The Other Real Truth about Role Playing

[Jareena Faye]

A/N: This was supposed to be an impartial "explaining of a concept." Don't get all offended and angry until you've read it all, because I was only trying to portray every side.

 

The title is a parody on "The Truth about Dungeons & Dragons," as well as "The Real Truth about Dungeons & Dragons."

 

It’s been popular since the 80’s: the role playing game. Also known as an RPG or RP, three different forms have developed over the years--- board game, computer game, and “story form.” While stereotyped as something that only a geek or freak would do, RPG’s are enjoyed by children and adults of all kinds. Because of its wide range of players, the public has formed a wide range of opinions. Therein lies the controversy.

 

The basic idea, at least, is simple. To participate, a player assumes the “role” of a fictional character, probably of his own design, and fights next to or against the characters of his friends. Additional rules and variants, as well as what kind of people are playing, complicate this in one way or another.

 

Role playing originated the sixties, as a form of card or board game. This form of gaming was a minor success, but it has since become popular through the still-surviving Dungeons & Dragons--- the mother of current role playing, a board-and-dice game that has seen both movie and computer adaptations. The latter, computer role playing games (CRPG’s) are a separate form of gaming. These take place in chat rooms, game sites, or in programs that are purchased and installed on the PC. The third kind of role play, story form, is the more unique of the sisters. It only requires writing tools, a friend, and an imagination. When completed, the game resembles a co-written manuscript.

 

No one attempts to deny role playing's addictive nature. There's something captivating about an endless world with few boundaries, where one can look and act however one likes. Whatever a person lacks or longs for in the real world, he can be through his character. Of course, there are certain givens--- for instance, a player is expected to show respect for another player's ideas and characters; but the rules are always flexible. One needs only to wait for the inevitable battle. Characters are often killed like flies, and “friends” may then take whatever they wish from the bodies. This world, so unlike our own, so empowering to our egos, can make for a very wonderful and convenient escape.

 

It should hardly be surprising, then, to learn that some “serious” players have dedicated hour after endless hour to The Game. Eating and sleeping become irrelevant. An entire weekend could be eaten by a single session. The Game becomes top priority.

 

These occurrences are probably responsible for the parents, religious fanatics, and authors who have come to the conclusion that Dungeons & Dragons should be condemned altogether as an evil that leads to obsession, depression, and the occult. They are the ones who promote the alleged suicides linked to role playing, as well as the claim that Dungeons & Dragons is just a front for Satanists who are trying to recruit new members.

 

As for Satanic influence, role playing’s enemies may have simply gotten it backward. Undoubtedly, there are those involved in occultism who role play; but does that mean role playing introduced them to the occult, or is it just a coincidence? At least one person, Sean Sellers, admits that he used Dungeons & Dragons “to introduce people to Satanic behavior concepts and recruit them into the occult.” Elsewhere, a Satanist party allegedly calling itself the Kroth--- members of which were involved in destructive acts --- reportedly participated in a role playing game that was “sort of Dungeons & Dragons on drugs,” themed around guns and blowing up the local school.

 

When it comes to suicide, no deaths have been officially credited to D&D. That does not rule out the possibility that the game might have been a factor in past suicides--- a straw to break the camel’s back, so to speak ---but if the game truly were a sole cause, the role players’ suicide rate would be much higher.

 

That doesn’t mean gamers haven’t been severely grieved when his or her character was “killed.” Many obsessed gamers have grieved the death of their character as they would grieve the death of a friend. Role playing’s enemies are not solely among the Christian fundamentalists --- former players have appeared on radio and talk shows, or in magazines, to testify of how they let The Game control their lives .

 

While the accusation that role playing is “dangerous” implies the impending doom to come, it does not address the present, the fact that playing itself may affect the mind and soul. Psychologists have often reassessed “that when someone lives in the realm of fantasy for an extended length of time, the lines dividing reality and fantasy become distorted, fuzzy.” The human psychosis seems to have a weak spot for what it prefers to believe, regardless of facts. One does not have to be delusional or unstable to see that their version of reality differs from others’ simply because of what they have chosen to believe.

 

Does that mean that role playing results in an unbalanced mind? Fans of Dungeons & Dragons, and role playing in general, have been everywhere from derisive to defensive to these attacks on gaming. Many players, of course, are normal people. They participate for recreation, and do not spend endless hours reading nothing but rule books, or endless days playing without ceasing. Designing and controlling the characters has made them better writers; drawing the characters and maps have made them better artists; better readers due to the extensive rule books and manuals; better mathematicians thanks to all the calculations needed for D&D.

 

Additionally, because a player may design his own character, participating in RPG’s does not mean that you will inevitably be casting make-believe spells or promoting sorcery. A player may also choose who he plays with. Therefore, it is perfectly possibly to engage in the basic act of role playing itself without ever indulging in any of the undesirable themes that have made fundamentalists so set against role play in the first place.

