Confession: D&D

[mellowcalico]

Cool… I found out the place my fellow nerds hang out!

I played D&D for a while myself. The only arguments I ever heard about it being evil or against God came in the form of this little pamphlet (think it was called a “Chick’ Pamphlet”. They also had one that told me that being Catholic was evil and against God and the Pope served evil powers–so I figured how right can it be.

It’s hard to get a D&D group together anymore–everyone is so busy. I miss the game. We’d usually spend about 30 minutes “actually” playing and another 2 hours talking, goofing around, being social–lol.

I play LOTRO (Lord of the Rings Online) now. It’s a fun game and a nice way to pass the evening (beats TV).

 

[StTommyMore]

“Allah” is a TITLE ascribed to God, much as “God” (Hebrew: “El”) is. God’s name is, when transliterated into English YHWH. It is the name itself that has power, even if we are ignorant of its connections. There is a great deal of power in names. We are not to give our gurdian angels a name, because the act of naming implies power over the named thing. Our close friends use our names in a different manner than our casual acquaintances. I would not think of calling any of my professors by their first name without explicit permission. TO deny the significance of names is to really miss the boat.

 

[StTommyMore]

Cool… I found out the place my fellow nerds hang out!

I played D&D for a while myself. The only arguments I ever heard about it being evil or against God came in the form of this little pamphlet (think it was called a “Chick’ Pamphlet”. They also had one that told me that being Catholic was evil and against God and the Pope served evil powers–so I figured how right can it be.

It’s hard to get a D&D group together anymore–everyone is so busy. I miss the game. We’d usually spend about 30 minutes “actually” playing and another 2 hours talking, goofing around, being social–lol.

I play LOTRO (Lord of the Rings Online) now. It’s a fun game and a nice way to pass the evening (beats TV).

For what its worth, the tract you are referring to, entitled “Dark Dungeons” is completely bogus. But at the same time just because Jack Chick is wrong does not make all critics wrong.

 

[JHow]

Jharek: Thanks for the interesting post. I recently read Children of Hurin, but I never read Silmarillion (I started once, back in HS). I might have to pick it up again.

 

[Transformer]

But at the same time just because Jack Chick is wrong does not make all critics wrong.

No, but the fact that all claims that D&D has anything to do with the occult are literally based on the libel and blatant lies of a single woman makes all the critics wrong.

 

[Ne_OrangeKnight]

While there are no formal invocations, the game is littered with the names of actual demons and heathen gods.

To be fair, the same could be said of the Bible. In fact, Scripture does contain invocations to pagan gods. Surely, then, that alone can’t be the test.

Sam, the Neon Orange Knight

 

[StTommyMore]

No, but the fact that all claims that D&D has anything to do with the occult are literally based on the libel and blatant lies of a single woman makes all the critics wrong.

No, you are wrong. My critics have nothing to do with anything except my own experiences with the game and what I see as problems. You also have to remember that Michael Stackpole cannot be viewed as an impartial source. His job is PR for GAMA.

 

[StTommyMore]

To be fair, the same could be said of the Bible. In fact, Scripture does contain invocations to pagan gods. Surely, then, that alone can’t be the test.

Sam, the Neon Orange Knight

But you have to look at the context. Where is a pagan god shown in a favorable light in the Holy Scriptures?

 

[Transformer]

No, you are wrong. My critics have nothing to do with anything except my own experiences with the game and what I see as problems. You also have to remember that Michael Stackpole cannot be viewed as an impartial source. His job is PR for GAMA.

StTommyMore,

All high-profile criticism of D&D is traceable back to Pulling. If you’ve ever been influenced by anyone else’s criticisms of D&D, if you’ve ever employed anyone else’s arguments against the game, if your position on the game was influenced by anything other than just your experience of playing the game in complete isolation from what anyone else said about it, then your position is traceable back to Pulling. Also, the Pulling Report presents the facts about Pulling’s career. The facts speak for themselves just fine.

There is no evidence of a link between D&D and the occult. If there is any non-anecdotal evidence of a connection, I want to see the abstract of the journal article documenting it. A connection is unlikely because there is no real-world magic in D&D. Stat-blocks, polyhedral dice, nerdy math, hobbits, and fireball spells don’t have much to do with the occult.

The idea that D&D could lead impressionable people to worship pagan gods I find particularly hard to swallow. The gods in D&D are little more than silly and banal plot devices, vaguely inspired by ancient mythology. They haven’t been particularly well done in any edition of the game, and they certainly don’t read anything like real, legitimate objects of religious practice, pagan or otherwise. The thought of someone picking up the current player’s handbook, reading the entry on Vecna, and deciding to worship him as a real god is just unbelievable.

But really, the bottom line is this. D&D is a game. There is no evidence I’m aware of that D&D has anything to do with the occult or with leading people to worship pagan gods. If there is any real (so, non-anecdotal) evidence of that, I’ll need to see it before I reconsider my position.

