TheRPGSite

Fan Forums => The RPGPundit's Own Forum => Topic started by: RPGPundit on August 31, 2006, 06:23:33 PM

Title: From the RPGPundit's Blog: More on The Magic Deer
Post by: RPGPundit on August 31, 2006, 06:23:33 PM
One poster has commented that in Blue Rose, unless you're actually running a campaign to kill the monarch or overthrow the government, it really shouldn't matter about the Magic Deer and the utopian-fascist nanny-state.  He went on to argue that you could even play a noble that doesn't entirely trust the magic deer, and could try to encourage people toward a more representative system of government where the monarch's power was reduced.
 
Except in Blue Rose, your noble that doesn't trust the Magic Deer is wrong. The book says so. The Deer is the embodiment of all that is good, and good being defined as a kind of pagan feminist collectivism, and its "goodness" is absolute.
 
Not to mention that in the end it really wouldn't matter, because if said nobleman was really really successful, and the people clamoured for an end to the deerocracy, the deer would just go on, pick the next monarch and give a good head-hoofing to whoever disagrees. The book says so, you can't beat the deer without changing the setting.
 
People have also suggested that the alignment rules are also more stringent in regular D&D than in Blue Rose, and that if you wanted to interpret a Paladin as "evil" in D&D for engaging in religious genocide against Orcs, you wouldn't be allowed to do so by the rules.
 
To this I say sure you do see the difference between on the one hand CHOOSING to play a paladin who ends up having to follow severe moral restrictions of some kind or another, and follows a particular deity's interpretation and regulations of good; and on the other hand being told that your hardworking noble businessman would be "evil" for not wanting to pay his anti-sugar tax (because, too much sugar is bad for you so we have to regulate it); or that to distrust the magic deer would be evil or at the very best misguided?
 
And yes, in other games there are deities that are defined as being definitively good but:
1. they usually aren't so blatantly tied to modern day socio-political concepts that not all gamers would consider their definition of "good", making the game an insult to people who believe in free enterprise, christianity, libertarianism, free thought or hell, just plain democracy.
2. They usually don't actually and actively determine the ruler and aristocracy of the main kingdom that the game presumes your characters are playing in; and make it ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE to be overthrown or resisted by the magic of deus ex machina.
3. If they do, then those settings suck too.
 
Yes, my opponent might say, but why does it matter if you play someone who is a rogue-ish type but doesn't want to overthrow the system? You can play a merchant or mercenary who's in it for himself, and it doesn't change anything. It doesn't matter, he would say.
 
And yet, I think it does matter. It matters if you roleplay, in the sense of immersing in your character. It makes a world of difference to me if I know, based on the setting, that deep down my merchant businessman or self-interested rogue or wizard out for revenge or enlightened freethinker are fundamentally wrong. It would ruin the enjoyment of playing them to me, or if I did play them it would have to be for other reasons.. in Blue Rose such a character could only be run as a desperate attempt for redemption or a slippery-slope to total corruption.
Its like if you were to say, play a character in a modern game: a pagan, or a buddhist, a secular humanist or a biology teacher or whatever, but the DM tells you at the last minute "oh by the way, IN THIS WORLD calvinist fundamentalist christian theology is RIGHT; and your character is predestined to HELL for who they are.. its not just a belief, IN THIS GAME its absolutely true. Just so you know; it shouldn't really change how you run the character, but he is going to go to hell after he dies.  Oh, and everyone around you knows and believes you're going to hell too, because in this game the nation you're playing in is a calvinist theocracy; so they all at the very least disapprove of you and your lifestyle intensely.  And no, its not possible they're wrong. They're totally right, the literal interpretation of the Bible is true and your character is going to hell. It really wouldn't do you much good to try to convince them otherwise, because they actually are right, and the government is really good and pure and kind and christian so most people are really happy about it and wouldn't be willing to listen to you.  And even if a couple did, they'd actually be wrong like you, and you'd just be leading them to evil too. But hey, don't let that change how you run your character.. "
 
