thread: 2005-09-02 : Meg on Ritual
On 2005-09-06, Marco wrote:
Right. So when people say that a game is "not safe" then it is *not* the kind of game where "it [is] ok for people to be very 'real' in their gaming, handle messy internal personal issues and baggage, and come out with some insight."
See, people have been saying that Dogs is "not safe" and meaning it in a good way. I think that's a mistake—it's a mistake about what "not safe" really means in that context. The sparring example is bad too, IMO.
RPGs are *not* therapy—however, the lesson we can learn from therapy is that in order to get real one must be vulnerable. I don't have any inclination to get vulnerable with someone who *wants* to hurt me (and will feel good about having hurt me) even if the injury is minor.
I get my nose bloodied a lot (I train tactically). There are guys who I think really *do* want to hurt me—and feel good about themselves when they manage it. I don't like those guys or see anything redeeming about it.
I do not think confrontation and provocation is a good way to get people to have the kind of experience that pushes your buttons and is powerful and healthy. I think it's a way for people who enjoy pushing other people's buttons to engage in that arena just like the guy who, when we spar, decides he actually wants to leave me with a mark.
Psychodrama is powerful, strong, and no one gets abandoned. It has all the positive aspects (minus RPG-exploration and story) that people want here and there's no aspect of PvP at all. I think that realization alone should give some pause to the idea that sparring is a good metaphore to reaching those goals.
-Marco