Martin Crim , I think, misunderstood my point about the moral equivalent
of war (he certainly misunderstood my politics!) but wrote :
"That's why no one buys any novels
except sword and sorcery, or goes to see plays and movies that aren't filled
with violence, or watches anything on TV other than the Power Rangers." That
seems to be a mixed bag, I assume he means an Orlanthi none?
Most novels involving violence are not sword and sorcery, and most novels that
sell have at their center either or both sex or violence. As for movies and
what sells there, check the figures!
My more serious point is that moral exhortations that RPGs ought to have
less violence and more of other things usually don't go anywhere. If you
think that such scenarios can be written and played successfully, then
more power to you: demonstrate it! The appeal of LARPs is that the players
really can play different roles than just violent ones; in my experience
that is also true of on-line computer games.
Ironically, after that criticism, Martin seems to come close to agreeing
with my point: may it be that the problem is the GM plus players model? But the
problem with any system that involves full-ime activism is that most people
don't want to be full-time activists!
By the way, the story that might describe the mood that some people want
created by the KOW is the lead story in the second of Jerry Pournelle's
"War World" compilations, "The Face of the Enemy" by Don Hawthorne.
Michael R. asked me to post the syndrome list from the Times, so I will do that shortly.
Jim Chapin
Powered by hypermail