Quote from: WilTell me that this game does not have an agenda and that I'm crazy. The game explicitly states that its goal is to indoctrinate players into their ideology. EDIT: I realize you were speaking to Pundit. Still, it doesn't take someone on a witchhunt to see that the author will impart some agenda into anything they create. It's just a matter of degree.

Do some RPGs have agendas?  Sure.  White Wolf in it's day seemed pretty damn determined to push their wierd brand of anti-science, anti-Christian neo-paganism on people, right down to telling them that all scientists were lying, evil old men and all priests were pedophiles.

Do ALL RPGs have agendas?  Fuck no, and it takes the kind of fucked up witch-hunt thinking that Pundit and Friends are so fond of to even consider the idea.  

I think it would also do well for you to re-read Brimjack's post.  There's a difference between a bias, and an actualy agenda.  The two are not the same, and conflating the two only makes you look like an idiot or a loon.

Wil, you summarized the different levels of a game's "agenda" very well indeed. I wouldn't say, though, that the rules level is "neutral" at all--it's deeper and more pervasive than any overt political theme.

What your PC is in the gameworld, relative to all NPCs, what he's able to do from the get-go, how soon, using what resources, earning which rewards for which kinds of actions, to name but a few parameters... those are all extremely significant issues.

I see where this train of thought is going, so let me be clear that I want to avoid stating what I used to think, which is that having PCs be Teh Awesome from Day 1 (whether in terms of physical power or special knowledge), is politically regressive by default. Power fantasies are regressive. But starting out powerful isn't necessarily.

Quote from: J ArcaneI think it would also do well for you to re-read Brimjack's post.  There's a difference between a bias, and an actualy agenda.  The two are not the same, and conflating the two only makes you look like an idiot or a loon.

I hadn't gotten that far yet, but now that I read it you're right - I (probably like others) was conflating bias and agenda. So all RPGs have bias, but not all have an agenda.

D&D for example is built upon achievement principle.

Quote from: WilI hadn't gotten that far yet, but now that I read it you're right - I (probably like others) was conflating bias and agenda. So all RPGs have bias, but not all have an agenda.

Yep, that's pretty much how I see it.

Quote from: Pierce InverarityWil, you summarized the different levels of a game's "agenda" very well indeed. I wouldn't say, though, that the rules level is "neutral" at all--it's deeper and more pervasive than any overt political theme.

What your PC is in the gameworld, relative to all NPCs, what he's able to do from the get-go, how soon, using what resources, earning which rewards for which kinds of actions, to name but a few parameters... those are all extremely significant issues.

I see where this train of thought is going, so let me be clear that I want to avoid stating what I used to think, which is that having PCs be Teh Awesome from Day 1 (whether in terms of physical power or special knowledge), is politically regressive by default. Power fantasies are regressive. But starting out powerful isn't necessarily.

I think it depends on how conscious a design decision is on the part of the author and for what purpose. I mean, ostensibly the agenda for any RPG is to be fun. So if the designer thinks it is going to be more fun for the PCs to start as ratcatchers that may be a design feature that he implements. IF he decides that the PCs start as ratcatchers because he wants to underscore the miserable conditions of the proletariat during the Middle Ages and relate that to America's shrinking middle class - well, some people are definitely going to be turned off by that.

Of course, knowing the author had an explicit agenda in making a design decision (other than having fun) without being told is very hard to tell. I would say that (for example) Paul Jaquays making homosexuality a mental illness in the Central Casting books (and later an actual evil trait) is a sign of bias. The introductions to his books made it very clear that he also would like for others to think the same way as him, which means that the decision is elevated to an agenda in my eyes.

Quote from: SettembriniD&D for example is built upon achievement principle.

Dude, all of Western civilization is built on the achievement principle.

Quote from: WilI hadn't gotten that far yet, but now that I read it you're right - I (probably like others) was conflating bias and agenda. So all RPGs have bias, but not all have an agenda.

Bingo.

Any RPG is essentially a simulation of the world as the author sees it, so any inherent biases he may possess are bound to come through, even if he's aiming for a deliberately unrealistic world.

That's true of RPGs, and it's true of any writing or creative endeavor really.  

We're talking "sky is blue" level stuff there.  