 

With so many good and bad testimonies from both sides of the debate, one is tempted to draw the conclusion that RPG’s are neutral; that you only get out of it what you put into it. Arguments will probably continue for many years to come, as role playing retains its momentum as a popular hobby. Perhaps more light will be shed on the matter as studies continue.

 

PS:

I guess footnotes aren't going to work on the 'board. If you want them E-mailed to you, let me know.

[Gryphon]

I have long found this to be an interesting (and often reoccuring) topic of discussion and I like your coverage of it.

 

I'm not sure how in depth you need to go if this is an assignment of some description but here's my own two cents worth of thought that was dredged up by your writing:

 

It should hardly be surprising, then, to learn that some “serious” players have dedicated hour after endless hour to The Game. Eating and sleeping become irrelevant. An entire weekend could be eaten by a single session. The Game becomes top priority.

It occured to me that this does not just happen to those that play D&D. There are many passtimes in this world that have a habit of growing to consume all available time. Ask anyone who's recently got a new game for their computer, or PS2, or a model enthusiast who's just got that replica of a 1897 steam engine that they have to get built this weekend and I'm sure you'll find the compulsion is more universal.

 

I also thought that this debate in different forms happens over and over on many different topics all over the world. It wasn't too long ago that I heard certain fundamentalist groups were claiming that Harry Potter books were the work of the devil to lure young children to their doom... what is it with fundamentalist groups anyway huh?

[Peredhil]

It should hardly be surprising, then, to learn that some “serious” players have dedicated hour after endless hour to The Game. Eating and sleeping become irrelevant. An entire weekend could be eaten by a single session. The Game becomes top priority.

I have a feeling this quote will be popular with anyone who has has the fun of experiencing it. I've had people fly from Germany to the United States to catch up on their characters in my world. For them, it's a stress-relief from highly obsessive business lives. I remember staying up my entire Spring Break at my first College playing D&D.

Online games like Everquest, which from my experience is designed similar to a Skinner box experiement have combined the adreniline of teamwork and reward in bringing down THE big Mob.

Which seques into another point. Role Playing is a tool. Like any tool, it is someway neutral, it is the use to which it is put which determines much. I was taught my D&D in 1975 by a dual Doctor - Divinity and Psychiatry. He used Role Playing in his therapy with abused children to give them a "safe" fantasy forum in which to verbalize issues and "test" various possible solutions.

I know that as a "hard-core" Christian myself, Many of the favorite themes that have engaged the minds of my players have been ones I've (to be nice to me) borrowed from the bible and other apocryphal works. On the other hand, I've also been inspired to borrow from the Quran, Book of Mormon, and Hindu and Buddhist works, along with the traditional sources of mythology and other Fantasy masters such as Tolkien, Howard, Moorcock, McDonald, Byron, etc.

 

I think this is a pretty well-written and well-rounded paper. The use of the lable of "religious fundamentalist" might be offensive to some, but in the paper's context, it is too well established to refute.

 

-Peredhil's two cents

[Quincunx]

First of all, good to put an Author's Note on this before the essay; normally I frown on preludes, but it was helpful here. This looks quite like a school essay--a short, persuasive piece in need of slight polishing--and I'm going to give it a grade-worthy edit before adding my own reflections.

 

I would have divided the paragraphs differently, fusing the two which explain the concept, the fragmentary "The basic idea, at least is simple. . ." to "Role playing originated in the sixties. . .". I would also fuse the next two, but in this case it's the second paragraph "It should hardly be suprising. . ." which is a bit weak to stand on its own. The paragraph on suicide and the one which follows on testimonials to lost time are also short, but would need to be slightly rewritten to be fused--or better yet, fleshed out with an extra sentence or two apiece. In the paragraph beginning "Additionally, because a player may design his own character. . .", I'd drop that phrase entirely, fuse the first two sentences, and then graft that paragraph onto the one which came before. In general, any time you wrote a turning-point phrase or sentence, you made it begin a new paragraph where it might have been just as effective without the white space.

 

You do fairly well at avoiding controversy, sometimes at the cost of persuading the reader. The only word which cannot stay is "psychosis"--in context, it should be "psyche", and psychosis has a very negative connotation. You have the beginnings of a great anti-RP point when you describe character death and friends pillaging the bodies but don't firmly grasp it in the following sentence. (If it's too early to present anti-RP, consider moving it down in the essay. The callous nature of RPG is too much of a plum to go unnoticed*.) On the point of suicides, you can research Shawn Woolley as the most prominent case and use that information to support either side of the paper; however, if you use it as anti-RPG, that balanced against the strength of the paragraph on Satanic links might be enough to destroy the neutrality, and you'd have to revise near the beginning of the paper to add pro-RPG tones. The ending is a trifle weak; making the topic of that paragraph ("RPGs are neutral. . .") the final line of the essay will focus the wandering generalities.

 

*So was D&D: The Movie, but you covered that one.

 

--

 

Personal reflections: You did well in making the essay superficially neutral, but the research** given to the anti-RPG side, which you meant to make their position less shaky, highlights the lack of research on the pro-RPG side and seems like a personal opinion. If you meant the essay to be slightly anti-RPG, that's an extremely subtle and good job.

