Veggie values (not nutritional).

From: Alex Ferguson <alex_at_dcs.gla.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 95 11:42:02 GMT


Truls Parsson holds the truth of
> >> I would use people > animals > fish > plants

to be self-evident.

> There are two reasons for this order.
> 1. Likeness to people [... and] 2. Emotions, [...]

> As far as I know all history examples follow this "general" guideline.

History doesn't have a lot of examples of people refraining from noshing animals, especially for "sentimental" reasons. Almost all cases involve animals which considered either unclean or holy, with the odd example of blanket prohibition. The only historical case I know that reflects this order is certain Japanese Buddhist sects, which are more likely to be to do with the much greater importance of fish in the Japanese diet, and that native religion was already less than keen on "animal" meat. And the same culture had no objection to whale meat, of course.

As Paul Reilly (?) so rightly said, CA cult rules aren't just a matter of Being Nice, they're a form of magical, geas-like restriction. While this will reflect local moral values, these are likely to be more concerned with the spritual state of the cultist, not their emotional disposition to little furry things.

Note that I'm not saying this value-ordering is Wrong, just that I don't see it is a universal thing. Furthermore, it's somewhat Boring for game purposes to assume that an Arroyan cultist is going to find people with exactly the same ideas of a Ethical Diet wherever in the Wide Wide World they travel.

Alex.


Powered by hypermail