It is indeed a difficult subject. If there were an oppressed minority who felt they were being terribly misrepresented or associated with evil by depictions of Hades then yes it would be an equivalent situation and we would need to consider that as well. I am not sure such a group actually exists though.
It is a tough call where to draw the line. There are some people who are fine with you describing the god they currently believe in within a fictional setting and even poking fun at it while others get very deeply offended. If people are raising the issue and feel like they are being associated with evil, or are deeply offended, then maybe it is something to reconsider. D&D isn't a southpark episode. It isn't about critiquing religion or pointing out the humor/absurdity/hypocrisy of anyone's beliefs. It is about collective storytelling and the story is not generally a critique of religion. I don't think anything is lost if we say 'soul jar' instead of phylactery. In fact I think it may well be easier for new players to understand. I wouldn't equate being more sensitive with what contend we adopt for D&D to general self censorship of speech as a whole. You can be sensitive in your D&D game while still laughing at southpark when they make fun of a particular religions beliefs/quirks/etc.
Of course if you want to play a game where you critique christian beliefs and that is a central theme then you wouldn't really be able to avoid offending some people and it becomes more about everyone at the table being ok with the story being told, and maybe some sensitivity when discussing the game with outsiders.
ETA. The best way to handle this might be just lines and veils at your table with respect to what your players in particular are ok with. But I would expect if there are a lot of people who are offended by a particular thing WOTC might well choose to drop a term or god or whatever from the game.
Oh I agree, for the most part. Offense is a tricky one, mainly because there is a difference between causing offence, and taking offence. Setting out to cause offence can be an issue, while taking offence often comes off as entitled.
BTW mate, I did say I was a pagan and witch, and mainly into the Chthonic underworld deities and the Titans. Triple dark god (Hades/Tarterus/Erebus) and Triple dark goddess (Persephone/Hecate/Nyx), while my occult system is mainly built around the Titans and Titanids. Even if I'm just a community of one (which I'm not), don't I count?
Mind you, for a much greater offence, look at how 'witches' have been mis-represented, and not just in popular media. Its been literally murder. I still wouldn't try to control others words.
Its a bit late for caffeine and chocolate covered confectionary right now. Though another shot of spiced rum might help.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
When faced with an issue, most people would rather be negative than find a solution.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It is indeed a difficult subject. If there were an oppressed minority who felt they were being terribly misrepresented or associated with evil by depictions of Hades then yes it would be an equivalent situation and we would need to consider that as well. I am not sure such a group actually exists though.
It is a tough call where to draw the line. There are some people who are fine with you describing the god they currently believe in within a fictional setting and even poking fun at it while others get very deeply offended. If people are raising the issue and feel like they are being associated with evil, or are deeply offended, then maybe it is something to reconsider. D&D isn't a southpark episode. It isn't about critiquing religion or pointing out the humor/absurdity/hypocrisy of anyone's beliefs. It is about collective storytelling and the story is not generally a critique of religion. I don't think anything is lost if we say 'soul jar' instead of phylactery. In fact I think it may well be easier for new players to understand. I wouldn't equate being more sensitive with what contend we adopt for D&D to general self censorship of speech as a whole. You can be sensitive in your D&D game while still laughing at southpark when they make fun of a particular religions beliefs/quirks/etc.
Of course if you want to play a game where you critique christian beliefs and that is a central theme then you wouldn't really be able to avoid offending some people and it becomes more about everyone at the table being ok with the story being told, and maybe some sensitivity when discussing the game with outsiders.
ETA. The best way to handle this might be just lines and veils at your table with respect to what your players in particular are ok with. But I would expect if there are a lot of people who are offended by a particular thing WOTC might well choose to drop a term or god or whatever from the game.
Oh I agree, for the most part. Offense is a tricky one, mainly because there is a difference between causing offence, and taking offence. Setting out to cause offence can be an issue, while taking offence often comes off as entitled.
BTW mate, I did say I was a pagan and witch, and mainly into the Chthonic underworld deities and the Titans. Triple dark god (Hades/Tarterus/Erebus) and Triple dark goddess (Persephone/Hecate/Nyx), while my occult system is mainly built around the Titans and Titanids. Even if I'm just a community of one (which I'm not), don't I count?
Mind you, for a much greater offence, look at how 'witches' have been mis-represented, and not just in popular media. Its been literally murder. I still wouldn't try to control others words.
Its a bit late for caffeine and chocolate covered confectionary right now. Though another shot of spiced rum might help.
When faced with an issue, most people would rather be negative than find a solution.