 

Roleplaying games give all the benefits of superficial contact and learning networking, with the drawbacks of none of it being. . .eligible? in the real world.

 

**Were citations your footnotes?

[Falcon2001]

Good job on the paper. As a D&D player myself, I know a few people that aren't the better for playing, but in general most people seem to be pretty easygoing.

[Jareena Faye]

That's the great thing about The Mighty Pen. There are so many educated people who can actually offer me criticism. Usually I just get a ten-year-old typing "mor pleas." Cough. So... thank you, one and all!

 

 

To Quincunx: Like I said at the bottom, the citations wouldn't post; they were in Microsoft Word format, so they just didn't copy over. I can post them if you like!

 

Falcon2001: I'd be interested in hearing more on that, if you have any more to say about it.

 

The use of the lable of "religious fundamentalist" might be offensive to some, but in the paper's context, it is too well established to refute.

Yeah, I didn't really have a better word for it... if only I could be less formal in the paper and say, "By the way, I'm a religious fundamentalist who occasionally role plays! Oh well!"

 

 

Again, thank you! I'll definitely be consulting your comments this weekend as I write the final draft.

Edited April 8, 2005 by Jareena Faye

[Hydrus]

I don't think people should be offended by the term "religous fundamentalist" Peredhil. It's simply a description of their beliefs, a politically correct term fine for use in essays such as this.

 

Of course, these days there is quite a bit of negative publicity for certain minority groups of fundamentalists....

[~O~]

I'm a religious fundamentalist... at least that's what I call someone who strives to practice the foundations of a religion.

~O~

I thought that it was interesting that you commented on the "obsessiveness" of roleplaying games. I know from my family history that I have a predisposition towards alcoholism from both sides of my family (it's the reason that my parents don't drink at all, and why I have a one-drink-limit). I'd like to propose the idea that obsessiveness in general is something to which one has a predisposition. As a result, people will move from one compulsion to another. Hence, a drug-addict will often become a dedicated smoker. An alcoholic can become addicted to religion.

~O~

This has a couple of ramifications.

~O~

First off, we can argue that roleplaying is keeping people from more harmful obsessions such as drugs.

~O~

Second, though, we could ask a question; is there a link between the character traits that spark an interest in roleplaying and a predisposition to obsessions?

[Jareena Faye]

Wow... that's very interesting! You have a very thought-provoking suggestion, here.

 

I would say that that is definitely possible, and quite true, in many cases. However, I'd like to suggest another possibility--- while some people have a predisposition, does that mean that everyone with an obsession has a predisposition to be obsessed? Or do others have a choice?

 

I think many different factors go into a lot of the social problems, and we tend to blame just one thing for them. (TV, celebrities, parents, school, government... whatever.) I want to say that, ultimately, we have ourselves to blame; but I believe many factors influence our decisions as well.

 

Your thoughts?

[~O~]

I once saw a show by Dr. Phil. He was talking with a group of people who were overweight. Many of them said that they were genetically predisposed towards obesity. Dr. Phil's comment?

~O~

"Tough."

~O~

His point was that while there were factors outside of our control that made aspects of our lives harder than some other people's. So? Life isn't fair. Just because we have a fatal flaw doesn't mean we have to give in to it. Isn't one of the great definitions of a hero someone who overcomes their internal challenges on their way to overcoming external challenges?

~O~

So just because people are predisposed towards obsession doesn't mean that they must go quietly into the dark night. They can fight if they so wish, even if their fight will be difficult. That's why I mentioned my one-drink-rule with alcohol.

~O~

Besides, as a die-hard dice-chucker... I have to ask; is an obsession with roleplaying games a weakness or a strength?

[The Portrait of Zool]

...is an obsession with roleplaying games a weakness or a strength?

That depends. Anything can be done to excess. Otherwise, I would call it a productive outlet with benefits that will often bleed into other ares, such as creating new friendships, developing concentration and intellectual accuity, as well as just making life more interesting, thus inspiring someone to be more active all around.

 

On the other hand, anything can be done to excess, which is a different kind of inspiration...

[Peredhil]

Peredhil walks in and leans on Zoolio's portrait, nodding as the painted figure speaks.

 

I agree. I also agree with out Winged Globe friend, that predisposition is not destiny.

 

Good thing that we at the Pen know our limits on Role Playing.

 

Hugging everyone, he saunters back out.

[Jareena Faye]

You all rock... you are all geniuses... YESH!!

 

I particularly agree with ~O~ about how we don't need to give into predispositions. I mean, to an extent, don't we all have those? There's a dark part of me that has always known how to lie, steal, and talk back to my parents, and there will always be a part of me that will want to do such things. I can let it grow without boundaries, and become a snotty teeanged monster. Or I can feed my nature with living water and strive in the opposite direction.

 

Anyway....

 

Does anyone mind if I quote them in my paper revision? Pending Quincunx's comment, I'm going to flesh out the pro-RPG side of the paper, since he still thought it sounded rather anti.