Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

As someone who is very religious, and does in fact, to use mattyrm's words "going to pick up a dusty old book of ridiculous fantasy stories involving magic and demons and stuff and actually think it is real and let it affect their real lives in any tangible way......."

I must confess I don't understand some of the more insane wacko levels of Christianity (as someone who keeps the Levitical holy days and attends church on the sabbath, I'm throwing stones in glass houses here). Yes, D&D, 40K, LOTR and many other mythos' portray daemons and witches and heretcal elements, but the one thing that no one seems to grasp is that in nearly every case they're portrayed as the VILLAINS of the piece.

The bible belt isn't very dense down here in NZ, so the only Christian guy I know is one who happily plays Tyranids.

Frazzled wrote:Its funny. I've never had this as an issue, never even heard about it as an issue in real life, only on the intranets. learn something every day.

IME it was MUCH more common in the 80s, prior to mass use of the internet. I heard about it regularly back then, in gaming magazines and from fellow gamers that I met. I had a couple of relatives and one babysitter express religiously-motivated ignorant junk about D&D. Mostly I just kept quiet about it around them. It’s much rarer nowadays, as far as I can tell.

When I was in a club we shared our premises (a community centre) with an evangelical group called The Church of God.

There was never any friction except that they had booked the hall solid for every weekend of the year, which stopped us from playing big naval games except on Bank Holidays.

Church of God, eh? Yeah, they're real evangelical-types. How much of a pain in the ass they are depends entirely on the pastor - our local branch runs a food pantry for the poor and are generally decent folks.

Pika_power wrote:The bible belt isn't very dense down here in NZ, so the only Christian guy I know is one who happily plays Tyranids.

Excellent, those hyper-evolving alien life forms are far more suitable than daemons...

Well once a man came in and looked at the various armies. I think he saw my CSM or the Daemon players army. So he says "You should leave your faith in god" We ignore him and after I mention "Daemonic Possession ignores that rule" The man then said "By the holy saviour your soul is damned!"


Fed up with him I unhooked my ipod and played Disciple by Slayer and screamed in a deathgrowl.

Needless to say we haven't seen him since.

WvLopp wrote: She was unsure of my hobbies but after watching us play she has no problems with it. She now plays but refuses to use spell casters.

This... This is what I don't get about christian gamers. The above statement is completely contradictory, taken from the context it was given in. It's obvious that she DOES have problems with the game, as her refusal, as stated by the context of your post, is based in her personal beliefs, not just some personal playstyle choice. It's like christian M:tG players refusing to play a deck with black or red cards in it.

If you're going to play a game, play the game. Don't sit there and try to say that you don't have an issue with the game when it's exceedingly clear, by your own list building and justification, that you do. These things are plastic, resin, and metal, and are still not as graphic or offensive as, in the case of christians, specifically, one of the most inhumane implments of torture and execution ever created, and the depicion of someone being subjected to it's ministrations in a manner far MORE sadistic than the usual ropes. You will find at least one of these totems in their building of worship, usually hanging in a prominant location. The game is just that, a game. Someone making a daemon rending someone in two, with the depiction of all the vicera and violence that would come with such an act is merely depicting a piece of fiction in an illustrative format. The cross was widely used for several centuries as a means of execution, via asphyxiation, and thus, whether or not the protagonist of their holy book lived and walked, there have been tens of thousands of people killed in such a matter, making it a reenactment for the sake of scaring one into submission.

But I've gone off on a tangent, allow me to bring myself back to the topic at hand.

If you're going to play a game, with the understanding that it is just that, a game, a pile of plastic or paper used to simulate some kind of struggle or competition, then why should it matter what the alignment of the stat box for one of these pieces of resin, metal or plastic is? That's like saying that black spells in Magic are inherantly evil, or that rolling those spell dice are going to cause a giant fireball to fall from the sky and hit the table. It's an abstraction of a free-flowing work of fiction, not some pagan ritual designed to call up the spirits of Evil Lincoln and Belhwalistalimoogawrox, The Eater Of Cheetos and Eternity, so why try to make a point by not taking a unit choice out of fear that it's not what your diety of choice wants you to play?

Commissar Molotov wrote:Church of God, eh? Yeah, they're real evangelical-types.

Not all of us!

Dronze, I think it's more a factor of "comfort level". I don't think people are trying to "make a point" by not using spell casters. Spell casters can be loosely parrelled with witchcraft. And the person in question may have an issue with identifying themselves with witchcraft, even in a make believe environment such as D&D. I don't personally have that issue, but I wouldn't judge someone if they did.

