I had the idea for this when I was checking out someone's profile on RPGGeek, which happened to have the words Chaotic Evil in it. But did I think instantly of D&D alignments? Well ok, yes I did, but then I thought Hang on, there's a game in there somewhere. Ok, but what kind of game? No-brainer, a game about ever so slightly incompetent trainee demons of course. It's also by way of being a dig at the 'D&D turns harmless teenagers into psychopathic killers' school of journalism. Lest I get whacked by the same stick, I've made clear in the rules that the characters can only do very low-level evil, and that the GM should explicitly steer players away from disturbing themes. Not sure that'll be enough to ward off potential criticism however. I haven't got a system yet, but tbh if folks say 'Don't do it, it's pants' I won't bother. Anyhow, here (http://dl.dropbox.com/u/44973653/Chaotic%20Evil.pdf)'s the link.
So, thoughts?
I don't think roleplayers should ever be encouraged to roleplay purely psychopathic evil characters.
By "psychopathic" I mean amoral:- without conscience. Characters that have excessively shallow emotional affect.
This is a realisation I have only recently come to, and I've been a roleplayer for 30 years, and very much a thinking one with a wide range of experiences, so pay heed. It doesn't apply for gamers who don't "get" immersion but you can't make a rules-light game with a 1-PC-per-player rule and not have *some* gamers immersing, so it probably applies to any style of game you personally (Leo) would make.
What will you do to give your demons personalities and redeeming features?
How will you justify that in the fiction?
Watch Little Nicky for inspiration. Maybe you can get licensed. Then again [SPOILER ALERT]
[SPOILER ALERT]
Little Nicky himself was a one-off angel-demon hybrid. [/SPOILER ALERT] [/SPOILER ALERT]
Quote from: Omnifray;616661I don't think roleplayers should ever be encouraged to roleplay purely psychopathic evil characters.
By "psychopathic" I mean amoral:- without conscience. Characters that have excessively shallow emotional affect.
This is a realisation I have only recently come to, and I've been a roleplayer for 30 years, and very much a thinking one with a wide range of experiences, so pay heed. It doesn't apply for gamers who don't "get" immersion but you can't make a rules-light game with a 1-PC-per-player rule and not have *some* gamers immersing, so it probably applies to any style of game you personally (Leo) would make.
Thanks, will take that under advisement.
Quote from: Omnifray;616661What will you do to give your demons personalities and redeeming features?
How will you justify that in the fiction?
They'll take on human personalities, with human strengths and weaknesses in addition to their own (limited) supernatural powers. I imagine they'll take over human bodies but won't get it quite right, so they'll end up lurching about like the cockroach guy from MIB (one of the most inspired characters in fiction IMO).
Incidentally, as the game references D&D I plan to make the rules somewhat on the crunchy side.
Quote from: catty_big;616370I had the idea for this when I was checking out someone's profile on RPGGeek, which happened to have the words Chaotic Evil in it. But did I think instantly of D&D alignments? Well ok, yes I did, but then I thought Hang on, there's a game in there somewhere. Ok, but what kind of game? No-brainer, a game about ever so slightly incompetent trainee demons of course.
Been done.
http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/26014/the-imp-game
Quote from: Omnifray;616661I don't think roleplayers should ever be encouraged to roleplay purely psychopathic evil characters.
I disagree completely and entirely.
I think playing purely psychopathic evil characters can be a fun release and excercise. As a GM, I play these kinds of characters all the time, after all, so why shouldn't players be able to play them too?
One of the most fun games I've ever run was my "Vile Darkness" game, inspired by the D&D 3e "Book of Vile Darkness". My instructions to the players is that they were to make extremely irredeemably evil characters; these were not sympathetic characters, they were to be rotten to the core, bad seeds, and have no redeeming features whatsoever. The more revolting and disgustingly vile they were, the better. The unifying factor was they were all members of the Cult of Orcus. The game was set in the Forgotten Realms, and we used the Book of Vile Darkness and it's, um, "special" prestige classes and rules.
It was a really fun game and we all had a blast with it.
It's not the kind of thing you can do all the time, but as a short little campaign to really get your Evil On, it can be a ton of fun. Eventually we put it down and went back to more heroic games... but every once in a while we'll talk about that game fondly and the rotten things everyone did and laugh about it.
And we're Immersion players around here. Being Immersive doesn't mean not knowing the difference between fantasy and reality, after all.