Its ludicrous to think that it wouldn't change it... that it wouldn't in fact ruin the entire experience for you to know that in that universe, in an absolute sense, your character is WRONG.
Title: From the RPGPundit's Blog: More on The Magic Deer
Post by: Lawbag on September 01, 2006, 04:19:20 AM
Why cant you play in Blue Rose with the Magic deer with the assumption that the deer is evil, and it is the long term goal to overthrow that feministic attitude?
Title: From the RPGPundit's Blog: More on The Magic Deer
Post by: Hastur T. Fannon on September 01, 2006, 06:25:29 AM
Incidentally do you have similar problems with Ars Magica, Tekemel, Werewolf, oMage or Orpheus? (and those are just off the top of my head)

All of those have a fairly rigidly-defined metaphysics and playing a character who believes something that's contrary to those metaphysics will cause problems
Title: From the RPGPundit's Blog: More on The Magic Deer
Post by: RPGPundit on September 01, 2006, 12:55:44 PM
Quote from: Lawbag
Why cant you play in Blue Rose with the Magic deer with the assumption that the deer is evil, and it is the long term goal to overthrow that feministic attitude?


Well, you can.. hell, it would probably be the only tolerable way to play the Aldis setting. But it would not be "by the book". My complaint is only significant if you are considering the setting "by the book".

RPGPundit
Title: From the RPGPundit's Blog: More on The Magic Deer
Post by: RPGPundit on September 01, 2006, 12:56:27 PM
Quote from: Hastur T. Fannon
Incidentally do you have similar problems with Ars Magica, Tekemel, Werewolf, oMage or Orpheus? (and those are just off the top of my head)

All of those have a fairly rigidly-defined metaphysics and playing a character who believes something that's contrary to those metaphysics will cause problems


Out of all of these the only one I can even marginally stand is Ars Magica.

RPGPundit
Title: From the RPGPundit's Blog: More on The Magic Deer
Post by: Hastur T. Fannon on September 02, 2006, 04:40:24 AM
Quote from: RPGPundit
Out of all of these the only one I can even marginally stand is Ars Magica.


Toon?
Title: From the RPGPundit's Blog: More on The Magic Deer
Post by: Aos on September 02, 2006, 08:25:53 AM
I want to fuck the magic deer.
Do I have to wear a dress?
Title: From the RPGPundit's Blog: More on The Magic Deer
Post by: RPGPundit on September 02, 2006, 12:19:35 PM
Quote from: Aos
I want to fuck the magic deer.
Do I have to wear a dress?


In Aldis, the Magic Deers fuck you! :spank:
Title: From the RPGPundit's Blog: More on The Magic Deer
Post by: mythusmage on September 08, 2006, 08:21:37 AM
Quote from: Hastur T. Fannon
Incidentally do you have similar problems with Ars Magica, Tekemel, Werewolf, oMage or Orpheus? (and those are just off the top of my head)

All of those have a fairly rigidly-defined metaphysics and playing a character who believes something that's contrary to those metaphysics will cause problems


Don't know about the others, but in Ars Magica and the original World of Darkness how things work on the existential level depends upon belief. So long as people believe things work a certain way, then things work that way. Change beliefs and the way things work change.

In Blue Rose things are as they are. You can believe what you want, it doesn't change a thing. You could persuade everybody in the setting the magic deer is evil, and nothing would change in any substantial way.

Making matters even worse is the fact the morality is black and white. No shades of grey. No way to adapt to circumstances. The morality in Ars Magica is black and white, but one can hold to an alternate belief where the pattern of good and evil is different. In addition one can change another's belief. One could, for example, with lots of hard work and dedication convince The Church that magic is of God, and being of God is therefor good and a right and proper tool to be used for the betterment of Mankind and the discomfiting of Satan. You can't do anything like that in Blue Rose.
Title: From the RPGPundit's Blog: More on The Magic Deer
Post by: Hastur T. Fannon on September 08, 2006, 12:32:16 PM
Quote from: mythusmage
Don't know about the others, but in Ars Magica and the original World of Darkness how things work on the existential level depends upon belief. So long as people believe things work a certain way, then things work that way. Change beliefs and the way things work change.


And playing a character who believes that things are the way they are based on certain underlying rules that can be determined through observation, experimentation and thought would result in?
Title: From the RPGPundit's Blog: More on The Magic Deer
Post by: mythusmage on September 09, 2006, 05:15:45 AM
Quote from: Hastur T. Fannon
And playing a character who believes that things are the way they are based on certain underlying rules that can be determined through observation, experimentation and thought would result in?


