"AUSCHWITZ! THE GAME!- Or-- the morality of gaming" Topic
62 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please use the Complaint button (!) to report problems on the forums.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Historical Wargaming in General Message Board
Areas of InterestGeneral
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Ruleset
Featured Showcase ArticleNeed 16 square feet of gaming space, built to order?
Featured Profile Article Editor Katie surprises her grandmother on her 80th birthday.
Current Poll
Featured Book Review
|
Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
Pages: 1 2
(Phil Dutre) | 31 Mar 2012 3:31 a.m. PST |
This sort of discussion is not limited to wargaming. E.g. a while ago here in Belgium there was a show in which a famous chef prepared the favorite dish of famous historical figures. The usual cast of figures: famous politicians, athletes, musicians, etc. In one episode he prepared the famous dish of Hitler (whether it was really Hitler's favorite dish or not is beside the question). Of course, there was an uproar. Some people claimed this was putting Hitler at the same level of other celebrities, and therefore was trivializing the crimes of the Nazi regime. Others said 'It's just about the dish, nothing more than that'. Of course, it's never 'only a dish', just as it's never 'only a game', or it's never 'only a joke'. When importing real-world themes into gaming, you also import a lot of historical baggage. Some baggage is heavier than other, or has more sensitivities, or strikes rawer nerves. So, one should never act surprised when people or other gamers will get upset. |
Grizzlymc | 31 Mar 2012 8:03 a.m. PST |
Phil I would disagree, when I import a theme into a game, I may or may not choose to import baggage. If someone else imports baggage, that is his affair. If he doesn't like my game that is his damn business and he cqan choose not to play or close his eyes, or walk away. His baggage isn't mine and his outrage isn't mine. The only time that I can be held responsible for his baggage is when I have engineered it so that he cant escape – my example of holding a WWII night bombing game in a Dreseden old folks home is an example. I think it was featherstone who pointed out that our lead soldiers do not leave behind lead widows and orphans. We do not perpetrate atrocities, we do not perpetrate abominations. I would have a certain opinion of people whose games reflect atrocities, but it is not for me to expect that everything that other people do will be carried out so as not to offend my sensitivities; nor for me to worry too much about theirs. And yes it is only a game, it is only a dish, it is only a joke. I assume that Mr Hitler's favbourite recipe did not require masss slaughter to get it on the table. |
Martin Rapier | 31 Mar 2012 9:36 a.m. PST |
"However, I have to say that unless we are modelling for shock value (so for example WD wargaming First World War Trench Assaults, and the associated Butchers bill " Oh dear, I think that was one of mine. The intention was not to shock but to educate, both to debunk to a degree the 'lions led by donkeys' myth, but also about the appalling cost of any sort of frontal assault on deep entrenched positions, however good your tactics or tech are. I'm not sure these sorts of games are matter of 'morality', but they are one of taste, and individual gamers tastes will be different, so we are never going to agree on this one. |
(Phil Dutre) | 31 Mar 2012 10:55 a.m. PST |
@Grizzlymc Actually I agree with you
every wargamer should draw his own limits what he finds acceptable or not as a theme to put on the gaming table. The only thing I'm saying is that some themes are much more sensitive than others, and that people should not be surprised when others raise objections when confronted with a game with sensitive content. |
Grizzlymc | 31 Mar 2012 2:33 p.m. PST |
The sensitivity is in the others, not in the content. We may extend to them the privelige of our consideration (for example, I might leave my swastika armband at home in order to recruit more members, or, horrors, moderate my language) but that is not their right or our obligation. Surprised never; outraged yes! |
Cuchulainn | 31 Mar 2012 7:20 p.m. PST |
I don't understand why wargamers frequently throw this question, or something very similar, on TMP every year or so. If you really are torn between wargaming an event or using a particular army, why not just ask yourself if what the army will be doing on the table would be against the Geneva Convention in real life? So the SS fighting in France in 1940 would be OK, but driving British prisoners into a barn, throwing in grenades and then gunning down any survivors would be a no. The same would go for playing a game about the Holocaust. Even if someone thought it might be "fun" to base a game on how many Jews you could murder in gas chambers before the game was over, if it's against the rules of war, then it's dodgy. Personally, I think me and all the members of the wargames club I belong to, have been educated enough to know what's acceptable and what's a no-no without too much of a dilema. |
Grizzlymc | 01 Apr 2012 8:54 a.m. PST |
In a sense your initial question is answered by the remainder of your post. You define a standard for what is acceptable and what is not, without qualifying it by saying that this iis your personal (our your group's) standard. This carries the implication that there is some fundamental standard which people must observe. This is plain hooey. If some rivet counter wants to model the SS and their opponents as leess likely to surrender bacause of atrocities, I would probably go with the flow, otherwise, I have no problem with playing them as Heer with better elan, more or less training, and perhaps better kit. If someone wishes to model them burning prisoners alive, or puts on a game of einsatz truppen, I will no doubt observe that it takes all types to make a world and avoid the game and people involved like the plague. BUT THAT DOES NOT GIVE ME THE RIGHT TO TELL THEM WHAT THEY SHOULD AND SHOULD NOT PLAY. By the way, if we all applied the geneva convention test to our armies, there would be a massive flood of cheap toys on ebay. Obviously, if a club wishes to restrict the activities of its members, that is up to the members. |
Cuchulainn | 01 Apr 2012 3:29 p.m. PST |
I wasn't saying that we all should adopt the Geneva Convention test to our wargames. All I meant was that if a player is having trouble deciding if a game is morally acceptable, then it would help to apply the Geneva Convention. Our club dosen't actually restrict it's membership to certain activities, I just don't see any of us wanting to wargame the Holocaust or similar. As for the toys being for sale on Ebay, why would that be? As I said, I have no problems wargaming with any army no matter what it's history in real life, indeed you and I have exactly the same opinion of the SS. I also agree that I wouldn't dream of trying to dictate what other people should do in their games. As I said, my Geneva Convention test was merely for those who seem unable to decide if they should or shouldn't wargame an incident or event. |
OSchmidt | 02 Apr 2012 4:37 a.m. PST |
To Basileus Note that I did not say at all what you highlighted in your post. Those were all part of a caveat that if you take the line of the other respondent that the little yellow markers WERE human beings then all of these things held true. You will not that I said that these markers merely represent human beings, and were not in fact real human beings and hence the moral obloquy you refer to does not attach. You conveniently left out the "if" which of course changes the whole theme of the post to saying the opposite of what I said, which I suspect, was your point. You should read more carefully. |
Grizzlymc | 02 Apr 2012 3:19 p.m. PST |
I would tend to be less tolerant than Cuchulainn, if people can't decide whether they are offended or not, maybe they should just stop the onanism. |
Crown and Empire | 03 Apr 2012 3:29 a.m. PST |
Apply the Geneva Convention test to ww2, well thats no fun, as in europe the main protagonist hadn't signed it, so no European or Desert WW2 from now on. |
Mike Tanner | 26 Jul 2018 7:55 a.m. PST |
The Jews staged a revolt at Krema IV, Auschwitz, in September 1944. This would probably make an interesting skirmish game for those who are not slaves to political correctness. |
Pages: 1 2
|