagree with Christianity/Judaism/Taoism/Buddhism are either stupid or cartoonishly evil. Other than people who say 'I do not believe in such and such god'.
Yes, but weakness is more interesting than strength, isn't it? In Nietzsche's paradigm, it's like how there are a million ways to be sick, but only one way to be healthy.
Also, isn't disrespecting Judaism . . . anti-Semitic??
Quote from: Socratic-DM on April 06, 2025, 06:59:51 PMNietzsche is correct about one thing, one very big primary thing, Power does not corrupt, power attracts the corruptible. power amplifies what was already there. men who don't want power know well enough what may be amplified within themselves.
No. He was wrong.
I have seen far too many cases were someone was given power and for god unknown reasons they flip out. They did not seek the position. But once they have it they Jeckyl/Hyde into a monster. Sometimes gradually. Sometimes poof and they are an endless problem.
These ones are a pain because you never see it coming. With power mongers you can often see it taking shape.
It's simple: Slaves exist in my game cause Thralldom is a possible punishment for crime. And they'll cost upwards as much as a year's wages for an unskilled laborer.
Thrall, Body Servant 600p
Thrall, Combat 480p
Thrall, Laborer 240p
Thrall, Pleasure 300p
Otherwise, I'm not sure what Nietzsche has to do with RPGs....
Honestly the most useful part of Nietzsche's philosophy is the Ubermensch, especially the extreme some idiots take it to, where the Ubermensch gets to redefine physics the same way they do values.
Quote from: FishMeisterSupreme on April 06, 2025, 11:20:23 PMHonestly the most useful part of Nietzsche's philosophy is the Ubermensch, especially the extreme some idiots take it to, where the Ubermensch gets to redefine physics the same way they do values.
Where in Nietzsche does he indicate that Ubermenschen
work together? I haven't found anywhere where he says there can be an entire society of them; the masses must remain forever undermen.
While I might be a Heathen of a sort myself, and one who's views do somewhat line up with his, Philosophy really isn't the realm of tabletop gaming if you ask me, It's an escape from the real world lol.
I guess the average murderhobo PC is kind of like an ubermensch. No rules, go wherever you want, exploit everything to enrich yourself as you will. All the more reason you don't need to make it explicit or talk about it.
Quote from: Socratic-DM on April 06, 2025, 06:59:51 PMAs C.S Lewis might put it, Nietzsche was in some sense trying to raise from its grave (its shallow and unquiet grave...) the pre-Christian ferocity of Achilles by a "modern invocation".
I just wanted to share this essay, as I think it's worth a listen:
I don't want to go too much farther into it, as it'd decidedly off-topic for this forum, but I think Lewis is hitting on a primary paradox of Christian civilization. Short version: Christianity is at it's best when Christian ideals of humility, compassion and service are operating in balance with primarily pagan ideals of valor, honor, and individual excellence.
Quote from: Neoplatonist1 on April 06, 2025, 10:21:15 PMQuote from: FishMeisterSupreme on April 06, 2025, 08:47:24 PMBecause societies running on master morality are the norm, so to speak, it takes a revolution of sorts to spread slave morality.
So by making a setting where master morality is the norm and where slave morality would be mocked, you make a setting that is more believable than a setting in which the only people who would disagree with Christianity/Judaism/Taoism/Buddhism are either stupid or cartoonishly evil. Other than people who say 'I do not believe in such and such god'.
Yes, but weakness is more interesting than strength, isn't it? In Nietzsche's paradigm, it's like how there are a million ways to be sick, but only one way to be healthy.
Also, isn't disrespecting Judaism . . . anti-Semitic??
Nietzsche generally considered Jews to have Master Morality, and the way they pioneered film, air-conditioning, music production, and a wide range of banking and investment firms, it's easy to see that he was right.
Quote from: ForgottenF on April 07, 2025, 09:43:40 AMQuote from: Socratic-DM on April 06, 2025, 06:59:51 PMAs C.S Lewis might put it, Nietzsche was in some sense trying to raise from its grave (its shallow and unquiet grave...) the pre-Christian ferocity of Achilles by a "modern invocation".
I just wanted to share this essay, as I think it's worth a listen:
I don't want to go too much farther into it, as it'd decidedly off-topic for this forum, but I think Lewis is hitting on a primary paradox of Christian civilization. Short version: Christianity is at it's best when Christian ideals of humility, compassion and service are operating in balance with primarily pagan ideals of valor, honor, and individual excellence.
That leans more on valuing syncretism than it does Christianity's own internal moral system. Christianity is not a syncretic religion, and Nietzsche would not have tolerated any syncretism with it, anyways. I would say that a number of Old Testament figures such as David, Joseph, and Moses all demonstrate what you are ascribing as pagan ideals, but they are held in balance with other ideals or with metaphysical understanding.
I suppose this is my cue to explain why Nietzsche is wrong.
To quote Francis Schaeffer, "Christianity is not conservative, but revolutionary." Christianity's fundamental aim is to replace it's current ruler (Satan) with Christ. People like Nietzche tend to not appreciate this because 1) they don't appreciate the spiritual warfare aspects involved, and 2) they don't appreciate that because political precedent is a thing, the how a revolution is inseparable from the what. Nietzsche missed that what he called "slave morality," is not an alternative morality. It's intended as a disruptive strategy.
This all just returns to my point that roleplaying settings based on Nietzsche, his ideas, and their implications, are inherently dynamic. If they aren't dynamic, you aren't actually doing the conflict lines justice so much as using it as window dressing.
Christian v Pagan morality is a theme in my Wilderlands campaign. The default for the setting is pagan/master but the Mycretians especially teach Christian/slave morality and it has influenced beyond them. And of course the players IRL all have slave morality to a large extent. I like to challenge their assumptions, but the Mycretians tend to win the debate I think.