I love the models that GW makes for Chaos demons, but I don't think I would be comfortable playing an army made up entirely of little representations of the demonic. Yes I know they are little plastic toys, but I would rather play with the little plastic toys that sends them back to the warp.

Also, think about explaining to your pastor(if you had one). Oh yeah this is my demonic Bloodthirster of Korne, and that little guy with pus and gore over there is my Great Unlean Demon of nurgle. Not really a great conversation starter for someone that isn't in on the game.


GG

There are close-minded religious people and there are closed-minded non-religious people. This thread is about closed-minded religious people thinking fantasy and games corrupt people and so disparage all fantasy and games. What bothers me is there are some close-minded non-religious people in this thread who disparage all religious people based on these experiences/stories.

I've been on the receiving end of both these categories.

One time while playing Warhammer Quest in my FLGS a woman asked if this was the game that made people kill themselves. Years later while working in the same FLGS after 9-11 a regular spoke positively about Muslim extremists killing Christians because he hated Christians.

generalgrog wrote:Dronze, I think it's more a factor of "comfort level".

If one is uncomfortable with the thematic elements of a game, then why are the playing it? If you play a game of 40k, and you never use psykers on the basis of it's occult standpoint as opposed to just not playing psykers because you don't have a legitimate use for them in your list, you're making the point that you think that whatever is happening on the table has some analog to real life. It's a game mechanic, nothing more. This being said, I can only come to a single conclusion of that point:

People who make that degree of justification are only incapable of suspension of disbelief abecause they are incapable of actual disbelief. Witchcraft is only deemed as dangerous by those who actually believe that it works, not by those who don't.

I don't think people are trying to "make a point" by not using spell casters. Spell casters can be loosely parrelled with witchcraft. And the person in question may have an issue with identifying themselves with witchcraft, even in a make believe environment such as D&D.

Wow... this one is easy... They ARE trying to make a point. The argument that you followed your statement actually helps my case, as it almost, word for word, less typos and punctuation errors, shows the point they're trying to make.

They are trying to separate themselves from the parts of the game that they seem to have an issue with in real life. It would seem that the subject in question has no issue with genocide, xenophobia, or war in general, as long as the occult isn't involved in it. Witchcraft and the occult seems to be rather obscure thematic elements to have an issue with within a game.

I don't personally have that issue, but I wouldn't judge someone if they did.

Glad you don't, but I, personally, will label them hypocrites and/or ethical monsters on that basis, as that's what they are. If I saw someone refusing to play Chaos Daemons on the basis of religion, then going to pick up a box of IG or SMs, I'd be forced to facepalm until they collapsed into oblivion. Then again, well, my views on religion and the individual aren't the topic of conversation here, so I'll just make the point of stating the obvious: Most Tabletop Miniatures Games are set up in such a fashion that the ethical, or even the moral aspect of the fight at hand is removed from the field. It is a fight for a fight's sake, nothing more, nothing less. There are no "Heros" or "Villains" here, only soldiers.

I love the models that GW makes for Chaos demons, but I don't think I would be comfortable playing an army made up entirely of little representations of the demonic. Yes I know they are little plastic toys, but I would rather play with the little plastic toys that sends them back to the warp.

You mean the ones that have no issue with a conscious decision to commit genocide, according to their fluff? Good to know where your moral compass
is aligned.

Also, think about explaining to your pastor(if you had one). Oh yeah this is my demonic Bloodthirster of Korne, and that little guy with pus and gore over there is my Great Unlean Demon of nurgle. Not really a great conversation starter for someone that isn't in on the game.

I dunno, I guess it depends on if the person can see the quality of sculpture, rather than just seeing an ill omen bringing damnation and misery on the heads of the congregation. Besides, if someone is in your home, and you've got your armies promenantly displayed, is that not considered to be committing the sin of pride, at best, or the sin of idolatry at worst?

They're game mechanics, and if people can't seem to understand that, then I'm going to be forced to carry out the rolling of 10,000 dice, so that I may summon Belhwalistalimoogawrox, who will open his great maw, and come streaming from the quiet commercial park that they keep the internet saved to, into your home in order to eat all of your Cheetos and eternity.

Glad you don't, but I, personally, will label them hypocrites and/or ethical monsters on that basis, as that's what they are. If I saw someone refusing to play Chaos Daemons on the basis of religion, then going to pick up a box of IG or SMs,

Really, they are monsters because they don't want to play magic users? I always thought magic users were [rhymes with wussies] myself.

Dude thats like about a 9 on the tension scale. You might try meditation or some light exercise to mellow the out a little bit. And if Frazzled is saying you need to mellow out, it means you're about 30 minutes out from a major coronary.

hahahahhahahhahhahaha

Seriously... I might have to haunt OT more...