It may be fair to say that Omnifray shouldn't be encouraged to roleplay purely psychopathic evil, but don't project that onto the rest of us, please!
Quote from: Doctor Jest;617057Been done.
http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/26014/the-imp-game
The Imp Game? Been done:
http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/18723/aye-dark-overlord
Plus, they're both card games, not table top RPGs (slightly different market), and in any case I'm setting Chaotic Evil in 'reality' rather than fantasy. Also, there are already several hundred D&D clones out there, and yet more come out all the time. No, I don't think similarity to other games is a problem; rather the reverse: games that are wildly removed from existing games get a far rougher ride, I guess because folks need what MadMen call 'hooks' to buy into a product, whether it be card games, RPGs, or cars. Look how many cars are produced every year that look almost identical to the hundreds of other cars that came before them.
Quote from: catty_big;617067Plus, they're both card games, not table top RPGs (slightly different market)
The one I linked is an RPG, not a card game. I have it. Board Game Geek misclassified it. Here's it's RPG geek link:
http://rpggeek.com/rpgitem/56318/mischief-mayhem-revised-edition
Quote from: Doctor Jest;617062I disagree completely and entirely.
I also disagree, but only slightly entirely. I see where Matt’s coming from: I think the danger is where a game mimics ‘real’ life (of course, neither Chaotic Evil nor KPfS mimic
real real life, although there are obviously people in real real life who are genuinely psychopathic and wouldn’t think of killing pets as abhorrent). Yes, we slaughter loads of NPCs and fellow PCs in fantasy games like D&D but there it’s almost like cartoon violence, i.e. we can divorce it from reality. But yes, I agree with you that being psychopathic in a game is a way of channeling violence, like young children play-fighting with sticks; humans have a natural propensity to violence, better it be worked out of our systems through games than in real real life.
Quote from: Doctor Jest;617062It may be fair to say that Omnifray shouldn't be encouraged to roleplay purely psychopathic evil, but don't project that onto the rest of us, please!
Ah, now here I agree with you entirely. I gather that at larps Matt is known to slaver uncontrollably at the sight of a weapon, and when there is heavy combat they lock him in a shed blindfolded and gagged, lest he break out and start laying about him with a chainsaw. I believe that one lunch break he was heard to ask for human liver, with f-f-f-fava beans and a bottle of Chianti.
Quote from: Doctor Jest;617070The one I linked is an RPG, not a card game. I have it. Board Game Geek misclassified it. Here's its RPG geek link:
http://rpggeek.com/rpgitem/56318/mischief-mayhem-revised-edition
Ah, ok. Still, I reckon I can differentiate enough to ward off lawyers. They're terrific at marketing, mind: nearly three years on and they've garnered zero ratings and zero comments; no threads, and only two users owning. Don't suppose I'll fare any better though :boohoo:. Anyway, I'm sure it's a fun game, and see my other comments about products being similar to other products already on the market.
I played in a wonderfully fucked up pirate game years ago where every character was evil in the extreme. We all had earned the gallows and it was the close of the Age of Piracy and the law was closing in on us. Our goals? Make enough money and escape into obscurity where hopefully we would never be found; die in a blaze of infamy or perhaps become too useful to the powers that be and somehow become "respectable".
So we sailed as a fleet of rivals, a nightmare brotherhood bent on destruction and betrayal. The campaign did not last long, but it was badass in its crazy.
CE is a fine RPG experience...with the right group of players. I think you need a bunch of immature dorks pounding booze and cracking jokes (us) or a group who takes it seriously and intelligently (not us) and certainly not a mix of the two.
I ran a CoC event a con years ago that I billed as NC-17 for adult gamers because everyone was a death row convict in a maximum security prison that get to decide the fate of humanity. The players were hardcore serious and it was a deeply intense session. Was it fun? Hmmm...I don't know, but the players thought it rocked because it was transgressive in its creepiness and that certainly appeals to certain horror fans (me definitely).
Quote from: catty_big;617076I also disagree, but only slightly entirely. I see where Matt’s coming from: I think the danger is where a game mimics ‘real’ life
I don't agree there either. Of course, I only play with adults who know the difference between fantasy and reality. If you're playing with mentally unstable people, then they should probably avoid roleplaying entirely. For the average person, however, there's nothing wrong with it.