Not a damn thing. In such a universe individuals don't matter, what matters is the consensus. You need to persuade enough people there could be something to what you say, before you'll see a change.

That's the trick to consensus reality, there has to be a consensus. A large enough consensus to overrule those who disagree. And for it to be a true consensus it has to be something people agree to willingly.
Title: From the RPGPundit's Blog: More on The Magic Deer
Post by: Hastur T. Fannon on September 09, 2006, 01:38:23 PM
Quote from: mythusmage
Not a damn thing.


Exactly

You try playing a Mage game with a character who doesn't believe in magic (and bogs the game down with looking for the trick when someone performs some) or a Werewolf game with a character who doesn't have a problem with urban development or an Orpheus character who doesn't believe in ghosts or (worse) thinks that Oblivion sounds like a pretty good idea then not just the setting, but the actual rules of the game say that this character is wrong

Just like Blue Rose
Title: From the RPGPundit's Blog: More on The Magic Deer
Post by: mythusmage on September 09, 2006, 03:04:44 PM
Quote from: Hastur T. Fannon
Exactly

You try playing a Mage game with a character who doesn't believe in magic (and bogs the game down with looking for the trick when someone performs some) or a Werewolf game with a character who doesn't have a problem with urban development or an Orpheus character who doesn't believe in ghosts or (worse) thinks that Oblivion sounds like a pretty good idea then not just the setting, but the actual rules of the game say that this character is wrong

Just like Blue Rose


Ah, but in the oWOD enough people could change how the world worked. As a matter of fact, how the world worked depended on which game you were dealing with, for within each community there was enough people to dictate how things worked in that circle. Perception made flesh.

You mention Mage. You say, "You try playing a Mage game with a character who doesn't believe in magic..." Doesn't the non-believer fit the spirit of the game? Isn't it the goal of every mage to make his magic seem ordinary, coincidence or a trick lest he be overcome by paradox?

The World of Darkness is based on subjective truth. The idea that truth is malleable and can be altered by altering beliefs. Blue Rose is based on a nasty, narrow objective truth. The magic deer is always right, and you can't change it.

You can disagree with the majority on how the world is in WOD, and be right. Disagree with The Deer in BR, and you are wrong. That sir, is the difference between a consensus reality as in the World of Darkness, and a dictated reality as in Blue Rose.
Title: From the RPGPundit's Blog: More on The Magic Deer
Post by: The Yann Waters on September 09, 2006, 03:41:30 PM
Quote from: mythusmage
You say, "You try playing a Mage game with a character who doesn't believe in magic..." Doesn't the non-believer fit the spirit of the game?
But of course, since after all there's always the Technocracy. A character's view of the world by no means has to involve magic: a PC might believe his unusual abilities to be a bizarre experiment conducted by aliens from outer space, and that would be every bit as acceptable as the paradigms of the Verbena or the Void Engineers.

Still, the existence of the Consensus cannot be affected by the Consensus itself, and in Mage the consensual state of reality remains an objective fact even if no one on Earth believes in it at all. There's a solid structure underlying the universe; at its most fundamental level, it consists of Quintessence being shaped into Patterns by Avatars. Will and belief can't change that.
Title: From the RPGPundit's Blog: More on The Magic Deer
Post by: Hastur T. Fannon on September 10, 2006, 04:12:40 AM
Quote from: mythusmage
The World of Darkness is based on subjective truth. The idea that truth is malleable and can be altered by altering beliefs.


Which in itself is an objective truth

and then there's this:

Quote from: GrimGent
There's a solid structure underlying the universe; at its most fundamental level, it consists of Quintessence being shaped into Patterns by Avatars. Will and belief can't change that.



Thinking about it, the nWoD games are worse.  If your character has a sense of morality that's different to the standard Vampire/Werewolf/Mage/human then they are wrong.  The rules say so.  If you don't follow the standard of behaviour as set out in then your character will go insane and have other bad things happen to him/her.  It's not like oWoD where humanity only mattered for humans and vampires and you could find a Path of Enlightenment that more suited your character.  Have a different standard of morality and you are badevilwrong

At least Blue Rose doesn't give you dice penalties for not believing in the Magic Deer (please tell me that's true)
Title: From the RPGPundit's Blog: More on The Magic Deer
Post by: Spike on September 11, 2006, 10:09:34 PM
To be honest, any game that dictates morality, either objectively or subjectively has a problem.  The WoD, either old OR new was always hampered by their insistance that 'killing people and taking their stuff makes you an uncontrollable madman'.