 

[JHow]

…All high-profile criticism of D&D is traceable back to Pulling. If you’ve ever been influenced by anyone else’s criticisms of D&D, if you’ve ever employed anyone else’s arguments against the game, if your position on the game was influenced by anything other than just your experience of playing the game in complete isolation from what anyone else said about it, then your position is traceable back to Pulling. Also, the Pulling Report presents the facts about Pulling’s career. The facts speak for themselves just fine…

I don’t find Pulling’s criticism of D&D to be so orginal that no one else could have come to these opinions on their own. In fact, they seem fairly commonplace, similar to criticisms leveled at certain genres of music and literature.

 

[StTommyMore]

StTommyMore,

All high-profile criticism of D&D is traceable back to Pulling. If you’ve ever been influenced by anyone else’s criticisms of D&D, if you’ve ever employed anyone else’s arguments against the game, if your position on the game was influenced by anything other than just your experience of playing the game in complete isolation from what anyone else said about it, then your position is traceable back to Pulling. Also, the Pulling Report presents the facts about Pulling’s career. The facts speak for themselves just fine.

There is no evidence of a link between D&D and the occult. If there is any non-anecdotal evidence of a connection, I want to see the abstract of the journal article documenting it. A connection is unlikely because there is no real-world magic in D&D. Stat-blocks, polyhedral dice, nerdy math, hobbits, and fireball spells don’t have much to do with the occult.

The idea that D&D could lead impressionable people to worship pagan gods I find particularly hard to swallow. The gods in D&D are little more than silly and banal plot devices, vaguely inspired by ancient mythology. They haven’t been particularly well done in any edition of the game, and they certainly don’t read anything like real, legitimate objects of religious practice, pagan or otherwise. The thought of someone picking up the current player’s handbook, reading the entry on Vecna, and deciding to worship him as a real god is just unbelievable.

But really, the bottom line is this. D&D is a game. There is no evidence I’m aware of that D&D has anything to do with the occult or with leading people to worship pagan gods. If there is any real (so, non-anecdotal) evidence of that, I’ll need to see it before I reconsider my position.

My main objection is that it can desensitize people to occult influences. I have never maid the claim that the game is, in itself, sinful. I have pointed out issues that I find problematic. While D&D does not cause people to turn to paganism, it tends to dismiss heathen religion to have no basis in reality. I avoid the game personally because of its potential to open the door to demonic influence. All I have are anecdotal stories concerning my own experience which proves nothing other than in my own experience good did not arise from it. I just think it wise to avoid all things wherein Satan can take opportunity to take control of the aspects of one’s life. Of course a friend and I are looking for ways to “baptize” D&D to make it less problematic and still be able to enjoy fantasy gaming. Until then I will stick games with less of an emphasis on the supernatural.

 

[Havard]

I think I see what Tommy is getting at.

Wizards of the Coast, and TSR before them, employ the names of demonic entities from Scripture and from the Judeo-Christian tradition, and do so quite casually. Why is this a problem? Well, because in the company of kobolds, trolls, otyughs, and xorns, there is the danger of people to think of these actual, existing demons as similarly fictitious.

C.S. Lewis warned “There are two equal and opposite errors into which our race can fall about the devils. One is to disbelieve in their existence. The other is to believe, and to feel an excessive and unhealthy interest in them.”

Or, as Verbal put it, “The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn’t exist.”

 

[JHow]

I think I see what Tommy is getting at.

Wizards of the Coast, and TSR before them, employ the names of demonic entities from Scripture and from the Judeo-Christian tradition, and do so quite casually. Why is this a problem? Well, because in the company of kobolds, trolls, otyughs, and xorns, there is the danger of people to think of these actual, existing demons as similarly fictitious.

C.S. Lewis warned “There are two equal and opposite errors into which our race can fall about the devils. One is to disbelieve in their existence. The other is to believe, and to feel an excessive and unhealthy interest in them.”

Or, as Verbal put it, “The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn’t exist.”

This, I think, is a really good point: trivializing something we should take seriously.

Suppose D&D had also taken the other approach and included a “St. Francis” character, “monk, non-combatant, Level 3 miracle worker”. It would rightly desrve critcism on the same grounds, I think.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

“Allah” is a TITLE ascribed to God, much as “God” (Hebrew: “El”) is. God’s name is, when transliterated into English YHWH. It is the name itself that has power, even if we are ignorant of its connections. There is a great deal of power in names. We are not to give our gurdian angels a name, because the act of naming implies power over the named thing. Our close friends use our names in a different manner than our casual acquaintances. I would not think of calling any of my professors by their first name without explicit permission. TO deny the significance of names is to really miss the boat.

I can imagine quite a number of linguists who would actually find your notion laughable. Again, how do strings of sounds and symbols have any power outside that of what we have attached to them?