You also may want to think
very carefully before making any claims that RPGs, no matter the themes involved in play, have
any potential to cause someone any kind of real harm. We really don't need some anti-RPG activists latching onto "admissions" that the game could be
dangerous. Which, to be clear, I genuinely believe is a completely ridiculous idea.
I never thought I'd be trying to convince actual roleplayers that Pat Pulling was wrong. Come on guys.
Quote from: catty_big;617080Ah, ok. Still, I reckon I can differentiate enough to ward off lawyers. They're terrific at marketing, mind: nearly three years on and they've garnered zero ratings and zero comments; no threads, and only two users owning. Don't suppose I'll fare any better though :boohoo:. Anyway, I'm sure it's a fun game, and see my other comments about products being similar to other products already on the market.
I think the company went out of business. Sign o' the times and all that.
But the point was, it's not untrodden ground. Seeing what others have done in the arena is probably a good thing when designing something.
Quote from: Spinachcat;617112CE is a fine RPG experience...with the right group of players. I think you need a bunch of immature dorks pounding booze and cracking jokes (us) or a group who takes it seriously and intelligently (not us) and certainly not a mix of the two.
We were the latter during the game, and the former when discussing the game.
QuoteThe players were hardcore serious and it was a deeply intense session. Was it fun? Hmmm...I don't know, but the players thought it rocked because it was transgressive in its creepiness and that certainly appeals to certain horror fans (me definitely).
And me. I love that stuff.
Quote from: Doctor Jest;617134If you're playing with mentally unstable people, then they should probably avoid roleplaying entirely.
Sure, but people sometimes have underlying psychological problems without realising it until they play games like Penny For My Thoughts, which is why such games have health warnings. Granted, that doesn't apply to CE although it could apply to CoC, depending on the sort of game the Keeper is planning on running. I only expressed nervousness about the content of CE because I don't want Moms Against Blah on my case. It's all very well saying 'Fuck 'em', but I wouldn't want that kind of thing this early in my career.
Quote from: Doctor Jest;617134We really don't need some anti-RPG activists latching onto "admissions" that the game could be dangerous. Which, to be clear, I genuinely believe is a completely ridiculous idea.
It is, but see above.
Quote from: Spinachcat;617112I played in a wonderfully fucked up pirate game years ago where every character was evil in the extreme. [W]e sailed as a fleet of rivals, a nightmare brotherhood bent on destruction and betrayal. The campaign did not last long, but it was badass in its crazy.
Sounds terrific fun. I think pirate games can only really go one way, i.e. with
'Aaaarrrr ye scurvy dogs' type dialogue, and with every Yes a
'Yaarrr!' and every No a
'Naaarrr!'. Quote from: Spinachcat;617112CE is a fine RPG experience...with the right group of players. I think you need a bunch of immature dorks pounding booze and cracking jokes (us) or a group who takes it seriously and intelligently (not us) and certainly not a mix of the two.
Yes, definitely.
Quote from: Spinachcat;617112I ran a CoC event a con years ago that I billed as NC-17 for adult gamers because everyone was a death row convict in a maximum security prison that get to decide the fate of humanity. The players were hardcore serious and it was a deeply intense session. Was it fun? Hmmm...I don't know, but the players thought it rocked because it was transgressive in its creepiness and that certainly appeals to certain horror fans (me definitely).
CoC, like most horror, can go either deathly serious or way out gonzo (which might be a sort of release mechanism), which I think is what I think puts a lot of folks off. If you want real creepy horror with reduced potential for the players to gonzo it up, depending on the GM you need something like either Dead of Night or Hot War. (Yes I know hot War isn't supposed to be in itself creepy but the way a particular guy on the UK roleplaying scene runs it it's definitely not for the faint-hearted).
Following a bit of discussion on another forum, I've had some more ideas for CE:As D&D features in the game*, I thought it would be a good idea to make it reasonably crunchy. In keeping with the theme of bungling ineptness, I’m toying with the idea of having negative, rather than positive stats. Frx, you have average stats in all your basic skills, but would also have an Ineptness stat which would come off your roll, which could however be modded by various traits and triggers accruing to your mortal form, so if you chose a hard-drinkind construction worker you could get a bonus when you used STR, or in a scene in a bar. Alternatively,
all your stats could be minus numbers, and the TN would be say half d+1 (i.e. 6 off a d10, 7 off a d12, 11 off a d20 etc.) the more missions you complete the higher the hedrality you can use. You can spend MP (Mwa-ha-ha Points to buff your stat, or a ton of them to guarantee success. The scene would then go from being PC>NPC to PC>PC, potentially cutting the NPCs out of the action entirely.
