tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post1774764589916178320..comments2023-10-14T03:58:59.333-06:00Comments on The Tao of D&D: EducationAlexis Smolenskhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10539170107563075967noreply@blogger.comBlogger18125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-74780956190351255212011-08-15T23:08:46.381-06:002011-08-15T23:08:46.381-06:00"If you keep reading, I might say something t..."If you keep reading, I might say something that will force you to re-evaluate your world."<br /><br />A threat. And a promise. Together at last! If only a Reece's Peanut Butter Cup were as satisfying as one of your threat/promise confections. Stop, you're coercing me and it tickles.<br /><br />By the way, it is too late - I am already re-evaluating my world. My sincerest thanks for that.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05267072903625386387noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-82516527159587326462011-07-12T03:53:58.169-06:002011-07-12T03:53:58.169-06:00Alexei, great post. It's always lovely to read...Alexei, great post. It's always lovely to read your blog, despite you being excessively quick to anger in face of disagreement makes writing and reading comments a bit frustrating. I can understand why tho.<br /><br />Keep on writing this serie on Civ technologies please :)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-30895621654992798282011-07-08T09:41:45.611-06:002011-07-08T09:41:45.611-06:00@Alexis: Your point is that the way you play -- wh...@Alexis: Your point is that the way you play -- which is not the way I play -- is done for a very particular reason. Since it's a matter of preference, I can't argue with that, even though I don't agree with it. It's like arguing with people over which foods taste good.<br /><br />What I focused on instead is why you'd write (as you say) 3,000 words in support of your point that's based on some common mistaken notions about medieval society and its place in the development of new ideas. It's not that I wanted you to write more; it's that I wanted you to, say, read actual stuff written in medieval times before claiming certain things.<br /><br />Medieval villages were definitely isolated and ideas did not spread as rapidly as in the modern world, but it wasn't because of a universal monolithic church imposing a single correct worldview on all of Europe. There were certainly *individuals* at the time, particularlys some in the Church, who thought the world was and should be that way. But in fact the primary problem with travel and communication of ideas was technological (it was hard getting from place to place, or spreading ideas,) and criminal (outlaws or roving bands wanted to kill you and take your stuff.) And because of those two facts, there were *lots* of alternative ideas -- they just didn't spread very far, for the exact same reasons that created the divergence.<br /><br />Thus, when the Church declared Arianism a heresy, it had to deal with the fact that many large areas were predominately Arian and had to be either re-converted or conquered. Similarly, the isolated Celtic Church diverged from the official line and the area had to be re-converted. The German crusade against the Slavs was ostensibly to convert pagans to Christianity, but in fact some of the people being converted were Eastern Orthodox. And the Cathars -- I don't know where you got the idea I thought they were "sweetness and light", but I brought them up because they were another example of a regional development of a divergent system of knowledge, which was later wiped out by crusaders.<br /><br />Medieval European history is not a history of a unified idea system eliminating or being threatened by a small number of "enemies". It's a history of thousands of fragmented idea systems slowly being unified through Dark Ages warfare as the ideas and the cultures that spawned them came into contact. This eliminated the broad distinctions, but the process of unifying and expanding kingdoms, clearing the roads, and establishing pilgrimage routes brought more geographical regions into contact and revealed the survival of thousands of *subtler* differences, plus it enabled the spread of other newer ideas as they developed. There's constant controversy and invention of new ideas during the later medieval period, especially in the urban areas, which made things ripe for further change when various classical Greek texts were translated into Latin and published, thus ushering in the Renaissance.Talysmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02162328521343832412noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-27094701577909172272011-07-08T06:15:13.523-06:002011-07-08T06:15:13.523-06:00The reason I was avoiding getting too heavily into...The reason I was avoiding getting too heavily into the specifics of Magic in the first response I had was because I knew I would far too easily go down an unproductive detour as I did in my second post.