Answer: Zero.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

Wizards of the Coast, and TSR before them, employ the names of demonic entities from Scripture and from the Judeo-Christian tradition, and do so quite casually. Why is this a problem? Well, because in the company of kobolds, trolls, otyughs, and xorns, there is the danger of people to think of these actual, existing demons as similarly fictitious.

Well if you think of demons being horned archfiends capable of hurling hellfire, wreaking mass destruction, and could grow to the size of the Petronas towers then yes such a thing IS fictitious.

In all honesty his logic is no more paranoid than that of a person who would decry superhero comics for downplaying radiation. After all, it’s not a superpower catalyst and in fact you’re more likely to just end up deformed and sickly from exposure to it.

If anything, a person who feels inclined to practice the occult from playing DnD is nothing more than an example of someone who needs mental therapy. Lots of it. Distinguishing fantasy from reality is one of the primary signs of a sane human being after all.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

Pretty much. Besides, if real demons were like those in fantasy, then I can’t understand why they don’t just rise out of some infernal crack in the ground and start taking over. I mean, their worshipers would certainly have an edge over us and Christianity would might as well have been wiped out centuries ago.

 

[StTommyMore]

I can imagine quite a number of linguists who would actually find your notion laughable. Again, how do strings of sounds and symbols have any power outside that of what we have attached to them?

Answer: Zero.

And I know of theologians and priests who would agree with me. Since we are talking about a theological concept, I will side with the theologians

 

[StTommyMore]

Well if you think of demons being horned archfiends capable of hurling hellfire, wreaking mass destruction, and could grow to the size of the Petronas towers then yes such a thing IS fictitious.

In all honesty his logic is no more paranoid than that of a person who would decry superhero comics for downplaying radiation. After all, it’s not a superpower catalyst and in fact you’re more likely to just end up deformed and sickly from exposure to it.

If anything, a person who feels inclined to practice the occult from playing DnD is nothing more than an example of someone who needs mental therapy. Lots of it. Distinguishing fantasy from reality is one of the primary signs of a sane human being after all.

Your hubris in the face of supernatural powers I find staggering. Saying “its just pretend” does not wash. We must not take these things lightly. While it is true that demons do not take the form of a pit fiend or balor, they are just as dangerous to the soul. Demons are very real. Demonic possession is real. Fantasy games in particular convince us it is all “just pretend,” which is the real danger: denial of the supernatural.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

And I know of theologians and priests who would agree with me. Since we are talking about a theological concept, I will side with the theologians

Names, as far as their physical forms and their connection to their meanings are concerned, are within the realm of linguistics, not theology. You’re a cricket player in an American football game here.

If you’re so frightened by the names of pagan gods and demons, I’m surprised you haven’t proposed to reform the names on the calendar.

Your hubris in the face of supernatural powers I find staggering. Saying “its just pretend” does not wash. We must not take these things lightly. While it is true that demons do not take the form of a pit fiend or balor, they are just as dangerous to the soul. Demons are very real. Demonic possession is real. Fantasy games in particular convince us it is all “just pretend,” which is the real danger: denial of the supernatural.

Hubris? Is that what you call scientific reasoning? Demons in fantasy and demons in real life are two different things. The same applies to angels. Hence, the importance of knowing fantasy and reality. Then again, every person has that capability if it weren’t hampered by religious paranoids.

 

[Havard]

You’re absolutely right Jharek. Much more sinister. As flippant as The Screwtape Letters can seem, this particular passage definitely strikes me as closer to their potential than any other representation:

My dear Wormwood,

I wonder you should ask me whether it is essential to keep the patient in ignorance of your own existence. That question, at least for the present phase of the struggle, has been answered for us by the High Command. Our policy, for the moment, is to conceal ourselves.

Of course this has not always been so. We are really faced with a cruel dilemma. When the humans disbelieve in our existence we lose all the pleasing results of direct terrorism and we make no magicians.** On the other hand, when they believe in us, we cannot make them materialists and sceptics**. At least, not yet.

I have great hopes that we shall learn in due time how to emotionalise and mythologise their science to such an extent that what is, in effect, belief in us, (though not under that name) will creep in while the human mind remains closed to belief in the Enemy. The “Life Force”, the worship of sex, and some aspects of Psychoanalysis, may here prove useful. If once we can produce our perfect work—the Materialist Magician, the man, not using, but veritably worshipping, what he vaguely calls “Forces” while denying the existence of “spirits”—then the end of the war will be in sight.

But in the meantime we must obey our orders. I do not think you will have much difficulty in keeping the patient in the dark. The fact that “devils” are predominantly comic figures in the modern imagination will help you. If any faint suspicion of your existence begins to arise in his mind, suggest to him a picture of something in red tights, and persuade him that since he cannot believe in that (it is an old textbook method of confusing them) he therefore cannot believe in you.