I’ve got an idea for char gen which I think is pretty cool (standing by to be told that it features in game X by designer Y): during the set-up phase all the players fill out a char sheet with things like age, gender, job, body type, edges and hindrances etc. (e.g. tenacious vs alcoholic, or a trait that could be either positive or negative- resolute/obstinate, cf. Jaws of the Six Serpents), then all the sheets are put into a hat and drawn randomly. The players would then be able to spend 1-3 MPs (they’ll be given 3 MP at the start) to change one-three things about their character. Then they are randomly given their missions, may look at them briefly and then will each have the opportunity
once to either move all the missions one place to left or right, exchange theirs with another player, or reshuffle them, or all the above, again by spending 1-3 MPs. Whatever MPs remain unspent at the start of the game proper can be spent during the first mission.
What to do about having several missions going on at once? Option 1: have one overall mission for the player party, frx Evil Under the Sun: you are ordered to visit the seaside on a blisteringly hot summer’s day to ruin folks’ holidays. You each say what you intend to do- cause havoc at the beach, in the amusement park, in the bars and cafes etc.- then, if you see another player doing well, jump into his or her scene and try to thwart their plans. Option 2: have separate missions, but during the set-up phase build rivalries into char gen, so that the players always know who they want to try to screw over during the game, regardless of the mission. Option 3: same as Option 2, but simply have the players jump in and out of each other’s scenes, encouraging them with the promise of earning the other player’s MP should they succeed, and accordingly rising in the estimation of the Boss.
*Might have to low-ball that- don't want a visit by sharp-suited lawyers from WoTbro.
P.S. Moved house yesterday; still dealing with the fall-out from that so will be off the forums for the most part for the next few days. Keep them suggestions coming though. Thanks.
I think the subtlety of my position may have been missed.
I'm not saying you should never play a chaotic evil character.
What I'm saying is, the character should have some redeeming feature... even if it's very faint.
Perhaps you're an evil anti-paladin, but you have a soft spot for kittens.
Or simply, you're in love with a priestess of mercy.
There is a big difference between evil and psychopathic.
And Leo, c'mon - Italian wine? You surely realise that nothing goes better with liver and fava beans than Australian Shiraz. This is what I mean about the subtlety of my position having been missed...
Most psychopaths have tons of redeeming features. They can be caring parents and spouses, good friends, and considerate neighbours. In other words, they can be loyal members of a PC party that work towards goals of the greater good even. You may just not want to leave them alone with any captured enemies.
As far as I understand it, if they're true psychopaths (ya know, like 40 points on the Hare checklist, the real deal, worst of the worst), those things aren't really redeeming features, just them playing it smart. Enlightened self-interest. The long game. "Loved ones" are just items of equipment to them.
Of course, IANAP.
Quote from: Omnifray;617341As far as I understand it, if they're true psychopaths (ya know, like 40 points on the Hare checklist, the real deal, worst of the worst), those things aren't really redeeming features, just them playing it smart. Enlightened self-interest. The long game. "Loved ones" are just items of equipment to them.
Of course, IANAP.
well, traditionally a psychopath is assumed to view people as means to and ends rather than valuing them as themselves. But its entirely possible for a psychopath to construct their own system of morality and live by it, they are simply motivated by something besides empathy and without the support of a conscious to make them feel bad about hurting others, emotionally or physically. In modern society the motivation would simply be the capacity to live and succeed within society. In medieval terms, one of the worste punishments that a person could suffer was being branded an outlaw, or outside the laws and protections of society. A smart psychopath would quickly realize the benefits of being a member of a community, and endeavour to acclimate themselves to social norms. I could definitely see how a life of an adventurer, someone separate from but still valued by society would appeal to that sort of character.
Seems like a reasonable idea for a hobby game you could play for one offs.
I suspect there wouldn't be a lot of longevity in it becuase any game in which you restrict PCs character choices to a narrow niche within a genre tends to run out of steam quite fast.
I would try to court rather than avoid controversy though make the PCs all minions of the Abrahamic devil and write the rule book from their perspective, ie with the idea that their actions are just and honourable. Measure sucess by their ability to gather souls from mankind.
