19 ms·
Does this circumstantial suggestion that a man was involved in the 1960s zodiac killings partially vindicate the critics of Dungeons & Dragons (first published
by msbarnett 4y ago
Does this circumstantial suggestion that a man was involved in the 1960s zodiac killings partially vindicate the critics of Dungeons & Dragons (first published 1974)?
I’m going to go with “no” and cite “the linear flow of time”.
- Apocryphon 4y agoIt's a little bit like McCarthy being retroactively proved marginally in the ballpark because the Venona papers uncovered Soviet infiltration.
- msbarnett 4y agoIt strikes me as even more tenuous than that because you could just as easily say “ah well there were no zodiac murders post-D&D, so obviously role playing slakes rather than inflames the psychopathic mind” or something.
- Apocryphon 4y agoTo be fair, I said "connected", which could mean almost anything- not specifically "caused." It's interesting that if this Doerr theory is true, that means Zodiac really did resemble pop cultural conceptions of him and other Zodiac-inspired fictional killers: a geek, interested in nerdy fantasy hobbies once considered the province of social misfits. But then again, the occult-steeped tone of the letters and the ciphers themselves already gave that impression.
- poopnugget 4y ago[flagged]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- tptacek 4y agoThe Venona papers didn't put McCarthy remotely in the ballpark. It's not as if the premise of Soviet infiltration was controversial; it was universally understood to be happening.
- vintermann 4y agoOn the other hand, 1974 is when the killer ceased written communication, according to the Wikipedia article. Kind of macabre, and certainly not evidence, but it would be darkly hilarious if the reason the killer stopped was that he got into D&D. There wouldn't happen to be anyone here who played D&D with Paul Doerr in the 70s?