Showing posts with label Jesus. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jesus. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 29, 2011

Role-Playing Games: A RETROspective

(Originally posted as Role-Playing Games: One Christian's Perspective on Epinions)

Okay, this is a tough one; why RPGs are a "tough" subject is something I'll explore later. So, before I offer my "brief" opinion, let me provide some background:

From the mid-80s to the mid-90s, I was a HUGE RPG fan. It all began with Choose Your Own Adventure-type books, like Lone Wolf (by Joe Dever and Gary Chalk) and the Wizards and Warriors series. As I became interested in the fantasy milieu, I delved into the "dreaded" world of Dungeons & Dragons (D&D), starting with "first edition" Advanced D&D in the 80s and then second edition in 1993. I expanded into other worlds of gaming, such as various Palladium RPG series like Robotech, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turles, and Rifts. Because I often didn't have the time or enough friends that were interested in playing RPGs, I was more of a collector and reader of the rule books than a player, though I spent countless hours rolling up characters and designing game campaigns in my head. When I did get to play, I was often the Dungeon Master (DM) or Gamemaster (GM), telling the interactive story while relatively inexperienced players assume the roles of characters. One classic session of gaming featured my friends Ed and Tim, who were brothers, playing the roles of bungling assassins. Ed's weapon of choice was a trident because it did the most damage (one twelve-sided die's worth of damage) and his primary tactic was charging at non-player characters (NPCs) with it. Ed once kicked Tim's character in the butt for double-damage (which is done by rolling a 20 on a twenty-sided die), reducing Tim's assassin to one hit point. Ah, the heady times of RPGs...

During my college years, I largely left RPGs behind in favor of comic books and, later, collectible card games, so my books sat in boxes for years until I unearthed them last year in my parents' garage. I thumbed through those old tomes, remembering the good times: games with Ed, Tim, and Brian; the hours of rolling up characters; memories of the histories of characters that existed only in my imagination; the times I walked to Comic World, eagerly awaiting the purchase of any newly-released book. At the time, RPGs seemed like intelligent, but somewhat carefree fun with wizards, fighters, clerics, and thieves intermingling in fantasy worlds of adventure and combat; the rules could be dense, esoteric, and almost impenetrable to the novice enthusiast, but RPGs were simply rules for conducting interactive games unlike any board game.

However, having given my life to Jesus in 1999 in Japan, I now peruse those books as a Christian. As a believer, I cannot help but consider some of the themes that are present in many RPGs: violence, stealing, questionable character decisions, occult imagery, the (pretend) use of magic, and the general darkness of the motifs and settings in many RPGs. I also consider the broad array of critical articles and opinions leveled at RPGs, particularly D&D, by Christians: in the 80s, D&D was linked to the suicides of obsessive players; in the 90s, the criticisms were largely redirected at card games like Magic: The Gathering, but RPGs were still viewed with scorn as gateways to the occult, witchcraft, and devil worship. Even today, RPGs, which are mostly digitized and game console-based, are nonetheless associated with the same negative influences as the paper RPGs of twenty years ago.

Anyway, I'm kind of beating around the bush, so I'll go straight to my opinion, assuming that you, the reader, have at least been exposed to RPGs either as a player or as a reader of the criticisms against RPGs. In my opinion as a believer, playing a paper-based RPG can be a fun, social event with friends who want nothing more than to make characters, do a little play-acting, and take part in an adventure told by a storyteller. Granted, there would have to be the proviso that certain things would not be done, such as playing characters that commit atrociously criminal acts in the game, worshipping deities, and summoning demons or other hellish creatures. Also, the friends would have to agree that the game would start and end at times decided beforehand, and that future games would occur only at set times -- this prevents the potentially life-sucking temptation to play daily. More than that, one would have to look critically at any game and decide if the story and the characters are an affront to Christ, but what does that mean? That would be up to the individual, in prayer and contemplation, to determine. With all of these conditions in mind, an RPG can be a viable way to spend time with friends.

All of that said, I find it extremely difficult to reconcile RPG play with a Christian worldview because most of what makes RPGs "fun" is predicated on action and violence. Now, for me, I don't have a problem imagining a quest to rescue somebody and having to fight orcs, dragons, beholders, and the like; after all, Tolkien and C.S. Lewis, who were big influences on Gary Gygax and his creation of D&D in the 1970s, often depicted epic battles between the forces of good and evil in their Christian-influenced works. But, many campaigns often involve one-on-one violence between characters and NPCs; yes, even though the violence is highly imaginary, one must question if one's imaginary actions reflect what is in one's heart. Though Jesus spoke of adultery in Matthew 5:27-30, what He says is also applicable to violence; in other words, if violence is in your heart, it is just as bad as committing the act of violence. Of course, violence is a topic I have broached before, and it is a tricky one vis-a-vis games, especially pencil-and-paper games like D&D or NES 8-bit games like Contra, but the idea that your heart can be reflected in your gameplay cannot be dismissed.