You obviously need to have the GM sections written more objectively but he PCs should exist in an environment where they seems to have no other option but to do evil and in that there is no need to look to redeeming features.
For inspiration you can look to "I Lucifer" by Glen Duncan and Mike Carey's Lucifer comic book series by Vertigo. Now both of these have a very sympathic Lucifer character in Carey's stuff Lucifer is hard to even define as evil.
Also for the right mind set read the wasp factory by Iain Bankes. Its written from the perspective of a psychopath who very nicely justifies all of their actions.
Quote from: jibbajibba;617398Also for the right mind set read the wasp factory by Iain Bankes. Its written from the perspective of a psychopath who very nicely justifies all of their actions.
In that vein, I'd also recommend The Collector. Which, incidentally, was one of the main inspiration for the second storyarc in Gaiman's Sandman series.
Check out these RPGs:
Kult
In Nomine Satanis/ Magna Veritas
In Nomine (Steve Jackson Games port)
Children of Fire
Heaven & Hell
D&D Planescape
Naturally, outside of Imp, all of these will be far more... adult? dangerous?... than what you're asking. Sounds like you want Chaotic Evil with a nice side of Toon, or safety padding. Cool. More power to you, and best of luck on your creation.
I can play any of the above (and alter others) to get a similar feel. Y'know, run chaotic evil with enough cream and sugar to make the bitterness go down. But I usually like to run my evil campaigns straight black. So perhaps shoot for a happier, lighter market? A market more in tune with short campaigns and one-shots, one where the obscene stays off-scene?
Quote from: Opaopajr;617499Check out these RPGs:
Kult
In Nomine Satanis/ Magna Veritas
In Nomine (Steve Jackson Games port)
Children of Fire
Heaven & Hell
D&D Planescape
Thanks, yes I’ve played Kult, and ever since I played it I’ve bored everybody stupid with my opinion that it beats any other game hands down for creepy horrorfulness. Interestingly a Swedish friend of mine told me that Kult excited just the sort of moral panic that I’m worried about, with questions being raised in Parliament. Apparently the guys behind it were/are actual cultists. In Nomine got mentioned on another forum, I’ll check that out and the others too. All of which proves this point:
Quote from: Doctor Jest;617135it's not untrodden ground. Seeing what others have done in the arena is probably a good thing when designing something.
Although unfortunately very little is untrodden ground now. As someone in Hollywood once said, there are only seven stories. Trick is to add a twist, like an innovative system.
Quote from: Opaopajr;617499Sounds like you want Chaotic Evil with a nice side of Toon, or safety padding. Cool. More power to you, and best of luck on your creation.
No, I’m happy with black and bitter, but as I said earlier I don’t Moms Against Blah on my ass this early in my career. On the other hand I suppose sales would probably go up, so… let’s do it! Mwa-ha-ha-ha…!
Quote from: Opaopajr;617499So perhaps shoot for a happier, lighter market? A market more in tune with short campaigns and one-shots, one where the obscene stays off-scene?
Well, of the two games I’ve got in the works (see my sig) one is more suitable for one-shots, the other for either one-shots or short campaigns, my general taste being for action packed oncers, but… why not shoot for a campaign-length game? And why not make it not simply comic demonic shenanigans but a game exploring good and evil in humanity a la the other games cited? One starting point I think could be the demons, having taken human form, find the humanity gradually breaking through and themselves constrained by their human vehicles’ good rather than their own evil. I just
might get that past a church youth group he he.
I still want to make the comic version because sideswipe at life is where I’m coming from as a person and as a roleplayer, but I could make it partly modular, in that in the book there would be a black version (Game A) and one with cream and sugar (Game B). Of course it’s unlikely I’ll ever publish it with its current title as I’d never get it past Wotbro With Sharp-suited Lawyers, never mind Moms Against Blah. Heigh ho.
Anyway, the idea seems to have a few more legs than I’d previously thought, so watch this space for further developments. And a system, dammit!
Finally:
Quote from: Omnifray;617266And Leo, c'mon - Italian wine? You surely realise that nothing goes better with liver and fava beans than Australian Shiraz. This is what I mean about the subtlety of my position having been missed...
Ah ok. Actually, I'd be happy with beer.
Have you checked out Little Fears?
If you play it backwards -- being one of the (imp?) minions of nightmarish childhood fears, instead of the children who confront them -- it might do what you are thinking about.