Which is most emphatically not how the world works. Madmen are killign people because they are crazy, not crazy because they kill people. Other people kill people ALL THE TIME and never go crazy for it.  

It wouldn't have been nearly as much of a problem (indeed, it works excellently when dealing with the man on the street feeling guilty for driving over his daughter's puppy by accident) if it weren't so fucking integral to the game. There are no exceptions for anyone. Everyone has a moral code they must follow, period.
Really now?
Title: From the RPGPundit's Blog: More on The Magic Deer
Post by: Vellorian on September 12, 2006, 09:45:49 AM
Quote from: Spike
Other people kill people ALL THE TIME and never go crazy for it.  


I know and have known quite a few people who have killed others.  I can assure you, killing someone changes you.  Maybe not by making you "crazy," true.  I can assure you, however, that someone who can simply go out and kill someone, and feel nothing, not be changed and have no major emotional issues to deal with, is, without a doubt, "crazy."
Title: From the RPGPundit's Blog: More on The Magic Deer
Post by: Spike on September 12, 2006, 02:16:12 PM
No doubt.   My point was that those who can go out killing without being changed or having to deal with 'issues' were like that before they killed.  There is an interesting collarary regarding the prevelance of sociopaths in the population, The Ruthless Among Us was the title of the study, if I recall.

About three years ago one of my co-workers was forced to shoot a person. More specifically a mentally retarded woman.  Did he have issues over it? Certainly. Did he become a twitchy, neurotic mess? For about a day or two. Did he become a cold, cruel bastard? Not any more than he had been before.

A WW fan might suggest he 'made his humanity check'. I say bullshit.  He went through the default standard emotional responses any normal human being should go through in those circumstances.  Going 'crazy' and becoming... not just hardened but actually viscious is actually analomous.

While I am hardly a proponent of Unknown Armies as the 'best game evar' I will suggest that their model of 'humanity' was far more in line with actual human psychology by many country miles.
Title: From the RPGPundit's Blog: More on The Magic Deer
Post by: Bagpuss on September 12, 2006, 02:49:43 PM
Quote from: Hastur T. Fannon
Werewolf, Mage

All of those have a fairly rigidly-defined metaphysics and playing a character who believes something that's contrary to those metaphysics will cause problems

In Mage (at least the 2nd Ed which I'm familiar with) the line between good and evil is probably the thinest of all the WoD settings certianly when I read through it the first time my immediate assumption was that the Technocracy were the good guys, and the Traditions a bunch of selfish gits, this was even more confirmed by The Guide to the Technocracy. Sure the setting assumes that the Traditions are the good-guys, but it isn't in any way defined by the the metaphysics, the world would be a generally safer (if duller) place if the Technocracy won, also if they won magic effectively would no longer exist, so the metaphysics itself could change.

Werewolf as well has issues with some of the tribes, okay the Wyrm itself is ment to be really evil, but Vampires children of the wyrm are capable of good acts, they aren't all LE like in D&D. And some werewolves claim to be doing good by slaughtering humans, because of the damage they unintentionally cause.
Title: From the RPGPundit's Blog: More on The Magic Deer
Post by: jhkim on September 12, 2006, 03:32:30 PM
Quote from: RPGPundit
Its like if you were to say, play a character in a modern game: a pagan, or a buddhist, a secular humanist or a biology teacher or whatever, but the DM tells you at the last minute "oh by the way, IN THIS WORLD calvinist fundamentalist christian theology is RIGHT; and your character is predestined to HELL for who they are.. its not just a belief, IN THIS GAME its absolutely true.


Here's the thing -- you say that this applies to modern games.  But why do you say that it's only true of modern games?  The exact same thing is true in D&D.  There are real gods, and there is a specific theology which is RIGHT.  

