Zak

Questions have been posed to Zak in the past about weather or not is is appropriate to support (or buy from) people who do bad things or have bad beliefs (racism was the example given.) He effectively said no. That doesn't seem much of a stretch, especially today where wearing blackface decades ago is enough to get you fired today (doing a perceived bad thing = losing support). So, I have seen enough to make me not want to buy or publicly praise Zak Sabbath products. To be fair, someone who publicly claims to be an anarchist-satanist, who praises the work of Marx is also probably on my no-buy list. So now will I be tared a right-wing extremist? I digress.

The question that comes up now: is the fact that I have been inspired by Zak's ideas regarding gaming also a bad thing? Am I a worse person because I thought some of his very specific thoughts were good? No. In fact I dare say that I Could continue to be inspired by his game creativity. Vladimir Lenin, Benito Mussolini, Joseph Stalin, Kim Jong-il, Adolf Hitler all very much loved dogs. I love dogs. Therefore it is possible and probable that I will agree with very specific thoughts of the very, very, very worst people. The worst part about this is that these worst peoples are also in position to do things like build dog sanctuaries... Which I might want to financially support.

Wouldn't it be nice if we could spot narcissists and sociopaths at first glance? Then we could put them away quickly, maybe even help them. As a past victim of the worst of these, I am tempted to say yes--end their influence before it begins. The problem with that is that giving up fundamental trust sucks. I don't want to question the good folks at the Burger King who might have spit on my food. Inquisitions are unenlightened.

A Theoretical Question

If you had the relationship that you have with the other players in your game, but didn't have the game, would it be enough? It might be easy to say, "Well, there would just be something else to take the place of the game." I suggest to you that that is not true. Gaming is that special. It is interesting to consider what those relationships would look like without the game.

My first long-term gaming group broke up after ten years of gaming, because all that there was, was the game. I did next to nothing with those people outside the game. Such was my interest in having a game, I used them. They used me. When their interests moved away from gaming, the relationships with me ended. I had never experienced anything so stark, but none of it was healthy. Understand, that it is better to seek the healthy.

Now, I ask more of my players and of myself. I engage with these people on other subjects of similar interests. I eat meals with them and their families. I go to non-game events with them. I have much, much more of a friendship with these people than I did with my first group. I emphatically state that having a solid, well-rounded relationship with your others players only makes for a better game. Seems obvious but when the game is all there is, it is not enough.

Follow-up question: is this the problem with computer games?