And for your added twist, where human capacity for evil finds its limit from corporeal bonds, it can take a bit of Changeling: the Lost. That way imps serving the Fears (the 7 Deadly Sins) are actually kidnapped souls of children who found they enjoy the world of malice, and returned embodied to a world that no longer makes sense to them. Now they want revenge and a way to break the bodily barriers of virtue in this corporeal world.
Throw in a bit of Dragonraid in reverse (first Christian RPG, where conflict is resolved through Christian virtues and mysteries) and I think you've got what your looking for -- plus children. That way the corrupted re-embodied children souls are trying to amorally resolve their conflicts through the Seven Deadly Sins, particularly against their fetch, duped families, and terrestrial world itself.
I think I just spontaneously created the most evil RPG setting ever... I'm a bit shocked and left numb on how I feel about that. I'm thinking it needs to use the Venial Sins, otherwise people will go blind from the sheer concentrated chaotic evil.
Here's some extra Catholic Church Deadly (mortal) Sins than the prime 7.
Grave Matter
The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) defines these sins as grave matter:[20]
(This is not necessarily all of the possible grave matters.)
Abortion (any formal cooperation in it)
Acceptance by human society of murderous famines without trying to fix it
Adulation of another's grave faults if it makes one an accomplice in another's vices or grave sins, but it is not grave when it only seeks to be agreeable, to avoid evil, to meet a need, or to obtain legitimate advantages.
Adultery
Blasphemy
Defrauding a worker of his wages
Deliberate failure to go to mass on Holy Days of Obligation unless excused for a serious reason or dispensed by one's own pastor[21]
Divination, magic, and sorcery
Divorce (If civil divorce, which cannot do anything to the spiritual marriage in the eyes of God, remains the only possible way of ensuring certain legal rights, the protection of inheritance, or the care of the children it is not a sin.)[22]
Drug Abuse
Endangering their own and others' safety by drunkenness or a love of speed on the road, at sea or in the air
Envy (if to the level of wishing grave harm to another)
Euthanasia
Extreme Anger (at the level of truly and deliberately desiring to seriously hurt or kill someone)
Fornication
Hatred of a neighbor/to deliberately desire him or her great harm
Homosexual acts
Incest
Lying (the gravity is measured by "the truth it deforms, the circumstances, the intentions of the one who lies, and the harm suffered by its victims"[23] )
Murder (except when done in self-defense or defense of others when there is no other way)
Perjury and False Oaths
Polygamy
Pornography
Prostitution
Rape
Refusing or withholding a just wage
Rich nation's refusal to aid those which are unable to ensure the means of their development by themselves
Sacrilege
Scandal (deliberately causing someone to sin gravely)
Suicide
Terrorism that threatens, wounds and kills indiscriminately
Unfair wagers and cheating at games unless the damage is unusually light
And here's Venial Sins definition:
A venial sin meets at least one of the following criteria:
It does not concern a "grave matter",
It is not committed with full knowledge, or
It is not committed with both deliberate and complete consent.
That way you can make it for a lighter game. Just a pinch of sugar, evil children souls with extreme anger, sacrilege, and cheating at serious games might be more palatable to delicate tastes. But that's really up to you.
Is Usury no longer on that list?
Quote from: TristramEvans;619929Is Usury no longer on that list?
It's likely been reworded to "Unfair wagers." A loan isn't a gift after all.
Quote from: Opaopajr;619932It's likely been reworded to "Unfair wagers." A loan isn't a gift after all.
Well, once upon a time, charging interest on a loan was outlawed by the Catholic church. That was one of those rules I've always thought was a REALLY good idea.
I completely agree, and it wasn't the only religion to find interest/usury a sin. Historically the spiritual -- and secular! -- onus was usually placed on the loaner not the borrower. Defaulting on debt was considered inherent in the risk of loaning money.
I think I recommended the book "Debt: the first 5000 years" here before. It's enlightening! There's also interviews with the author out there. Check CSPAN Book TV or something (god, I love Book TV! I'm such a nerd!).
@Opaopajr (I):
Quote from: Opaopajr;619924If you play it backwards--
You mean, like those heavy metal singles form the 70s which, when you played them backwards, had the lyrics ‘Hey Satan, I’m going to the grocery store, need anything?’
