![]() |
![]() |
![]()
Post
#1
|
|
Great Dragon ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 6,640 Joined: 6-June 04 Member No.: 6,383 ![]() |
So, the classic shtick when we're talking about RPGs including Shadowrun is how there's a primal and eternal conflict between the "storygamers" and the "munchkins" which may never be reconciled. Part of this paradigm includes the fundamental idea that "storygamers" spend all their time talking about their character backgrounds and writing 10 page backstories only they care about whereas "munchkins" all invariably role play the T800 and spend all their time writing 10 page long character sheets where nobody but themselves actually knows all the rules referenced by that character.
Clearly, we have a philosophical imperative to create an ultimate munchkin character AS A FLESHED OUT PC. Thus we can have munchkin in stats, munchkin in tediously fleshed out 10 page backstory, and thus make non-munchkins cry by kicking them in the philosophical jimmy. Today, no joke, I felt a little bit sick, so I went to a Borders bookstore, sat down with a cup of coffee, and I actually red Grossman's "On Killing" in its entirety in one sitting in a couple of hours. I realize that Grossman has been criticized for an un-scientific method of data collection but I'm not actually writing this post to critique or exonerate Grossman. The point was rather that a person could use Grossmanian ideas about psychology, calling briefly on Freudian concepts (which always make for good storytelling) and write up a character which psychologically would be the ultimate fictional killer. There are many better men here on Dumpshock who will always write a better statistical character than I. But just in terms of the wishy washy background crap, I've thrown together the following outline you can use to justify your super munchkin terminator in storygaming terms and resume your honest roll-playing. 1.) The character must not have recieved "proper" social conditioning regarding the restraint of lethal behavior in any way, shape, or form. Therefore, the character should have been a small child growing up in a brutal African civil war at the height of its bloodthirsty atrocities and inducted as a child soldier. 2.) The character must have continued the lifestyle of the child soldier, complete with intense quantities of combat experience, successfully for years. According to Grossman, US soldiers in WWII started to come apart mentally after more than 2 months of constant combat without breaks. So we have to frame this character in the sense of being normalized to precisely these sorts of long spells of killing, death, and stress. The concept is that rather than having been forced to shift mental gears and endure stress, the gears never had to be shifted in the first place. As Hyzmarca has pointed out these child soldiers probably have seen more combat than just about anyone on the planet. 3.) Perhaps the character should be female? There's be no questions of pride, ego, or biological behaviors associated with violent conflict (fight, flight, submission, posture, all from Grossman). It'd just be pure, clean reality of violence without social filters or biological pre-programming towards non-lethal outcomes. No surrender, no expectation of mercy, no attempt to mitigate the horror. Zero to surreal nightmare machine in 1 second flat. 4.) The character needs to have a reason to have left or been able to leave the conflict which spawned him/her, and appear in the setting of the game campaign. Perhaps the character, living in a world of completely normalized violence and terror, just doesn't think much of risking life and limb on a whim just to walk somewhere else and see something different leaving a trail of bodies behind if necessary. Perhaps the character is just being very calculating and ends up seeking out places where violence is safer to commit in the long run and has bigger payoffs. 5.) Very importantly, I think the character must be a perfect strategist and tactician. It's one thing that can be used in terms of story or character development to explain why this particular character survived as long as he or she did. You can also argue that an almost superhuman detachment from normal emotions in combat situations has allowed for a nearly contemplative perfect distillation of essential strategies. |
|
|
![]() |
![]()
Post
#2
|
|
Street Doc ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Admin Posts: 3,508 Joined: 2-March 04 From: Neverwhere Member No.: 6,114 ![]() |
On the subject of sociopathic / antisocial behavior-
I worked for years in behavioral health with all kinds of messed up kids. I'm talking teen sex offenders and kids that watched their parents kill each other and shit. Usually at an early age they are diagnosed with "reactive attachment disorder", which is a profound impairment of their ability to form normal human relationships, a fundamental component of empathy. It should be noted that having parents doesn't save you from this if they are crappy parents- having parents that are abusive or act violently can be just as bad as having no parents. Also, I always found it interesting to work with the real sociopathic / antisocial kids, especially sex offenders. The predatory psychology of a sex offender is very interesting, and it is very much about faking empathy so that people like you. In the mind of such a person trust is a power game and their goal is very often to build trust by faking empathy until they can offend without people suspecting them. Most of the time this has nothing to do with sex. It also has a component of narcism because you spend so much time trying to be everything to everybody that you start to define your identity by what people think of you. Its all very complicated. Point being, yes, some people that lack empathy can understand and fake it very well to manipulate others. And having parental figures doesn't necessarily enable healthy attachment and empathic development. [edit]: Reactive Attachment Disorder Narcisistic Personality Disorder |
|
|
![]()
Post
#3
|
|
Midnight Toker ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 7,686 Joined: 4-July 04 From: Zombie Drop Bear Santa's Workshop Member No.: 6,456 ![]() |
I would submit that there is a rather large difference between what children with extremely abusive parents experience and being handed an Ak-47 and being forced to prosecute a war against the government using a combination of brutal genocide and suicidally ineffective Napoleonic-era shooting formations.
