I personally value authenticity in instances like this.  It feels like a waste to gloss over the uglier parts of the past: they help set the period, and they're also a good source of conflict.  If the players aren't interested or comfortable in exploring that part of the setting, they'll either tell me outright or indicate that to me by not engaging with it.

If a player really wanted to play a certain type of character and wanted to avoid historical obstacles, I'd either get rid of the obstacles or make his character a special case.  More often, however, I find that players who'd be inclined to play such characters in the first place want that kind of adversity: how many books can you think of that are about someone trying to overcome the limits society places on him?

What makes for good fiction doesn't always make for good gaming, but my experience is that in this case it does.

I'd try to keep it accurate as possible, even if it bothered some players. I'm sick of history being rewritten to comform to political correctness and won't conbtribute to it being done in any way.

It's sad how history is being essentially rewritten, which means that the truth is being edited out of existance because some people find it offensive.

So, any time a lot of people don't like the the truth, it's the truth that is supposed to change? My god, they tried rewriting history to conform to modern political views in every fascist or totalitarian regime in history, now they're doing it in America.

Just proof that at it's heart, Political Correctness is nothing but the new face of fascism in America. Too bad it's being preached at some prominent game sites. Thank god this one doesn't submit to it yet.

Quote from: RPGPunditBecause those other things are fantasy elements cheaply imposed on the quasi-medieval society of generic fantasy world X.
Whereas absolute equality of the sexes would be something that would fundamentally transform the quasi-medieval society of generic fantasy world X into something that wasn't medieval at all.

So magical healing wouldn't fundamentally transform a world of plague and cholera? Magical fireballs wouldn't fundamentally transform castle design and sieges? The existence of monsters, real monsters, wouldn't fundamentally transform patterns of settlement of wilderness, organisation of town militias and so on?

Pull the other one, it's got bells on.

All thes sorts of things have been the subject of many an rpg magazine article or forum post. The real effects of unreal things have been extensively discussed, and can be put into your fantasy game. What it boils down to is: if you want to, you can rationalise anything. Decide what sort of game world you want, and rationalise it afterwards. Rationalise why peasants are still starving in a world where agricultural magic exists, why people don't live to 120 in a world where healing magic exists, why people bother building thick castle walls but not thick castle roofs in a world where magical aerial attack exists, and why in two hundred years the dungeon just outside town hasn't been ransacked by the village, and/or spewed forth its monstrous inhabitants onto the village.

Gamers choose the game world they like, then rationalise it afterwards.

Quote from: RPGPunditSee my point above.  The fantastical unreal elements can be tacked onto the historical core BECAUSE they are fantastical and unreal. It becomes much harder to rationalize the kind of justifications that have to occur for non-fantastical changes to that same historical core.

"I can believe in unreal things that never have happened and never could, but I cannot believe in real things that have happened and can." What the fuck? What's this now, "Currently smoking: crack"?

Quote from: rpgpunditIn other words, the concept of zombies wandering around the Old South doesn't break suspension of disbelief specifically because Zombies don't exist, so we're willing to ignore the implications of their existing; but the idea of the Confederate States... suddenly doing a full 180º switch and accepting the members of this race as absolute equals...

Riiight. Zombies are easier to accept than racial equality in the CSA. I'm no fan of the CSA, or the alternate history scenarios in story or rpg where they get to win, but even I don't consider zombies more reasonable and rational than racial equality.

Anyway, it's simply as I said - they're presenting a game for an audience. There's no use putting out a game no-one will want to play. Even Ron Edwards made sure he had a cult before he published Sorcerer. A game where blacks get enslaved and whipped - no-one outside the Klan is going to want to play that.

Anyway, heaps of rpgs describe a warped reality, rather than wholesale fantasty. Millenium's End had the Worldwide Islamic Jihad, as if all the terrorist groups would form a single organisation...! James Bond 007 describes a world... Twilight 2000... Transhuman Space... all of these show a reality which is unlikely or impossible. Why? Because it's a game.

Quote from: rpgpunditNot to mention that it strikes me as actually being the more insulting of possible choices. Its covering your eyes and pretending that this racism never really happened, or sexism never really happened; its whitewashing history to ignore the mistreatment of these minorities for the sake of avoiding modern-day "white male guilt".

No, it's attempting to write a game people will actually play. Feel free to write the alternate, a game in which the players take on the roles of oppressed groups. Maybe you could all roleplay some Pakistani woman being hung upside down while her husband cuts up her face for dissing him, or some poor black guy being whipped till he almost bleeds to death for running away, or perhaps we could all play Auschwitz: the game of scrabbling for survival in a death camp.

Woohoo. Sounds like fun. I'm sure the Forgers would love it! "All roleplaying is group therapy," remember? Group therapy, education, same shit, different shovel.

People game for fantasies. As well as having characters better than we are, we like to have game worlds better than our own.

"I can accept zombies, but not an egalitarian CSA." Time to go out and buy another eight-ball for your pipe, mate.

Quote from: Dominus NoxIt's sad how history is being essentially rewritten, which means that the truth is being edited out of existance because some people find it offensive.

So, any time a lot of people don't like the the truth, it's the truth that is supposed to change? My god, they tried rewriting history to conform to modern political views in every fascist or totalitarian regime in history, now they're doing it in America.

From your profile, I see you enjoy D&D. I look forward to seeing your historically accurate treatment of dragons, bugbears, gelationous cubes, Magic-Users, Clerics, Rangers and Paladins using D&D.