<br /><br />The gyst I was getting at, was that you could easily have a medieval, even a dark ages setting in which the second type of education is available and more commonplace. But to lean too heavily on allowing modern things with the excuse of "a wizard did it" is counter productive.<br /><br />I also agree that getting into an alien mindset is fun. I always try to run any medieval setting with medieval physics to stress that: heavy things do fall faster, there are only 4 elements, glass repels electricity(lightning) and witches often do weigh the same as water fowl. This means I will encourage clerics to avoid modern mindsets and set fire to enemy villages. Unusual people should be burned at the stake because deformity IS a sign of demonic possession etc. Again, not because I would like to live in such a world, but because it is alien.Zzarchovhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07714805545939725730noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-10994000203313978872011-07-07T21:04:20.580-06:002011-07-07T21:04:20.580-06:00I think we are prisoners of a common language Alex...I think we are prisoners of a common language Alexis and thats perfectly OK. <br /><br />I also disagree on the world building issue more than a bit, to my eyes the goal is a good game and if it means low brow pandering, so be it. <br /><br />That being said I relish an opportunity to confront my preconceptions and "coerced" or not am grateful for the opportunity to do so.<br /><br />PS, you really should read much of appendix N if you have not. Little of it is truly second rate, much such as Robert Howard, Leiber and Vance are top notch and Tolkien rightly stands among the greats.5stonegameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10694550968360550229noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-47094313665075500322011-07-07T18:29:54.461-06:002011-07-07T18:29:54.461-06:00Another excellent post that leaves much food for t...Another excellent post that leaves much food for thought.<br /><br />I'd been wondering about reflecting the issue of education (and other modern substitutes like radio, TV, and the internet) that also serve to reinforce a particular shared cultural view.<br /><br />I'm going to have to re-read it actually -- there are a lot of things that are implied.<br /><br />Also, this a good reason for Drow be to universally reviled! One rumored exception doesn't exonerate all the others in the eyes of the populace.Alex Osiashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14851139031311819958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-28818211459844461512011-07-07T17:44:19.335-06:002011-07-07T17:44:19.335-06:00Stone,
I'm going to challenge you a little an...Stone,<br /><br />I'm going to challenge you a little and I want to say first that this is meant to be a positive answer. <br /><br />Worlds should not be based upon what players expect, but upon practical and brilliant design. No matter what players expect, if the world is an excellent world, players will throw out their expectations.<br /><br />Appendix N is the voice of the community construct. It is a very limited list in terms of imagination. The source suggesting how worlds might be created is a much, much bigger list.<br /><br />Coercion has long hidden behind definitions like "open discussions between rational adults." There isn't a used car salesman in the world who hasn't said, "Listen, friend, you and I are just talking, right?"<br /><br />Every friend you have ever had has used that friendship as an implied threat, as in, they will stop being your friend if you don't (insert desired action here). This was really, really obvious when we were children, when the threat was carried out loudly in the schoolyard. At the age we are now, things are different. We don't ask our friends directly. We make casual statements and wait patiently for our friends to offer. Which they usually do, because they are our friends. But if they don't offer, it is noticed, and we remark about it to our wives and our family and our other friends. And when enough failures to offer pile up, we stop calling those friends, and we stop thinking about them as friends. We deal with it in a very passive aggressive fashion, because we are adults and confrontation is unpleasant. But it's foolish to say there are no repercussions for the actions of friends. And it is foolish to say that we don't make casual statements in their company without expecting them to help.<br /><br />Please don't say you don't do it. Everyone does it. All the time. It is only that the threat is so relatively benign to anything we normally think of as a 'threat' that we deny that it even is one.<br /><br />I will admit to coercion because it doesn't hurt my agenda. I am a writer. My business is to create an emotional response by stringing things together. The threat I offer is that if you keep reading, I will say something that might hurt you.