I'd also submit that the point of the such a Grossmanian exercise is not to create a sociopath, but rather to create someone who is not a sociopath but who still has the ability to brutally exterminate anyone without the slightest but of hesitation or remorse by socializing them to accept combat as a normal social activity. Really, they would have to spend their formative years with a parent figure until they were too old to develop reactive attachment disorder. A toddler can't very well be a useful component of an army. Once they have the motor skills to use a rifle and the reasoning abilities to tell friend from foe, they are then removed from the parents and placed in a situation where they are treated as adults and expected to behave themselves as adults, where killing "the enemy" is a social norm that they are expected to comply with, and where rape and torture are socially acceptable pastimes which they are expected to indulge in together for the purpose of building team camaraderie. The child soldiers generally aren't abused, but they find themselves in a situation where there is an entire class of people that wants to kill them and two entire classes of people whom their entire social group encouraged them to kill. The important distinction is that there is no reason for them to learn how to ingratiate themselves to the people that want to abuse and no reason for them to learn to hide their action or their nature. Quite the opposite. They receive praise for killing enemy soldiers and brutalizing civilians. They're also required by circumstances to form strong bonds of trust with their teammates, as they literally rely on each other for their very lives. Killing and raping and torturing together is a way to build trust and affection. Now that I think about it, a parent who desired to do so could give a child this sort of experience and the child would probably come out much better adjusted than a regular child soldier, though it still requires a medium or high intensity war zone where you can kill people daily without any problems. The key here that when your daughter hits the little neighbor girl from next door you give her a time-out because we aren't supposed to fight with the neighbors but when the time out is over you give them both guns and take them across the street, because it is good to kill people who live across the street, and capture a little baby for them to practice their knife skills on. Give them the appropriate affection, encouragement, and socialization while simultaneously teaching them to kill "enemies" without hesitation or remorse. It could work, much the same way that children taught to hunt game or slaughter farm animals can do so much more easily than an adult who has never killed anything before can. It is probably even the best way to go about it, where possible. I'm just not sure that many Barrens parents would actually do so. I also have to wonder about a child of Tamanous members who grows up on a people farm. His life is just like any other farmboy's except instead of cows or pigs or chickens his parents breed, raise, and slaughter for meat and parts, human beings and other metatypes. As he grows up he gets to participate in the workings of the farm. He feeds the livestock, on occasion he gets to see them breed (you know how shameless people can be) and when he gets older his parents even allow him to see the inner workings of the slaughterhouse. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#4
|
|
Street Doc ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Admin Posts: 3,508 Joined: 2-March 04 From: Neverwhere Member No.: 6,114 ![]() |
I would submit that there is a rather large difference between what children with extremely abusive parents experience and being handed an Ak-47 and being forced to prosecute a war against the government using a combination of brutal genocide and suicidally ineffective Napoleonic-era shooting formations. While I see your point, I disagree. I worked with this one kid- at the age of 4 or 5 his dad brought him home a new pair of cowboy boots and then held his mom down on the floor and made the kid kick her in the head. If he'd have given the kid an AK-47 there is no doubt in my mind that he would have killed her. It seems to me that is just as powerful albeit in a more "civilized" setting. |
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 28th July 2025 - 12:42 PM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.