But an agenda implies direct action, proselytizing, intent to convince or affect, and that is almost certainly not present in all RPGs, unless you're of the type like Pundit to see "wars" and "agendas" everywhere you look.

Quote from: J ArcaneBut an agenda implies direct action, proselytizing, intent to convince or affect, and that is almost certainly not present in all RPGs, unless you're of the type like Pundit to see "wars" and "agendas" everywhere you look.

I dunno, some rpgs have done an astounding job at convincing players that katanas are Teh Ultimate Weapon

QuoteDude, all of Western civilization is built on the achievement principle.

So what?

Cthulhu RPG isn´t. That´s nihilism.
Blue Rose isn´t. That´s predestination.

etc. ad nauseam

All powergaming critique is basically a romanticist backlash, fighting achievement principle.

Quote from: SettembriniSo what?

Cthulhu RPG isn´t. That´s nihilism.
Blue Rose isn´t. That´s predestination.

etc. ad nauseam

All powergaming critique is basically a romanticist backlash, fighting achievement principle.

I'm just sayin', it's not like it's a big suprise. Now whether or not AD&D is trying to convince people that they should level up in real life is another matter (and apparently one that Tom Hanks knows the answer to).

QuoteI'm just sayin', it's not like it's a big suprise.

True. But I think that´s why it´s a great example for a value/political statement implicit in a game.

Quote from: DrewJust out of interest, would people mind giving their interpretation of the agendas of systems like D&D

I think that the original D&D's concept was somewhat framed by Gygax's religious conservatism.  It wasn't a "christian RPG" of course, as we know all too well, but some of its absolutist concepts of alignments, its demons, and its heroisms, all seemed to be one influence (of many) in the game.

QuoteExalted

All white wolf games tend to have an anti-"common man" agenda. A near-fascistic obsession with Ubermensch who are inherently superior to normal man, who is always fairly pathetic and easily defeated/manipulated by these supermen, who the common man hate.
All of this stems from Rein·Hagen's own elitism, as well as the elitism of the people who were early adopters of WW's games.

Oh yeah, almost all WW-games are also anti-science, anti-progress, and anti-western civilization in general.

,

QuoteWFRP

WFRP was originally created as a European response to D&D. It is full of very European (and more specifically British) ideas.  It shows quite plainly in that there is an utter lack of romanticism about the "good old days".  Gygax or Greenwood's "middle ages" in the form of their worlds are these places that seem very lily-white clean and tidy (even the "dirtier" parts of it) in comparison to the utterly European and utterly gritty/dirty version of the renaissance presented in WFRP.
There's a strong anarchic streak in the game too.  In a funny way, I think WFRP in its early stages was very heavily influenced by the British punk movement.

Quote, Paranoia

Seriously dude? Its a leftist manifesto against nationalistic propaganda.
Paranoia is definitely a "Heavy" bias game.

QuoteStar Wars

the RPG? This is one that doesn't really apply. Or at least, I can't think of any editorial bias the writers of the SW rpg had that Lucas and co. didn't.

RPGPundit

Quote from: WilTell me that this game does not have an agenda and that I'm crazy. The game explicitly states that its goal is to indoctrinate players into their ideology. EDIT: I realize you were speaking to Pundit.

The fact that he was speaking to me doesn't mean he isn't full of shit.  He said what he said as an attack to me, when pretty well everyone else agreed with the statement that RPGs are written with agendas. J Arcane's desire to call me a looney overruled his interest in saying something intelligent or even factual.

RPGPundit

Quote from: J ArcaneDo ALL RPGs have agendas?  Fuck no, and it takes the kind of fucked up witch-hunt thinking that Pundit and Friends are so fond of to even consider the idea.  

I think it would also do well for you to re-read Brimjack's post.  There's a difference between a bias, and an actualy agenda.  The two are not the same, and conflating the two only makes you look like an idiot or a loon.

How the hell am I engaging in "witch-hunt thinking" when I'm saying that every RPG, including all the ones I like, have agendas?
You seem to be conflating the terms "agenda" and "crusade".
Biases are what we all have, and agendas are any and all actions driven by our biases.  There are some that have soft biases, and some that have "Heavy" biases (ie. are on a crusade).

RPGPundit