Don’t forget we moved!
https://brandmu.day/
Historical Games Round 75
-
@Roadspike I love the word inflict for this.
-
I don’t want to play on games where my character is oppressed, and I don’t care if the PCs are the exception to the rule. I’m tired of being oppressed. It’s a fantasy world already, just change that part. Why does my gay character need to know the wider world hates her in order to RP about whatever cthulu is.
This is clearly the minority opinion, but there’s some otherside feedback for you lol.
as previously stated, good day.
-
@farfalla said in New Concept:
This is clearly the minority opinion, but there’s some otherside feedback for you lol.
I don’t actually think it’s necessarily a minority opinion. I feel like, whenever this comes up, we generally hear from folks on both sides, and I think that overall MU*s have trended more away from RL bigotry/prejudice in themes over the years, which suggests to me that there’s a strong enough will for that side. (That’s been my impression, anyways!)
I think the IDEAL would just be enough games where you can have variety. Some people find it really interesting to engage with those historical prejudices in fiction, some people find it really off-putting, just let people self-select, etc. But of course every game’s gotta make that choice for themselves. And having enough games for variety is an eternal hurdle.
-
In a world where Eldritch horrors exist, reality is so unlinked to our actual reality that there is no need for racism, sexism, homophobia etc. All of the usual rules and logic that apply to our world (from physics to how society operates) have been thoroughly broken.
-
@oknow But we are not starting in that world, it’s the arrival of that world at the start of the game.
-
@Roz That was just in response to this thread and this game specifically, which thus far seems to have a majority preferring historical accuracy.
-
@farfalla When Blu and I created The Savage Skies, we intentionally changed the history of the world to eliminate the racism, sexism, and homophobia that afflicted our actual world during that era (and still does now) because we explicitly wanted to remove those from what was supposed to be a fun game for punching fascists. These changes seemed to make most people happy. I don’t think you’re in the minority.
In the end, I think it comes down to what the game runner(s) want out of the game (I’m genericizing this statement, so it’s not just about this game or this game runner): do they want the game to focus on all the ways that life can be hard (eldritch monsters, social injustice, taxes, etc), do they want the game to focus on all the ways that life can be awesome (flying hotrod aircraft, punching fascists, casting magic spells, etc), or somewhere in between. I think most games will be somewhere in between, but where they want to be on the spectrum should, in my opinion, determine how they treat real life sources of oppression and injustice in their game.
… that said, I do think that in general it’s a good idea to limit or outright ban the use of real life injustices being inflicted by players on other characters/players. Helps weed out the assholes.
-
MY suggestion is that for whatever changes you make and unique theme details make sure what is common knowledge is put some where easily found. There are many games that are ‘This thing is what everyone knows IC’ but don’t document it and it leaves it difficult for new players to know this ‘common information.’ This is also done with OOC stuff too. Like the unspoken rules stuff. IF it is important enough IC and OOC, I think it should be documented.
I would play this theme, though.
-
@Roadspike I did very much the same with Seven Nations. I eliminated the need for discrimination based on gender, race, sexual orientation, etc. And instead, I just replaced with something more akin to nations generally having a baked natural apprehension to each other. While also having one nation kind treat mages as weapons and tools rather than people. I think this was, in an effort to create nuance and conflict between factions, a way to go about it without the players feeling like they were being put down because of who they were.
-
@farfalla said in New Concept:
This is clearly the minority opinion, but there’s some otherside feedback for you lol.
Eeek. I’m sorry if I came across that way. I don’t assume you’re in the minority.
I do not want to play in a world with -isms. I do not want to play in the really real 1920s. I want to play in a world that is like the 1920s, but cool.
Where the horrible things are monsters. Not society.
I just don’t want to have to read pages of lore for what amounts to “New York in the 1920s but without -isms,” when you can kind of just say that.
-
@KarmaBum said in New Concept:
I just don’t want to have to read pages of lore for what amounts to “New York in the 1920s but without -isms,” when you can kind of just say that.
I agree with everything KB said except this. I do want to read pages of lore (okay, a page of lore) that says “New York in the 1920s but without the -isms” because the ‘why’ interests me, but we’ve also established I’m a setting-nerd, right? I think most people will fall into the KB-bucket on this one.
-
I don’t think anyone here wants to play a bigot or have bigotry-related RP. I do think there is a meaningful difference between This is the real 1920s with everything that means but we’re not going to have themes of bigotry in scenes and This is a different 1920s where bigotry has been solved. That distinction is going to be important for some groups of players (either way).
-
@shit-piss-love said in New Concept:
I don’t think anyone here wants to play a bigot or have bigotry-related RP.
