Tone Shifts (was Re: Faeries)

[Ian Young]

Joe Iglesias responds to my comments on the tone of magick and aborted
fetuses...

> > Personally, I think this suggestion goes hand in hand with the notion
that
> > all UA magick has to be predicated on human perversity and depravity --
a
> > notion that was mercifully squelched early on.  
> 
> I respectfully disagree.  The occult underground is not a pretty place.
> That doesn't make it an evil or perverted place, but it does have nasty
> stuff that shouldn't be glossed over or seen as somehow "beneath" PCs.  A
> central theme of the game is whether characters rise above their
surroundings 
> and try to make them better, or succumb to their baser nature.  I think
it
> does the game a disservice *not* to have gruesomeness alongside the
good--
			[liberal snippage]
> I'm a little bemused by your squeamishness as well (well, ok, the fetuses
> are squicky, but I'm making a point here). UA is not a pretty game. It
> isn't Kult, but it does live on the darker side of the street.  I mean,
> you have read the book, right? 

With equal respect, I must state that this isn't an issue of glossing an
issue over, or squeamishness, or being politically correct.  The issue is
whether or not UA is intended to be vile and tasteless.  I firmly believe
not.

If it truly is a disservice to ignore the vile and the tasteless in the
game, then why do we merely have Dipsomancy instead of heroin-based magick?
 Why do we have Pornomancy instead of rape/torture-based magick?  Why was
serial murder- and ritual slaughter-based magick left out of the rules?

UNKNOWN ARMIES isn't a sugar-coated game, and I'm not suggesting that it be
given a glazing.  I feel it takes a refreshingly gritty look at the world
of the modern occult, without crossing that tenuous line of gratuity.  It
all comes down to an issue of knowing when something is just plain not
worth saying or writing.  It's what I refer to as "The Thumper Principle"
-- if you don't got nothin' good to say, don't say nothin' at all."  Making
game-based institutions out of topics like rape, torture and abortion do
strike me as beneath the tone of the game.

Granted, my reaction to your hailing the aborted fetus issue as
"Brilliantly vile" was a rather emotional one, but it wasn't because I was
too squeamish to imagine or address the matter.  In fact, when I was
considering the possibility of incorporating the souls of dead infants into
the game, the possibility of using aborted souls immediately occurred to
me.  And I thought about it.  And I thought, no.  I quickly discarded the
idea as crass and heavy-handed, not to mention not particularly
imaginative.  It was an obvious and ugly idea, not brilliant.  Was it vile?
 Certainly, but that's hardly a merit to crow about.

I don't intend to make my UA game pretty.  It may have it's lovely and
tender moments, but these will be balanced -- probably over-balanced -- by
a form of gritty realism that I still won't let sink into being crass and
vile merely for shock value.  Yes, it's very much a matter of taste, but I
think it's one that is borne out by the tone of the book.  To turn one of
your questions back to you, you did read the book didn't you?

Respecfully,
Ian