|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 15, 2018 5:18:51 GMT
Topic: Ritual Sacrifice, in AD&D(1st Edition).
To start, see Appendix III of your DDG. Here it is clear that human sacrifice does occur in the game. As well, sacrifice of objects/gems/wealth, sometimes animals, as well.
See Dragon #52 for the game benefits of successful sacrifice.
Bassically, if it is successful, then your character gets a new spell.
Move on to a new form of Life.
Within the context of human history/anthropology, it is interesting to note the concept of sacrifice. With regards to human sacrifice, it is the Central American cultures that are most well-known for this.
Does human sacrifice affect one's alignment?
I would rule, Yes: in the direction of evil.
|
|
|
|
Post by Malcadon on Feb 15, 2018 12:09:29 GMT
With regards to human sacrifice, you should checkout Geoffrey McKinney's Supplement V: Carcosa. It has 96 spells, with most of it requires an elaborate ritual involving murder, rape and/or torture. The alignment in that game has no "moral bearings" nor opposition, instead is about those who want to awaken Great Cthulhu and drive the world into madness vs those who want to fight the unearthly monsters in a Ragnarök-styled conflict. As such, "Lawful Sorcerers" are limited to the fifteen Rituals of Banishment that are easy to cast, requires little or no suffering, and is used to hold back the unearthly forces that threaten the mortal realm. On the other hand, the more Faustian "Chaotic Sorcerers" can use the full range of spells. The horrid nature of sorcery in this game is in keeping with the works of H.P. Lovecraft and Robert E. Howard, and the general assumption that Sorcerers are creepy psychopaths like Ed Gein and Jeffrey Dahmer. (you can read it here) "Cleanup on isle Baphomet." |
|
|
|
Post by dragonspipe on Feb 27, 2018 1:23:06 GMT
In game terms of ALIGNMENT,
Human sacrifice is always EEEEVIL ,
but if the sacrifice is done by influence of a deceptive demon/god/entity, the practitioners might be LN (but not LG).
|
|
|
|
Post by Malcadon on Feb 27, 2018 7:38:06 GMT
Human sacrifice is always EEEEVIL
Unless we are talking about Tékumel or the Meso-American (Aztec, Mayan & Olmec) cultures that inspired it, as being a sacrifice is considered to be the most noble thing a mere mortal can do — What is the value of the life of an ephemeral human being if one can offer one's own heart to the gods for the sake of continued life on earth? To do otherwise, would bring doom the world, and that would be EEEEVIL! Hell, not even the Bible is free of this thinking! |
|
|
|
Post by dragonspipe on Feb 27, 2018 23:25:24 GMT
Human sacrifice is always EEEEVIL
Unless we are talking about Tékumel or the Meso-American (Aztec, Mayan & Olmec) cultures that inspired it, as being a sacrifice is considered to be the most noble thing a mere mortal can do — What is the value of the life of an ephemeral human being if one can offer one's own heart to the gods for the sake of continued life on earth? To do otherwise, would bring doom the world, and that would be EEEEVIL! Hell, not even the Bible is free of this thinking! Ah, but how would we know that? How would we know that ancient Meso-Americans were thrilled and honored to be sacrificed. We can't ask them. In their heart of hearts (about to be removed...), did they all drink the kool-aid that deeply? We know that their fascist state theocracy said it was the greatest thing a mortal can do. Of course they said that. It would have to be, when the Aztec brownshirts show up to take your son or daughter away to be killed. I bet they paid them off, as well. Many did not resist, they suited up, put on their nikes, and got ready to ride the comet. But it seems reasonable to assume there would have been a counterculture in such an oppressive system. Culture and mass brainwashing does not change the polarities of good and evil. It just happens that all of the ancient cultures were wrong about human sacrifice. Wrong about slavery, also, but that isn't even close to being vanquished in much of the modern world. Yes, the Bible has some dank, Hebrew shit in it.  |
|
|
|
Post by Malcadon on Mar 1, 2018 5:49:38 GMT
Ah, but how would we know that? How would we know that ancient Meso-Americans were thrilled and honored to be sacrificed. We can't ask them. In their heart of hearts (about to be removed...), did they all drink the kool-aid that deeply? Dude! They had writing. Like the Egyptians, they left a lot of reliefs showing how they lived, along with a hieroglyphic writing system. Their writing system was studied for decades by expert linguistics from across the globe, and is now translated. In their writing, this was seen as martyrdom, but not in the modern terms of "people outraged by the death of a pacifist who was shot while protesting the war", but as a means to achieve a greater good (and achieve a state of godhood). We may not agree that is was a good thing to do to people, but to them it was good, as what is "good" is highly subjective from culture-to-culture. The truth is, humanity always "drank the Kool-Aid". Even today, we still "drank the Kool-Aid" in one way or another. We get Kool-Aid form our parents... Our friends... Our schools... Our churches... Our community... Our work... Our media outlets... Our leaders... The internet... And how society shapes us in ways we don't think about to ever question it — things core to our backgrounds and believes. We are all effected by it and we don't know this, as our pallets ignore the tease of the Kool-Aid — it becomes like water. Although, one thing I do wholeheartedly agree with Prespos on, is that the best cure to the Kool-Aid is punk rock: You know that this is shit good for you when figures of authority wish to ban it outright (for the sake of the kids)!  |
|
|
|
Post by dragonspipe on Mar 8, 2018 23:13:40 GMT
Ah, but how would we know that? How would we know that ancient Meso-Americans were thrilled and honored to be sacrificed. We can't ask them. In their heart of hearts (about to be removed...), did they all drink the kool-aid that deeply? Dude! They had writing. Like the Egyptians, they left a lot of reliefs showing how they lived, along with a hieroglyphic writing system. Their writing system was studied for decades by expert linguistics from across the globe, and is now translated. In their writing, this was seen as martyrdom, but not in the modern terms of "people outraged by the death of a pacifist who was shot while protesting the war", but as a means to achieve a greater good (and achieve a state of godhood). We may not agree that is was a good thing to do to people, but to them it was good, as what is "good" is highly subjective from culture-to-culture. "And every day, before breakfast, the Priest would point to the stone writings, and make us say the stupid chant..." may have been a thought of an ancient person, and it is very likely that if they spoke it, the consequences would be dire. The thought that human sacrifice was retarded was as good a thought then (arguably better) as it is now. I am not disputing what the writings say, nor that cultures are different. But I am saying there are empirical facets of good and evil that are at the very least present in biology, and that transcend culture, and even species. It is expected then that a civilization of nation-states using human sacrifice would have to lead its people through some impressive psychological hoops to get them to accept an unnatural (evil) situation. Even so, did no Mayan mother of a sacrifice cry? The slave market in Libya today is not "good" regardless of what the slavers , or the local culture, make themselves believe. |
|
|
|
Post by Algolei on Apr 2, 2018 6:56:48 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Malcadon on Apr 2, 2018 14:02:38 GMT
First video: "Trigger warning! Major trigger warning! A goat gets beheaded in this video!" |
|
|
|
Post by Algolei on Apr 22, 2018 19:49:32 GMT
"Yeah, but they were all bad."
|
|