<br /><br />If you keep reading, I might say something that will force you to re-evaluate your world.Alexis Smolenskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10539170107563075967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-28046840669032481402011-07-07T16:45:37.925-06:002011-07-07T16:45:37.925-06:00Alexis , don't assume I haven't read the ...Alexis , don't assume I haven't read the kind of literature you are talking about. I am aware that it makes for a great read and great drama. I am not as sure it makes for great D&D as most players expect it.<br /><br />Whats in appendix N and its successors does. <br /><br />Now mind you I enjoy reading about what you are doing and I find it interesting and worthwhile or I would not waste my time or your on it or commenting on it.<br /><br /><br />Remember too that open discussion between rational adults is not coercion. Coercion implies diminished choice by threat or arguably limit, neither of which especially applies here. If someone here comes about to your way of thinking, or you to theirs, no one was coerced. They chose to change their mind.<br /><br />As to you last point about different coercion, in a way I agree. My own game world reflects this idea from the notion "what if these tropes were mostly literally true what would the world be like"<br /><br />Its not a secondary creation in the Tolkien sense but one of logical consequences and the mindset thereof.<br />.5stonegameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10694550968360550229noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-42231652086907650122011-07-07T15:12:53.711-06:002011-07-07T15:12:53.711-06:00"No, no God but yes to Jehovah."
Zzarch...<i>"No, no God but yes to Jehovah."</i><br /><br />Zzarchov, I'm still baffled. The statement itself is obedience to somebody's construct, relayed to me. Why must it be 'Jehovah'? Why can't it be 'God'? Must it obey your construct? Must it obey anyone's construct? If I am the DM and I am God, and I dictate that the world is so, then is the world not so?<br /><br />You miss my position if you think I care about gods or magic here. I am taking the position that "wrong" is something people who want to 'educate' others establish as a means to coerce them into accepted social behavior. The very second that you or I or anyone takes the position that anything anywhere is "wrong" it is an intended coercion.<br /><br />I write this post, and every post, to coerce others through words to believe what I believe. You and everyone here who comments does so to coerce me or other readers to believe what you believe. This is the way of the world.<br /><br />The point here is very definitely not whether the medieval world as I might wish to play it ever existed, or could exist, or ought to exist ... it is that I want to pretend to play in a world that is not merely a fanciful wish-fulfilment meant to counter this world, but that I want to play in a world where the coercion is <i>different</i> from ours. And towards that end, I am discussing HOW it would be different, recognizing that the world once WAS different, because many of the perceptions/coercions we take for granted now did not in any way exist.Alexis Smolenskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10539170107563075967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-32984903974225030942011-07-07T14:51:53.406-06:002011-07-07T14:51:53.406-06:00My Apologies Alexis,
I did not mean to imply only...My Apologies Alexis,<br /><br />I did not mean to imply only Odin existed, merely that he did exist. As would Zeus, as for God? No, no God but yes to Jehovah. With God (capital G) there is only one real deity. If Odin and Zeus can flat out call him on that, then he cannot be omnipotent. <br /><br />I imagine the Angels of Jehovah would show up to besiege Asgard and the Aesir, unless of course perhaps there is a Warsaw Pact style alliance of Olympus, Asgard and the Devas.<br /><br />In which case (assuming worshipers are important to gods, which they must be if they grant miracles) I imagine that humans would have learned to try and play them off each other. <br /><br />The exact effect of such clashes would depend very much on the cosmology and would probably impact player character's very little, so I don't focus on it as a priority, instead going for "reclusive gods" and having cleric's go through intermediaries.Zzarchovhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07714805545939725730noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-22628005367172344452011-07-07T14:38:34.488-06:002011-07-07T14:38:34.488-06:00Awesome postAwesome postJoethelawyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00380090049725742287noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-3598800122974693892011-07-07T13:41:06.857-06:002011-07-07T13:41:06.857-06:00Separating this comment, so that it's understo...Separating this comment, so that it's understood I don't address it at any specific person.<br /><br />I wonder how many people reading this post fail to comprehend how they themselves have been 'educated' to spoil for the so-called original D&D they rush to defend.Alexis Smolenskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10539170107563075967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-40762488035039311112011-07-07T13:38:11.091-06:002011-07-07T13:38:11.091-06:00Baffling, Zzarchov.