I mean, I think that some folks do have interest in engaging in thematic prejudices of a historical timeframe in RP/fiction, which I think would count as “having bigotry-related RP,” and I don’t think that’s – a bad thing? It’s a bad thing if people want to use it as an excuse to be assholes, obviously, but people wanting to explore the impact of prejudices on characters aren’t wrong for it (which your wording, to me, kind of seems to maybe imply). Some folks have a reaction of “I absolutely don’t want to have to deal with that in RP, I already deal with it IRL” which is SUPER FKN VALID. Other folks can find emotional interest in exploring those issues, including ones that would have impacted themselves. It’s just different perspectives.
I like that there are games that allow people to forget about these shitty RL prejudices!! But I don’t think it’s a “no one HERE wants to do this” type of situation to have folks that would also be interested in engaging with RL prejudices.
-
@shit-piss-love Going with the bigotry has been solved due to historic changes. That is the one that I think is more in theme with the desire and theme I’m looking to build.
So, that way we can focus on more the evils of the supernatural and horror elements. Instead of the monsters we know that exist to this day and keep us all pushed down and depressed. Racism, women’s suffrage, and bigotry toward sexual choice are themes I’m not looking to discuss in this game as primary themes. Not saying, there might be one or two villain NPCs, but it would be the minority, not the majority.
Been debating on this all day, thank you Brand MU Day for helping me debate it back and forth.
-
@Roz said in New Concept:
@shit-piss-love said in New Concept:
I don’t think anyone here wants to play a bigot or have bigotry-related RP.
I mean, I think that some folks do have interest in engaging in thematic prejudices of a historical timeframe in RP/fiction, which I think would count as “having bigotry-related RP,” and I don’t think that’s – a bad thing? It’s a bad thing if people want to use it as an excuse to be assholes, obviously, but people wanting to explore the impact of prejudices on characters aren’t wrong for it (which your wording, to me, kind of seems to maybe imply).
Nah I’m the person you described. I’d love to play a game that is about violently fighting back at my oppressors. I was just using loose language. I also don’t think I’ll ever see the game you described (or that I proposed in the link) but hey, if it ever does someone make sure to ring me.
-
I feel like we’re overcomplicating things. “There’s less bigotry in this world because: bigotry isn’t fun OOC; it’s not required to be there like it’s some default state of humanity; and if you can’t suspend your disbelief for less prejudice but can for God being a space squid who hates you, then maybe sit with that and really think about it.”
-
@GF I mean that’s not really what the discussion has been, at all. PS it is fun for some people to explore these things, and that is as valid as wanting to avoid any rl issues.
-
@hellfrog I apologize.
-
@GF said in New Concept:
if you can’t suspend your disbelief for less prejudice but can for God being a space squid who hates you, then maybe sit with that and really think about it.
If it’s a fictional setting? I absolutely can suspend my disbelief for that. But history is established. Someone (sorry can’t find the quote) mentioned “it’s just the 1920s but without discrimination.”
I don’t know what that means.
I’m not being snarky. I hate discrimination with a burning passion in RL, and I fully respect someone not wanting to deal with that in their pretendy funtimes.
The problem is that discrimination is so deeply baked into societal systems that it’s just not as simple to me as snapping your fingers and saying it doesn’t exist.
Everyone always points to Wild West settings and says: “If you can imagine a world where the PCs don’t die of dysentery, why can’t you imagine a world without discrimination?”
Easy. You’re not pretending dysentery doesn’t exist, you’re just saying the PCs are lucky enough to not contract it, or to contract it and survive – both of which actually happened.
“A world without discrimination” is just not the same thing. How did it get that way? Let’s start from that Wild West setting…if racism isn’t a thing, then logically slavery wouldn’t have been. There wouldn’t have been a Civil War (or it would have gone very differently). Heck, the entire economic basis of the south would probably be dramatically different. Oh and would America even exist at all if not for the genocide against the native peoples? How far back do we go with this?
If you want to do alt-history, that’s cool. That’s what Savage Skies did. They picked a divergence point (something about “when dragons appeared” IIRC) and then wrote the history from that point forward to explain why their imaginary world is different from our real world. It’s a bunch more work, but it addresses the issue cleanly.
Less clean is “racism exists but we don’t want stories about it here” because of systemic discrimination. What about the laws of the land? What about PCs who have discrimination in their backstories? It gets thorny.
I’m not telling people how they should RP. I just wish people would stop ascribing evil motivations to those of us who just have a hard time imagining a historical setting as an egalitarian utopia.
-
@Faraday said in New Concept:
If it’s a fictional setting? I absolutely can suspend my disbelief for that. But history is established. Someone (sorry can’t find the quote) mentioned “it’s just the 1920s but without discrimination.”
I don’t know what that means.
…
I’m not telling people how they should RP. I just wish people would stop ascribing evil motivations to those of us who just have a hard time imagining a historical setting as an egalitarian utopia.This was me and what I said was This is a different 1920s where bigotry has been solved. I used that phrasing because I was trying to touch on what you’ve gone into detail on here. Like you, fictional histories leave me struggling to reconcile an internally-consistent setting.
I have a lot to say on the topic but I am way of doing so for the same reason you cited in your closing statement.