If people can't handle "the truth", then you'd better change it, or else you won't have any players.

So, tell us about your "historically accurate" D&D campaign?

Quote from: RPGPunditDo you think that if you're playing a game in a historical or semi-historical setting, you should try to adapt the setting's sentiments to make them more connected to modern feelings, regarding issues like minorities, sexuality, etc?
Or is authenticity more important than sensitivity?

I care more about authenticity, though in fact many settings are less prejudiced than people imagine.  For example, racism towards black people isn't really appropriate in a pre-18th Century game as it hasn't yet developed as a concept.  Independent women while rare were more common than is sometimes realised, particularly during the swashbuckling periods in which there were several notable women swashbucklers.

Quote from: RPGPunditDoes your answer change if there are members of said minority in your game?

If it were a real issue for them, I would run a different game.

Oh, I will gloss over some things.  For example, in the vikings game I wouldn't particularly object if a player had their character committing atrocities on a raid, but I would gloss over it as I have no great desire to sit their and hear a detailed account.

In a fantasy world, well if it's historical fantasy I stick as close to history as possible.  If it's more trad fantasy then whatever takes my mood but it's unlikely prejudice will be a big issue as that's not really part of the genre as a rule.

I once ran the Yogsothoth campaign for tsome friends from university and there's a bit where this rich NPC has been corrupted by this african priestess and you have to sit there and read out this speech talking about "crude negro cunning" and stuff like that.

At the time I didn't have the presence of mind to change it or cut it so I sat there and read it despite the fact that one of my players was black.  Luckily he just pissed himself laughing throughout it but I didn't feel particularly good.

I'm not a big fan of attempting to recreate the moral climate of the era, but then again I'm not a big fan of historical settings as such since I typically run games set in fictional settings or fictional versions of historical settings (such as the West).

One thing that does set me off however is game designers who put forth settings where the world is going to hell in a handbasket (Shadowrun, Deadlands- The Wierd West, etc) but where for some reason there is perfect equality of race, sex, etc.

Snort.

Quote from: gleichmanOne thing that does set me off however is game designers who put forth settings where the world is going to hell in a handbasket (Shadowrun, Deadlands- The Wierd West, etc) but where for some reason there is perfect equality of race, sex, etc.

Snort.

Hmmm! I'd say it's because they identify perfect equality with the world going to hell in a handbasket. Of course, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar...



-mice

Quote from: flyingmiceHmmm! I'd say it's because they identify perfect equality with the world going to hell in a handbasket. Of course, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar...



-mice

You make a interesting point there, but I don't think they're that smart.

More likely I think that they don't believe the world is actually going to hell, but rather is their own version of an Utopia with equality and respect for their pet peeves where all their own personal views are proven correct by the existence of what evil does exist- plus the option for adventure and self importance.

Or they're just plain chicken and worried about Political Correctness.

Or both.

Quote from: gleichmanI'm not a big fan of attempting to recreate the moral climate of the era, but then again I'm not a big fan of historical settings as such since I typically run games set in fictional settings or fictional versions of historical settings (such as the West).

One thing that does set me off however is game designers who put forth settings where the world is going to hell in a handbasket (Shadowrun, Deadlands- The Wierd West, etc) but where for some reason there is perfect equality of race, sex, etc.

Snort.

In Shadowrun there was not "perfect equality of race."

It's just that "race" wasn't "black," "white," "asian," "arab," etc. anymore.

It was Ork, Troll, Elf, Dwarf...

Orks and Trolls were definitely the underdogs and severely discriminated against.

Quote from: VellorianIn Shadowrun there was not "perfect equality of race."

It's just that "race" wasn't "black," "white," "asian," "arab," etc. anymore.

It was Ork, Troll, Elf, Dwarf...

Orks and Trolls were definitely the underdogs and severely discriminated against.

Made up discrimination against made up races is hardly what I was talking about.


Even here however things are not what they should be IMO.

There is little indication of it in their modules or books. Orcs are CEOs of companies, in their fiction a Troll is one of the most respected Mages in the Shadows, etc.

They make noises in the background essaies, but in practice, Orc and Troll discrimination is backburner window dressing. Exceptions can be found, but they are exceptions.

Additonally the books make it clear that such discrimination is foolish and evil. Even ghouls are people too. This 'mythical' discrimination only seems to exist to strengthen their equality message.

Sad really.

Quote from: gleichmanOne thing that does set me off however is game designers who put forth settings where the world is going to hell in a handbasket (Shadowrun, Deadlands- The Wierd West, etc) but where for some reason there is perfect equality of race, sex, etc.

Shadowrun is a world of perfect equality? Are we reading the same books?

Quote from: JongWKShadowrun is a world of perfect equality? Are we reading the same books?

Just read the "Sprawl Survival Guide", it talks directly about issues of race (other than the mythical races), sex, sexual orientation, etc all being things of the past.

Quote from: gleichmanJust read the "Sprawl Survival Guide", it talks directly about issues of race (other than the mythical races), sex, sexual orientation, etc all being things of the past.

You know, I just realized that some of what we're "arguing" could be simply that our group had a different style of play than the "canon."  We had discrimination on the bases of age, sex, skin color, race, cultural background, etc. as spices to the game.  I can remember Johnsons who wouldn't speak to arabs in our group, or who talked down to women, or placed hits with a sneering jocularity on homosexual characters.  Every Johnson had a flaw, and most of the time it was a discriminatory element.

So, I defer to you that the canon probably does try to wipe all that clean and, yes, that is a ludicrous thing to do to a setting.