Quote from: Opaopajr;619924I think I just spontaneously created the most evil RPG setting ever... I'm a bit shocked and left numb on how I feel about that. I'm thinking it needs to use the Venial Sins, otherwise people will go blind from the sheer concentrated chaotic evil.
That does look like some pretty chaotic evil!
@Opaopajr (II):
Whoa! Dude, that’s some list. Or is it a personal bucket list?! Interesting that Blasphemy and Homosexuality sit alongside Defrauding a worker of his wages in the modern sin index. If the Catholic Church concentrated less on the former and more on the latter, like they do in Central and South America, they might not have such a bad rep. (Blimey, hope Moms Against Blah aren’t reading this).
Thanks for the suggestions anyway. I’ll heard of Little Fears, will check it and the others out, but not just yet- I’m putting work on this and other medium-term projects on hold for a bit while I deal with some pressing RL stuff.
Quote from: TristramEvans;619937Well, once upon a time, charging interest on a loan was outlawed by the Catholic Church. That was one of those rules I've always thought was a REALLY good idea.
Yeah, sounds good. Trouble is, it wouldn’t work in practice, (a) because you need investment to develop, and you can’t have investment without debt, and (b), if you outlaw something useful and/or necessary, like money-lending or drug-dealing, some non-mainstream ethnic group or social stratum would be deputised to engage in it and then be heavily stigmatised for doing so, like the Jews in Mediaeval Europe, or the Dalits in India.
Quote from: catty_big;620014Yeah, sounds good. Trouble is, it wouldn't work in practice, (a) because you need investment to develop, and you can't have investment without debt, and (b), if you outlaw something useful and/or necessary, like money-lending or drug-dealing, some non-mainstream ethnic group or social stratum would be deputised to engage in it and then be heavily stigmatised for doing so, like the Jews in Mediaeval Europe, or the Dalits in India.
Only if one were accept a debt-based economy as the best way to conduct commerce in society. I don't follow that viewpoint myself, personally. I still see money in general as a giant game of make-pretend that every adult in the world has been suckered into playing.
Quote from: Opaopajr;620010I think I recommended the book "Debt: the first 5000 years" here before. It's enlightening! There's also interviews with the author out there. Check CSPAN Book TV or something (god, I love Book TV! I'm such a nerd!).
Sounds interesting, I'll definitely look that one up. Are you familiar with the documentary the Money Masters from the 90s? That one really altered my entire view of the economy.
Quote from: TristramEvans;620019Only if one were accept a debt-based economy as the best way to conduct commerce in society. I don't follow that viewpoint myself, personally. I still see money in general as a giant game of make-pretend that every adult in the world has been suckered into playing.
OK, but without debt financing, where does the money to develop come from? Frx, I'm currently severely potless, but have two RPGs in development, along with ideas for several more that I can't guarantee would make money but would almost certainly make some, and would I'm sure re-pay the investment, plus they would benefit society, because there would more choice of games out there.
Think of money-lending as investment (which it is in a way), and you have a solution to the problem that producers like me face. Of course, unlike the Mediaeval usurers, there has to be some investigation and ascertaining of the producer's ability to produce, and their ability to pay back the investment. Obviously, a comparison should be made between 'pure' money-lending (i.e. 'Sure I'll lend you the money, I don't care how you get it back but if you don't I'll break your legs') and modern financial instruments, but, as I say, to develop you need to get the money from somewhere. If not debt, then where?
Quote from: catty_big;620023Think of money-lending as investment (which it is in a way), and you have a solution to the problem that producers like me face. Of course, unlike the Mediaeval usurers, there has to be some investigation and ascertaining of the producer's ability to produce, and their ability to pay back the investment. Obviously, a comparison should be made between 'pure' money-lending (i.e. 'Sure I'll lend you the money, I don't care how you get it back but if you don't I'll break your legs') and modern financial instruments, but, as I say, to develop you need to get the money from somewhere. If not debt, then where?
If we assume the use of money, then one can simply point to pre-Revolutionary America where States printed their own money. Its not debt-based, as with the current case of the US treasury which gets its money via loans on nonexistent gold from the Federal Reserve ( a misleading name, as its not federal, but in fact a private banking corporation). This is the trick to money: anything can be used, without a limited supply, as long as everyone agrees to use it as money. For 700 years Britain used a very effective form of money that was nothing more than sticks split in half. The only reason to charge interest would then be as an incitement for someone to lend. But there are plenty of other options.