If you hate the high priest of Hieroneous and think he's a raving bigot who just wants to slaughter orcs as racial cleansing...  Well, you're wrong.  He's lawful good -- it says so on his character sheet.  The teachings of Heironeous are right, because he's a lawful good god.  If your character is a Jain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jain) who thinks that violence is absolutely wrong, then bzzzt -- tough luck.  That sword-swinging paladin over there is lawful good.  Nothing wrong about the killing he does.  

To take an example from a real game, I had a fantasy character who was a loyal Roman citizen.  He believed that the benefits of the Roman civilization to the people and the world outweighed the problems.  He supported slavery and gladiatorial games, arguing that in a state of nature man was violent and abusive, while the Roman system couldn't eliminate that, it channeled the violence into constructive ends.  He most certainly didn't hold any modern belief that life was sacred or that all people were created equal.  In a D&D game, he'd most likely be lawful evil or lawful neutral at best.
Title: From the RPGPundit's Blog: More on The Magic Deer
Post by: gleichman on September 12, 2006, 03:46:51 PM
Quote from: RPGPundit
Its like if you were to say, play a character in a modern game: a pagan, or a buddhist, a secular humanist or a biology teacher or whatever, but the DM tells you at the last minute "oh by the way, IN THIS WORLD calvinist fundamentalist christian theology is RIGHT; and your character is predestined to HELL for who they are.. its not just a belief, IN THIS GAME its absolutely true. Just so you know; it shouldn't really change how you run the character, but he is going to go to hell after he dies.


I do basically this for my games (minor details are different). Only I do it upfront (and don't really have a match for the follow-on rant).

Doesn't seem to cause any problems at all.
Title: From the RPGPundit's Blog: More on The Magic Deer
Post by: T-Willard on September 13, 2006, 04:18:31 AM
So let me get this straight...

If you're evil, you get a kick to the crotch by the Magic Deer (HHheheheh, I can't even type that without laughing) and tossed over the border, where you are undoubtably anally molested by waiting Catholic priests who hang out at the border waiting for paralyzed anit-Magic Deer haters, bible in one hand, sacred oil anoited cock in the other.

If you dislike the Magic Deer, it swoops down and kicks you in the head and carts you off to the land of unlubed assfuckings for all eternity.

How in the name of Satan's burning nutsack are you supposed to adventure in this land?

"OK, I'm going to roll my diplomacy and see if the Baron Von Shiiitepants will eat the red crumpets instead of the blue, thereby insulting Dame Unibrow."

Oh, wait, the red crumpets were made with sugar, so it's headkicking and anal plundering time for you!

And just hoooooooooow can a Magic Deer wield a scepter anyway? Is the scepter the code name for its shlong? Does it fly down out of the sky, bash you over the head with it's Magic Deer Cock (TM) and then kick you all the way to the border, where of course, the orcs will immediately pose you in a sexually explicit pose with the last guy, or next guy, who arrives with a hoof-mark in the middle of his skull warmer.

Does the Magic Deer have hands growing out of it's head? You can't fool me, those aren't horns, those are fucking hands!

And why would the DEER give a shit? Shouldn't his primary goal to be to keep all those bipedal retards from eating his people? Why the fuck don't the people of Blue Rose graze, set out salt licks, and wait in a lotus position for a deer to come by that needs a thorn pulled out of its hoof?

Magic Deer? WTF? How hard was that to come up?

"OK, Guys, we need the Magic Overlord of Bluerose! Flip on the Nature Channel, and the first thing we see get eaten by a lion, cougar, or get hit by a semi will be our new GOD!"

Shit, they could have ripped off King Authur. They could have ripped off some African legend like Disney does.

Magic Deer? BWAH-HA-HA! That's like hitting the jackpot on the lottery and finding out that they pay you in Monopoly money. By a clown. On a bike. With his hand jammed up a midgets ass and playing the kazoo.

Seriosly, a Magic Deer? One of the most stupid (but delicious) creatues our there. "Oh, look, bright lights, just like what killed Fred, James, Cindy, Buck, Bambi an.... OH SHIT!" I mean, these fuckers are STUPID! They can't even eat out of the fucking garbage can without tipping it over.

At least a raccoon would be cool. But no, they've got to pick a DEER!

I'll just attach high frequency whistles to my armor's shoulders.

Fuck that deer.





heehehehehehehhee

Magic Deer.