FFT: Can't We All Just Get Along?

by Paul Moore 

After careful reading of all the editorials published here, and some careful thought of my own, I can only conclude that we're all being too sensitive. Without getting too far into my religious past, let me say that I am more Roman Catholic than anything else, and I was not in the least offended by the Church's portrayal in FFT. As a matter of fact, I was pleasantly surprised to see someone out there has the guts to write a fantasy partially based on some of my religion's darker spots in its past, especially in a genre where it would come under so much close scrutiny. In my opinion, no subject should be off-limits in games, as long as we have a decent rating system to ease children into some of the harder subjects.

After reading editorials like those from Peter Beattie, I found myself asking why I wasn't offended. I came to the conclusion that I wasn't offended because the attack, which I'm still not convinced existed, wasn't directed at me, or any other people. It wasn't even directed at a current institution, but of an institution of the past. I will freely admit that the religion in FFT was based on Christianity, but it wasn't the Christianity that I know. I realized this when I read John Ford's editorial "Morally Acceptable Games, or, How to Neuter a Narrative," when he described FFT as a "symbolic interpretation of historical events." Even though the message in Christianity hasn't changed much over the centuries, the policies of its followers have changed radically many times. For example, how many of you have gone out and burned a witch lately? FFT isn't based in Christianity as it is, but Christianity as it was. The actions of those in that religion are a part of the past, and have little to no bearing on modern day Christians.

I have one more point I'd like to address: the attack. An attack, by definition, has to have the intent to harm behind it, and I just don't see that here. FFT, like so many great fantasies, asks a big "What If" question, in this case "What if a secularly powerful religion actually worshiped a demon?" The big objection here is that we can see the basis for the fantasy religion in our own world, and thus take offense. And yet, I still don't see the attack. Until someone from Square tells me otherwise, I refuse to believe their writers were intending to portray the Christian religion as a "satanic institution built by corrupt power-mongers intent on world domination" (P. Beattie, "In Defense of my Offense," admittedly out of context). As long as that is true, then I see no attack intended, and therefore no reason to take offense.

In the end, I think there is only one thing to be said. Lighten up! It's only a game.