Frazzled wrote:

Glad you don't, but I, personally, will label them hypocrites and/or ethical monsters on that basis, as that's what they are. If I saw someone refusing to play Chaos Daemons on the basis of religion, then going to pick up a box of IG or SMs,

Really, they are monsters because they don't want to play magic users? I always thought magic users were [rhymes with wussies] myself.

Dude thats like about a 9 on the tension scale. You might try meditation or some light exercise to mellow the out a little bit. And if Frazzled is saying you need to mellow out, it means you're about 30 minutes out from a major coronary.

Allow me to open out that argument a touch...

Given Point #1: The subject in question plays a GW Tabletop Wargame
Given Point #2: Common Thematic elements of this wargame include Witchcraft
Given Point #3: The subject is uncomfortable with the idea of witchcraft on a religious basis.
Given point #4: On the basis of assumption #3, the subject will not play with a unit that uses magic.
Given Point #5: The poster I was responding to plays either WHF or WH40K, the inspiration for this hypothetical player being his wife.

Based on these 5 logical and, AFAIK, true, statements, I can make the following inferrences:

#1 Based on Given Points #1, #2 ,#3 and #5, the subject is aware of the thematic elements of the game, which include not only witchcraft, but wholesale genocide (a full third of the games one can play, based on the rulebook), religious persecution, and xenophobia, themes found throughout the source materials and side material for the game.

#2 Based on Given Points #1, #2, #3 and #4, because the user is uncomfortable with one thematic element, but will still play a list that is lacking said element, that suggests complacency with genocide, religious persecution, and xenophobia.

#3 Based on Given Points #1 and #3 and Inferrance #2, the subject does not have enough of an issue with the game to not play, as well as the opinion of the poster I was responding to (preferring to play the "good guys"), this suggests that, as long as the victimized doesn't agree with me (assumed under the basis that there are actually "Good guys" and "Bad guys"), it's alright to persecute and kill them in the game.

#4 Based on Given point #3, we can infer that the subject links, on some degree, the tabletop and real life.

#5 Based on Given point #3 and inferrances #3 and #4 that they are complacent in genocide and religious persecution.


I think my opinion on the matter was well spoken, and well thought out, based on the available logical inputs.

Edited for the sake of emphasis of my own point.

All I can say is Thank God there isn't any sex in 40K or we would be in a real mess.

Yeah it's obvious that some people don't know how to have a rational discussion without resorting to insults. But hey it's the internet.


GG

generalgrog wrote:Yeah it's obvious that some people don't know how to have a rational discussion without resorting to insults. But hey it's the internet.


GG

Who might you be referring to GG?

Dronze wrote:
I think my opinion on the matter was well spoken, and well thought out, based on the available logical inputs.

It was.

generalgrog wrote:Yeah it's obvious that some people don't know how to have a rational discussion without resorting to insults. But hey it's the internet.

At some point discussion has to become descriptive, and that will inevitably lead to someone feeling insulted. Its important to distinguish between someone who intends to insult, and someone who merely says something which others find insulting.

Dronze wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Glad you don't, but I, personally, will label them hypocrites and/or ethical monsters on that basis, as that's what they are. If I saw someone refusing to play Chaos Daemons on the basis of religion, then going to pick up a box of IG or SMs,

Really, they are monsters because they don't want to play magic users? I always thought magic users were [rhymes with wussies] myself.

Dude thats like about a 9 on the tension scale. You might try meditation or some light exercise to mellow the out a little bit. And if Frazzled is saying you need to mellow out, it means you're about 30 minutes out from a major coronary.

Allow me to open out that argument a touch...

Given Point #1: The subject in question plays a GW Tabletop Wargame
Given Point #2: Common Thematic elements of this wargame include Witchcraft
Given Point #3: The subject is uncomfortable with the idea of witchcraft on a religious basis.
Given point #4: On the basis of assumption #3, the subject will not play with a unit that uses magic.
Given Point #5: The poster I was responding to plays either WHF or WH40K, the inspiration for this hypothetical player being his wife.

Based on these 4 logical and, AFAIK, true, statements, I can make the following inferrences:

#1 Based on Given Points #1, #2 ,#3 and #5, the subject is aware of the thematic elements of the game, which include not only witchcraft, but wholesale genocide (a full third of the games one can play, based on the rulebook), religious persecution, and xenophobia, themes found throughout the source materials and side material for the game.

#2 Based on Given Points #1, #2, #3 and #4, because the user is uncomfortable with one thematic element, but will still play a list that is lacking said element, that suggests complacency with genocide, religious persecution, and xenophobia.