Besides violence, there is still much to consider regarding the imagery of some, but not all, RPGs. Obviously, D&D and other fantasy-based games are steeped in wizardry and occult elements while games like Robotech (which is based on the animated series of the same name) are not -- this is undeniable. One may point out once again that Tolkien and Lewis also employed such elements allegorically, and that they were using spellcasting and witchcraft as plot elements, but are these concepts that anyone, let alone children, should allow in their minds and hearts? Some would say these things are merely in-game actions; if your conviction towards such things is this, then I cannot speak against that. Likewise, if you feel convicted about having any of that in any game or medium in your household, I cannot speak against that, either. The important thing is knowing one's own weaknesses and not exposing oneself to ideas that can take away from Christ.

I could go on and on about the positive and negative aspects of paper-based RPGs, but I will just present the basic ones. The positive aspects of paper-based RPGs are the use of imagination, the inherently social nature of gameplay, the creativity necessary to conduct the games, and the sheer fun of rolling cool-looking dice. Conversely, the negative aspects of paper-based RPGs are the imagery, the incorporation of violence, the encouragement of occult activity in the game, and the temptation to spend too much time in game play and game preparation. I do not believe that RPGs are inherently satanic or demonic, and I don't believe that RPGs are categorically amoral and mind-warping, but much of what is published for game use can be all of these things -- that is the danger of paper-based RPGs. If, somehow, one can elevate the positive aspects and minimize the negative aspects, one may can have a fun time with paper-based RPGs, yet this is more easily said than done.

To close, I must mention video game-based RPGs -- the kind you play on your computer or game console. Because these games are audiovisual and presented for the player, one is both dissociated from the action and engulfed by the action: dissociated insofar as the action is external to the player's mind and reduced to button presses and hand-eye coordination, yet engulfed in that one's senses of sight and sound are enraptured by the graphics and effects of the game. In this way, PC- and console-based RPGs are no "worse" than paper-based RPGs except that console RPGs are mostly non-social and somewhat isolating while paper-based games are not; and, console RPGs require little or no preparation to play, so one can play these games anytime, which enhances the addictive qualities of such games. Plus, one has to ask oneself: what is more powerful, the imagined appearance of a monster, or the appearance of a monster as visualized in a computer or console game? I'd choose the latter because the detail is too particular and too realistic.

Thursday, June 17, 2010

What Defines a (Iron) Man?

Yesterday, I pondered that which defines a man. I started off from the dangerous standpoint of what I cannot or do not do: I can't fix a car, plan a camping trip, program my own website, engage in martial-arts beatings, use a firearm, kill game with my bare hands, ride a mechanical bull, lasso a real-life bull, drink alcohol, or urinate for great distances. There were many guys at my old church that could do many of these things and they formed a nice group of men that could band together in the end times to form a viable commune and defend it with an acumen for survivalism and shotguns.

I then thought about what I could do: I can speak Japanese, teach linguistics or history or English, fix my computer, cook dinner, clean my house, iron my clothes, connect and configure electronic equipment, use an SLR camera, play most sports okay, run five miles, and write reviews, blog entries, and/or academic essays.

When I compared the lists, I became despondent because my skill set really does not correspond with what most men (even men in our churches) equate to masculinity. I began to ask myself: if the poop were to hit the proverbial oscillating fan, could I protect myself and my family? Could I stand up for myself? As the self-questioning questions flooded over me, I grew even more distraught.

But, this morning, I kept in mind the best answer I could muster -- that answer being to look at Jesus. He was indeed the Man -- self-sacrificial of his time and health, wise to always ask for His Father's help, courageous in the face of an inevitably painful crucifixion, and loving of humanity enough to reach out to both the masses (from the Mount, feeding the 5,000 with two fish and a loaf of bread) and the individual (Zacchaeus, Martha, Mary, and so on).

Thus, I was reminded that my yardstick of comparison should not be the guys at church, but the Man who is the head of the Church. Of course, I fall short of that yardstick as do us all, but I have to believe that I can do all these things in He who strengthens me. If I can strive to do those things, I could indeed protect my family and ensure my own safety with much more God-given strength than just being able to pummel any foe.

Then again, even David had a sling. :)