If Odin can show up and convi...Baffling, Zzarchov.<br /><br />If Odin can show up and convince the Norwegians to remain Norse, pray tell me why God and Jesus Christ his son can't show up and tell them not to?<br /><br />If you posit the true existence of Odin, why do you draw the line there? Particularly when you quote Milton exactly one paragraph later?<br /><br />I guess it really depends on where your prejudices lie, does it not?Alexis Smolenskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10539170107563075967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-58235582382332605712011-07-07T13:22:32.895-06:002011-07-07T13:22:32.895-06:00I can see how magic and gods plural would influenc...I can see how magic and gods plural would influence part of this post.<br /><br />"the foreign states went down one by one, ultimately converting to the one-god religions in order to continue maintaining their authority at home, "<br /><br />If Odin showed up and personally set fire to a few churches, people may think twice about accepting a one god religion. Especially if 10 minutes later Zeus shows up and sets fire to one of Odin's temples.<br /><br />Add in raising the dead, wizards able to grant unlife in a secular fashion (Why serve in heaven when you can rule on earth forever?)<br /><br />Magic is a giant variable, so it is inevitable that if you throw it into the mix it will vastly change things. But it depends on how much magic, how long it has been around etc. Maybe magic is a recent rediscovery and still in its infancy? The world is thus much like Earth.<br /><br />It does seem to me to be a bit of a diversion though, once you respond to any question with "A wizard did it", it gets hard to have any real discussion.Zzarchovhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07714805545939725730noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-85131458147091395942011-07-07T12:56:36.722-06:002011-07-07T12:56:36.722-06:00Stone, you say, "I've read a lot of fanta...Stone, you say, <i>"I've read a lot of fantasy and to be frank, very little of it is like that."</i><br /><br />This probably explains why I don't read a lot of it.<br /><br />Let me introduce you to another entirely different kind of literature, written in the period just prior to the year my world takes place. Shakespeare. Marlowe. Johnson. Spenser. Violence, intrigue, brutality, love, humour, thematic, consuming. From their perspective, a medieval mindset seems to make for rather excellent drama. Or am I wrong?<br /><br />I confess, I'm utterly unclear as to what magic's presence has to do with this. Would intelligent beings cease to be hormonal if magic existed? What is that based on? I just can't figure where this pronouncement you make comes from, that with magic and gods that the world cannot be anything like ours. Frankly, that sounds like a construct to me. It sounds like something I'm supposed to believe despite a lack of proof. It sounds like something that exists only to justify the writings of a lot of second-rate pulp authors from the last fifty years or so, and to say that I am somehow limited in my imagination by what they've written, as opposed to all the books written by all the people who are not bound by the fantasy publisher's agenda.<br /><br />That's what it sounds like to me.Alexis Smolenskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10539170107563075967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-10308922058192797482011-07-07T12:38:48.441-06:002011-07-07T12:38:48.441-06:00Alexis. I don't really have a qualm with your ...Alexis. I don't really have a qualm with your point, that is <br /><br />"But for me it is in that conjecture that the fantasy truly lies. It forces me to discard the social norms of my own culture in favor of another. Not because the other culture is wonderful.<br />Because it isn't mine. "<br /><br />I've read a lot of fantasy and to be frank, very little of it is like that. Most of it is action stories or as in the Romantic Fantasy genre "issues" stories set in a world with Medieval or Renaissance trappings and technology. <br /><br />Even fewer people actually "roleplay" in the historical context and in fact I'd argue the format of D&D is far more suited for an adventure game than anything like "The Real Middle-Ages" o<br /><br />As Ken Hite put it <br /><br />"The original D&D seems, quite obviously, to be a pastiche of Fritz Leiber and Robert E. Howard adventure stories, set in a Tolkeinian world of Moorcockian morality, using Jack Vance's magic system, redacted for multiple protagonists. No wonder things are confused."