WWYCD 101:A question of faith

[hfergus]

Re: WWYCD 101:A question of faith

 

Volt would be against the sacrifice unless it could be proved that it was necessary. Lots of luck there. He would argue that the cultural imperitive would in essence negate free will, so that argument would not work on him. (He'd also cite Aztecs, etc., who belived this as evidence it is probably hooey.)

 

Olorin If hed had the time (4 hours) he'd find out if it were really necessary. If not, he'd stop it. If it were, and had the time (probably days to months) he'd try to find out why and any substitutes. Knowing him, if it weren't necessary and he could, he kidnap the sacrifice, create an illusion of it and come back in several months with the sacrifice alive proving it were not necessary. Otherwise, they'd find something bad and do it again without him to stop it.

 

Black Tiger Would stop it. Period.

 

Futurian May not do anything, think thme way too primitive to convince if they do this at all. May stop it anyway. Probably would stop it anyway.

[lemming]

Re: WWYCD 101:A question of faith

 

Most of my chars would want to stop it without looking into the "big" picture.

 

Scales would have to weigh in factors like how long would the team be able to stick around. He'd also have to figure out if it was truly necessary though if he's there with the usual team, they'd probably be able to figure it out.

 

The problem is, even if we figure out that the sacrifices aren't needed, we'd have to convince the rest of the population. Might be possible over a course of a year, but if we're just passing through, coming back later may have to happen.

[Trebuchet]

Re: WWYCD 101:A question of faith

 

Talk about a thread that got out of hand.

 

This is the problem with projecting you personal morality-ethics-bunched-up-garters onto a gaming scenario and then being judgemental about the reactions of hobbyists who do not share your weltenshuaang. I mean: what do you think will happen if the players don't share your philosophical-religious-experiential-whaterver point of view and then you tell them that their reaction was immoral? Do you actually think they'll kiss your soapbox and recant their dearly held experiences and beleifs? I mean, I've been called a gaming operations director, but does anyone actually by into the notion that a game is a suitable fora for evangelism of any sort, that its a testing ground for the personal morality of the people you game with, or that the person who framed the scenario is the Judge of the Universe?

 

Puh-leeeze.

 

Its a game man. Just a game.

The scenario asked "What Would Your Character Do?" and many people answered as such. That was how I approached it: My character isn't into deep philosophical debates and moral relativity; she does what she thinks is right by the terms of her own Christian faith* and personal ethics. Introspection is not her strong suit. She lacks psionic, scientific, or magic abilities to delve deeper into the problem. She's a martial artist; she solves problems by hitting things until they break.

 

 

* A faith I, her player, do not share; even if we'd have the same moral reaction to human sacrifice. Despite considering myself an agnostic, I'm still the product of my Catholic upbringing.

[Metaphysician]

Re: WWYCD 101:A question of faith

 

As an aside, no, most of my characters wouldn't go for the "burn them all, for they have brought ruin upon themselves" course. . . in this scenario.

 

That response is reserved for the *Omelas* variant of this concept.