Strongly recommend reading the book. Here's a quick summary of its argument:
Apparently we often think of debt as a recent (and wholly evil) creation, whereas it is the bedrock upon which notions of markets and trade depend. Without a military force being paid to define the regional power boundaries -- and the subsequent trade within it to pay the military force -- the common peace of regional valuation is not possible. You need a baseline evaluation created by fiat, and force receiving guaranteed debt by the very same fiat is that baseline.
Further, debt does not equal interest/usury. You can owe someone money, but not have interest accrue. Just like another misconception, capitalism doesn't equal economy and trade. There's a lot of modern conflation with the past's plethora of abstract social solutions.
Anyhoo, let's go back to chaotic evil! :D
Quote from: TristramEvans;620026( a misleading name, as its not federal, but in fact a private banking corporation).
This is not exactly true. The Federal Reserve System is not a corporation. It actually has a unique structure that is a mixture of both public and private, is both part of the government and independent of it. The idea that it's a privately held corporation is a misrepresentation claimed by conspiracy theorists who don't understand how the Federal Reserve System works.
It's a quasi-governmental consortium of primary banks, at best.
However its inception and hold of private power on public policy does lend partial credence to the conspiracy theorists' argument. Just because some people have kooky, all-powerful conspiracies doesn't mean the institutional framework, and some actors behind its inception, isn't detrimental. To maintain that it still is actively detrimental with unsavory actors within, especially after recent years, is not a wholly dismissible argument.
One mere example in the last year alone? Its oblique involvement in the LIBOR scandal.
And now, we're gravitating towards Lawful Evil, and that's tragically not what this topic is about.
:p
Quote from: Omnifray;616661I don't think roleplayers should ever be encouraged to roleplay purely psychopathic evil characters.
By "psychopathic" I mean amoral:- without conscience. Characters that have excessively shallow emotional affect.
I never played a game between the ages of 12 and 25 that wasn't evil. Despite my feelings. Even as a GM, the players would always choose to play evil fucking characters.
Quote from: Opaopajr;620145Anyhoo, let's go back to chaotic evil! :D
In a minute. First,
Quote from: TristramEvans;620026If we assume the use of money, then one can simply point to pre-Revolutionary America where States printed their own money. This is the trick to money: anything can be used, without a limited supply, as long as everyone agrees to use it as money.
I think there’s a confusion between debt- I lend you some money, and you pay me back either whenever or according to an agreed schedule- and money-lending/usury- whereby I lend you money and charge you interest on the loan. If we’re simply talking about debt then it doesn’t matter who prints the money, in fact, as you point out, we don’t need to talk about money at all, it could be any resource that I have and am willing to part with some of temporarily, and that you do not.
Quote from: TristramEvans;610029For 700 years Britain used a very effective form of money that was nothing more than sticks split in half.
Ok but during that period did anyone need a loan to buy a large and/or complex and therefore expensive item of equipment (car, kitchen unit etc.), or to publish a book or movie or buy a three-bedroomed house? If I’ve got the money to enable you to do that and you haven’t and I’m prepared to lend it to you, that constitutes a service and something to which I can attach a monetary value, i.e. interest. And here I think we need further to distinguish between reasonable and unreasonable rates of interest, or usury, which I think was the Church’s point. Another example of this principle, taken from a slightly different area of business, is when shops multiply their prices to exorbitant levels during a shortage.
Quote from: TristramEvans;620026But hang on, I also said Quote from: TristramEvans;620026The only reason to charge interest would then be as an incitement for someone to lend. But there are plenty of other options.
Yes, I’ll get to that.
Quote from: TristramEvans;620026The only reason to charge interest would then be as an incitement for someone to lend. But there are plenty of other options.
What are they then?
Quote from: Opaopajr;620322And now we're gravitating towards Lawful Evil, and that's tragically not what this topic is about.
:p
Aha, therein lies a sequel game, Lawful Evil, about Wall Street/Canary Wharf traders/bankers who are conflicted between their selfish need to make as money as possible within the rules (obviously you don’t need to play D&D to know that plenty of evil is possible whilst following the rules) and their altruistic impulse (conscience or whatever) to play fair and not be a Burnsesque shitbag.
Quote: Originally Posted by
C Montgomery Burns How dare you! Smithers, release the hounds....Back to chaotic evil.