#3 Based on Given Points #1 and #3 and Inferrance #2, the subject does not have enough of an issue with the game to not play, as well as the opinion of the poster I was responding to (preferring to play the "good guys"), this suggests that, as long as the victimized doesn't agree with me (assumed under the basis that there are actually "Good guys" and "Bad guys"), it's alright to persecute and kill them in the game.

#4 Based on Given point #3, we can infer that the subject links, on some degree, the tabletop and real life.

#5 Based on Given point #3 and inferrances #3 and #4 that they are complacent in genocide and religious persecution.


I think my opinion on the matter was well spoken, and well thought out, based on the available logical inputs.

Edited for the sake of emphasis of my own point.

Too many numbers! I can only add that high if it involved fee income! Thats ok, the Masked Avenger will protect us.

Dronze wrote:#2 Based on Given Points #1, #2, #3 and #4, because the user is uncomfortable with one thematic element, but will still play a list that is lacking said element, that suggests complacency with genocide, religious persecution, and xenophobia.

I disagree with your assertion that they are complacent with genocide, religious persecution, and xenophobia. By your reasoning, if someone played Warhammer and included Fimir in their army you would infer that they are complacent with rape. If they played a Khorne army they'd be complacent with murder and hate. Just because the person has a hang-up where they don't feel comfortable personally "role-playing" a certain element of a game doesn't mean they approve of every other element that could be disagreeable to some or all.

This thread has, like all threads on religion, devolved into stupidity. I mean, how can someone seriously claim that because one does play this game it is considered tacit approval to genocide, murder, etc., and in the same breath call them "ethical monsters" for ignoring the witchcraft or demonic element. Seriously dude, grow up and go paint some minis. Let people enjoy the hobby the way they see fit and shut up.

As the risk of coming close to Godwin's Law...

While I personally might think that being uncomfortable running a daemon army seems a bit silly, I can understand it more when I picture myself running an SS-based army in a WWII game. I personally wouldn't be interested in running a true Nazi force (though a regular wehrmacht might be cool), and I might be concerned about what people thought I was identifying with did I indeed field an army with swastika iconography.

When I think about that example, I can wrap my head around the idea of not wanting to field daemons.

lol

dogma wrote:At some point discussion has to become descriptive, and that will inevitably lead to someone feeling insulted. Its important to distinguish between someone who intends to insult, and someone who merely says something which others find insulting.

dogma I really don't get you. I don't understand how you can't understand that calling someone a hypocrite/ethical monster is insulting. It has nothing to do with someone "feeling" insulted. Unless you think calling someone a hypocrite/ethical monster is a compliment?

I really think you take positions sometimes, just for the fun of it, not because you really believe it.

GG

eldarbgamer13 wrote:lol

Dude, love your avatar! I do that with my cat all the time. The Schmisser Meow-chine gun. "Take that Mrs. Khornholio! Meow!Meow!Meow!Meow!Meow!Meow!Meow!Meow! Click. Click. Out of ammo."

Kilkrazy wrote:All I can say is Thank God there isn't any sex in 40K or we would be in a real mess.

Oh yes, thank Gork we only have to deal with 8-titted rape-worms. Wait, what?

Years ago Wizards of the Coast stopped printing any MTG cards being or referring to demons, devils and such because of complaints/pressure from certain religious groups, which lasted for quite some time (I am not sure exactly how long).

Nowadays they are back though.

I think the key to remember is that religion (and speaking about christianity in particular) is a spectrum. You have crazy people, and you have normal people.

Whatever faith system you approach life with, there are certainly
A) people who embarass you
B) think your game is stupid/offensive.

Christianity and other religions are no different. In the same way that some people will always look down on our hobby because "they're not nerds" there are Christians who will look down on it for "relation to witchcraft."

generalgrog wrote:
dogma I really don't get you. I don't understand how you can't understand that calling someone a hypocrite/ethical monster is insulting. It has nothing to do with someone "feeling" insulted.

Of course it does. If someone acknowledged that they were, in fact, an ethical monster (that phrase seems contradictory) and felt no indignity at the recognition, then there would be no insult; simply accurate description. Unless the intent of the speaker was to insult, in which case there might be room for that classification. Of course, most people aren't ethical monsters, and most ethical monsters probably don't want attention drawn to that status, so in most instances such a comment will be an insult. Most, but not all; meaning that the comment itself is not intrinsically insulting.

generalgrog wrote:
Unless you think calling someone a hypocrite/ethical monster is a compliment?

No, I believe they're descriptive statements. If applied in instances in which they are not applicable, they are insults, if applied in instances in which they are applicable, they aren't insults. They could be considered compliments by an individual, or society, which valued hypocrisy and immoral behavior.