<br /><br />In truth this is as it should be, in a D&D world there really are people who in small groups or singlehandedly can take on bandit gangs, the 100% assuredly `real monsters and even whole armies. They too can exist outside the social order in ways that real people cannot and this matters.<br /><br />Its far more "Greek Heroic" than Medieval IMO<br /><br />Heck I am not sure a medieval mindset even makes sense as a starting point if you are trying for immersive RP. <br /><br /> Take D&D magic , while fairly rare in some games, it is still going to have a far reaching impact that will change the way people live.<br /><br />Take Continual Light for example, 1 3rd level or higher MU with this spell (and its decently common) can light entire cities to the standard that could not be reached well into the 20th century. <br /><br />And there are tons of other more powerful magics in the books or that could be researched.<br /><br />Than throw in activist gods and well you have the foundation for a world that is nothing like ours. Its a long order to figure out how such people might think and if we cling to "Ren Faire" medievalism, well its not that bad a guess.5stonegameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10694550968360550229noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-70852058138743069892011-07-07T12:05:51.739-06:002011-07-07T12:05:51.739-06:00Talysman,
1) Go back and read the sentence again....Talysman,<br /><br />1) Go back and read the sentence again. The article I am writing is about education, but the reason I gave for monks to avoid the population was not education. You have married the one to the other where I did not.<br /><br />2) This is the classic romantic depiction of the medieval period, that it was literally dripping with scholars and minstrels. Wishful thinking.<br /><br />3) Your thinking on this is muddy, and typically assumes the Cathars was a wonderful free-loving society that opposed religion. I have read rather bad historical texts that romanticize this notion. If you want to know where the Cathars got their ideas, I suggest a strong investigation into Gnosticism, which began as an alternative Christian practice and was every bit as authoritarian as any other religion. It failed for the same reason other non-Catholic religions in Europe failed - it was not strong enough.<br /><br />It is a failing to think that because, say, Jews existed in Europe that they existed as an 'alternative' way of thinking. This is like saying that communism is an accepted governmental option to democracy in the United States. The enemy is not an 'alternative.' It is the enemy. Did you miss the line where I mentioned traitors?<br /><br />Talysman, you are bringing very little scholarship to a very complex question and arguing that because I did not write 30,000 words rather than 3,000 than I am obviously oversimplifying. Well, duh. Of course I'm oversimplifying. I'm trying to make a generalized point here. The thing about giving an overview of a subject like Education is that if I want to keep it down to something that can be read at a sitting, I sort of have to generalize, don't I? Pointing out some compromising detail that I've missed in my generalization isn't an argument, it is being a pest. Rather than condemning me for what I obviously meant to do in the first place, why don't you talk about MY POINT?Alexis Smolenskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10539170107563075967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-38621128731774756622011-07-07T11:49:10.777-06:002011-07-07T11:49:10.777-06:00That's not an entirely accurate depiction of t...That's not an entirely accurate depiction of the medieval period.<br /><br />(1) Monks and scholastics didn't build fortresses because they wanted education and were afraid of people who were anti-education. They built them for protection from people who were pro-treasure.<br /><br />(2) The vast majority of people didn't travel very far, true, but the wandering scholars, peddlers, pilgrims, minstrels and later crusaders were an important exception and generally accepted.<br /><br />(3) There were, in fact, alternative views available, which is why the Church became obsessed with eliminating such views, sparking heresy investigations, witch hunts, and the internal crusades, like the one against the Cathars in southern France. If there were no sources for dissenting opinions, where exactly did thousands of Cathars get their ideas?Talysmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02162328521343832412noreply@blogger.com