Generally optimistic. Or "pessimistic without the presence of the PCs, but they can make a difference."

It doesn't have to be easy. But you make the premise too bleak, I won't buy into it.

80% optimistic, 20% pessimistic, usually segregated.
I mean, shoot, I ran a VtM Gehenna game where everyone was fighting for very survival, but it wasn't just assumed they were totally screwed.  They thought they were, but they kept managing to scrape by.

I don't really find much fun in the beat-down-the-PCs-grind-to-pulp stuff, but on the flip side, cute and fuzzy bunnies aren't really fun either.

Quote from: RPGPundit;310140So, what kind of games do you prefer to play or run? Games with a fundamentally optimistic sense to them, or a pessimistic sense?

RPGPundit

That's all very interesting, because while it seems that most people answer "optimistic" it strikes me that there are far more games out there that are pessimistic than optimistic.  So either we're a weird blip, an aberration compared to what the average gamer wants; or the game designers are the ones who are out to lunch, going for cheap "dark" settings because they require less effort to think up than something optimistic and good.

RPGPundit

Eh.... not so sure you're reading it right. I think there's more of an "optimistic play in a pessimistic setting" vibe here. In other words, the world may be all dark and gloomy, but PCs are the shining points of light therein. Really, though, aside from WoD - what other games are tuned to "pessimistic" RP? Maybe I'm just out of the loop here.

It could also be the typical dichotomy where people say one thing yet do another.

Or, it could be a matter of perception.
A small village surrounded by a deep dark forest can be considered a "dark" setting.
Protecting the fluffy bunnies that live in the village from wolves can be pessimistic or optimistic depending on how many wolves there are.

So, "dark" settings do not equal pessimistic automaticly.
=

Hard to define.

I prefer grim settings, so those are definately pessimistic, but i choose them because they provide more opportunity for a campaign.

I do not run 'save the world' campaigns; in most cases, the PCs actions will not affect the big picture.

On the other hand, the PCs are not slated for inevitable death by the campaign; they can arrange it themselves, of course...

But as a whole the PCs can improve themselves in the long run (provided they live).

To me, the struggle is more important than the goal.

So I think on a scale where optimistic is a 10 and pessimistic is a 1, my campaigns would be around 6.

Quote from: Werekoala;310493Eh.... not so sure you're reading it right. I think there's more of an "optimistic play in a pessimistic setting" vibe here. In other words, the world may be all dark and gloomy, but PCs are the shining points of light therein. Really, though, aside from WoD - what other games are tuned to "pessimistic" RP? Maybe I'm just out of the loop here.

Really?

Okay then, can the PCs or "Good Guys" turn the tide in favor of the forces of Good in the MIDNIGHT RPG setting?


- Ed C.

Quote from: OneTinSoldier;310496To me, the struggle is more important than the goal.

This. I don't care if there's a happy ending or not, it's a matter of convention most of the time anyway. DVDs offer alternate endings, which is a cheap way to admit "yeah the happy ending didn't make fucking sense but the producers thought that it would be bad business to let the hero die at the end"... To hell with producers who think viewers are unable to appreciate a good story whether it ends well or not. I enjoy "dark" or "pessimistic" settings because it stimulates my imagination. Because bleak fucked up situations are the best stage to display the guts of society and important characters.

I wish Pundit would give example of optimistic settings because I fail to think of any right now. For instance Amber seems in between of the divide to me, like some dynamic equilibrium.

Quote from: Koltar;310502Really?

Okay then, can the PCs or "Good Guys" turn the tide in favor of the forces of Good in the MIDNIGHT RPG setting?

No idea, because I've never read it. Now CoC is definitely a pessimistic setting where PCs have no hope of changing "the big picture". I suppose Paranoia might be as well, but its supposed to be "dark humor". Oddly enough, in my group, those are the only two games that are flat no way, foot-down will not play settings. For them, at least. I wouldn't mind.

I don't think settings can be optimistic or pessimistic. Only narratives and agents can be. I do think there are settings that are more or less bleak, dystopian and wretched. I prefer settings that are bleak, but that do not constrain PC agency. For example, I quite like Midnight because even though the evil forces of Izrador rule the land, you feel free as a PC to do _anything_ because of that. By contrast, I remember reading Vampire 2e and thinking to myself "So what the hell are we supposed to do?"

Quote from: Werekoala;310493Eh.... not so sure you're reading it right. I think there's more of an "optimistic play in a pessimistic setting" vibe here. In other words, the world may be all dark and gloomy, but PCs are the shining points of light therein. Really, though, aside from WoD - what other games are tuned to "pessimistic" RP? Maybe I'm just out of the loop here.

Sorcerer *
Twilight 2000/2013 **
Traveller: The New Era **
Fading Suns ***
SLA Industries ***
Paranoia ****
Macho Women With Guns ****
Tales from the Floating Vagabond †


* it's all about how immoral will you be
** Both are points of light, but there is absolutely no need for the PC's to be those points of light, and in fact, players tend to be encouraged to be greedy warlords and or the raiding parties.
*** No you can't make a difference. You can only survive, and maybe thrive if evil enough.
**** as ***, but it's humorous as well, slapstick and funny.
† it's all about making a difference, by sheer ineptitude.

Quote from: aramis;310516Sorcerer *
Twilight 2000/2013 **
Traveller: The New Era **
Fading Suns ***
SLA Industries ***
Paranoia ****
Macho Women With Guns ****
Tales from the Floating Vagabond †


* it's all about how immoral will you be
** Both are points of light, but there is absolutely no need for the PC's to be those points of light, and in fact, players tend to be encouraged to be greedy warlords and or the raiding parties.
*** No you can't make a difference. You can only survive, and maybe thrive if evil enough.
**** as ***, but it's humorous as well, slapstick and funny.
† it's all about making a difference, by sheer ineptitude.

Don't forget to toss in Kult under the 3-star category. Arguably Call of Cthulhu lives there as well: you can't change the fact that the Old Ones are going to come back and destroy humanity, you can just delay them for as long as you can before you succumb.

Let me also add:

Dark Heresy ††
Whispering Vault ††

†† In principle, the PCs are points of light; in practice, this is only the case because their adversaries are much, much worse.

In the case of Dark Heresy, the Inquisition is a monstrous secret police force for a fascist state, and only count as heroes because the alternatives involve the destruction of absolutely everything it means to be human. In the case of the Whispering Vault, the PCs are otherworldly entities that, despite being former humans, are charged with maintaining the fabric of reality, not necessarily protecting individual human beings. In both cases, PCs end up behaving in a way which from the POV of the innocent bystanders affected are completely horrific, but from the POV of the PCs is actually less damaging than the alternatives.

(On this subject, has anyone here watched Sapphire & Steel? I always thought it provided an interesting model for a Whispering Vault game - yes, Sapphire and Steel aren't visually bizarre in the way Whispering Vault PCs can tend to be, but they otherwise end up doing much the same sort of stuff.)