BLUE ROSE Returns, Championing Diversity & Inclusiveness

Back in 2005, Green Ronin published a roleplaying game called Blue Rose. It was designed by Jeremy Crawford (yep, him who works at WotC on D&D 5E), Steve "Mutants & Masterminds" Kenson (that's his actual middle name), Dawn Elliot, and John Snead, and was billed as a "romantic fantasy" game, of the genre for whom Tamora Pierce, Mercedes Lackey, and Jacqueline Carey are known. It used the True20 System, which was a slimmed-down, modified version of the d20 System, and won multiple ENnies. And now it's back!

Back in 2005, Green Ronin published a roleplaying game called Blue Rose. It was designed by Jeremy Crawford (yep, him who works at WotC on D&D 5E), Steve "Mutants & Masterminds" Kenson (that's his actual middle name), Dawn Elliot, and John Snead, and was billed as a "romantic fantasy" game, of the genre for whom Tamora Pierce, Mercedes Lackey, and Jacqueline Carey are known. It used the True20 System, which was a slimmed-down, modified version of the d20 System, and won multiple ENnies. And now it's back!

This time round, the game will be using the Adventure Game Engine, which powers the Dragon Age RPG, and will be funded via a Kickstarter launching in April. One of Green Ronin's reasons for bringing it back is that the game tackled a number of diversity and inclusiveness related issues, and those issues are very much the subject of intense - and often unpleasant - debate and conflict today.

You can click on the cover image below for the full announcement from Green Ronin's Chris Pramas.

BlueRoseCover.jpg

What's Romantic Fantasy? It's "a subgenre of fantasy fiction, describing a fantasy story using many of the elements and conventions of the romance genre". According to Wikipedia, the genre's focus is on social, political, and romantic relationships.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


log in or register to remove this ad

DM Howard

Explorer
I always liked the idea of Blue Rose, my friend has all the books, but we've never actually played it. Happy to see it getting some attention.
 

Regarding the cynical comments about political agendas and, "But RPGs are already inclusive, no need to advertise it."

I have the original game, and because of it, I got the True20 system. The introduction of the game gives a pretty good description of the genre its trying to emulate. Hey, why not? Those books had their fans, and certainly we saw plenty of games around works of specific writers and sub-genres.

RPGs aren't inclusive or non-inclusive; they are systems often with some embedded campaign elements. The campaign & its setting is where you get it. Anyone can make any version of D&D inclusive if they want to, and likewise, anyone can beat the nutritional value out of Blue Rose if they want to. The embedded campaign in the Blue Rose RPG (I don't have the later books) certainly has inclusive elements in it. But I think you'll find that people were running inclusive campaigns well before that. A friend of mine ran such a campaign in 1981 using Dragonquest.

The game doesn't rub me the wrong way, but touting a game as "better than XXX for its inclusiveness" rubs many people the wrong way - and I don't think they are entirely wrong to feel that way. Its much like the story games vs rpgs argument. Along with the message that its a game worth playing, someone wraps that in a message that its superior to whatever you were doing before, and not liking that makes you a backwards neanderthal hater.

When I heard Blue Rose was coming back, my first thought was okay, cool, why not. After reading Chris' blog entry, I lost interest. I wouldn't say no if someone offered to run the game. I don't find the embedded setting unattractive. But the message that this game is being embedded into runs contrary to a simple, but effective principle:

Don't pick yourself up by pushing others down.
 


KirayaTiDrekan

Adventurer
That's the thing about inclusivity, though. The straight, white, cisgender, male gamer doesn't ever worry about being included, about being represented. He knows that the game defaults to him and takes it for granted. Seeing a game make an effort, indeed make it a point, to include folks other than that "default" means we get to feel acknowledged.

For people who are used to being invisible at best, hated at worst, having a game say, "Hey, you exist and are valued," is so incredibly important that its hard to express. It is, therefore, likewise important, that Green Ronin and other companies be vocal about taking that stand.

Being inclusive and being vocal about it is not, in any way, pushing anyone down. It is saying, "Hey, we want everyone to have an equal space at the game table."
 

Ace

Adventurer
That's the thing about inclusivity, though. The straight, white, cisgender, male gamer doesn't ever worry about being included, about being represented. He knows that the game defaults to him and takes it for granted. Seeing a game make an effort, indeed make it a point, to include folks other than that "default" means we get to feel acknowledged.

For people who are used to being invisible at best, hated at worst, having a game say, "Hey, you exist and are valued," is so incredibly important that its hard to express. It is, therefore, likewise important, that Green Ronin and other companies be vocal about taking that stand.

Being inclusive and being vocal about it is not, in any way, pushing anyone down. It is saying, "Hey, we want everyone to have an equal space at the game table."

For clarity , this isn't about marketing but social policy, From a market POV s assuming anyone else need to care about "others" is inaccurate they really don't as gaming has and tabletop RPG's will continue to do well as a somewhat conservative White Middle/working Class Heterosexual Cis Gendered Male pastime for High IQ Geeks right where they started. Its about 20% female now as well at least as of 2000 or so. From the Escapist Unless there was a huge influx from the LGBT communities I don't think gaming would even notice since the LGBT community itself isn't very large, maybe twice the size of D&D players in the US and most aren't geeks AFAIK

If saleswas the issue than Hispanic, Asian and Black outreach makes much more sense. That's nearly 50% of the young people now vs maybe 4% for LGBT

That said I don't see games that address issues of otherness whether they be Blue Rose or Wraeththu or even Furry centric games in a respectful and quality way are a bad thing. I think they are a good thing in general and games like Blue Rose being masterfully written manages to breach the boundaries and appeal to several communities, I like this . I also think the iconic Pathfinder Shaman being Transgendered was pretty cool, its a unique way to address something the authors cared about and done in a very clever way with some historical precedent.

Under no circumstances should anyone take this as anti "other" post either I've had gaymers in my group and bi folks as well and they are perfectly welcome, bigotry isn't welcome since it takes away fun and I've never had a group that is that uptight. For most us its grab some dice and lets play. As an aside most have ever seen transfolk in gaming though we do have them in our community (Jannell formerly Paul Jaquays) of course. Transfolk are after all less than that about 700,000 in the entire US, about 1/2 of 1% of adults and in fact there are more Roma (1 million or so) and most people have never seen any of them either. Hopefully either of these groups can be portrayed with respect when they are used in games. Maybe good games can have that benefit with going Starbucks on us . Heck as long as no one pulls another piece of drek like World of Darkness Gypsies I'll be happy

I've noticed that most gamers are pretty tolerant and their is plenty of room in the hobby for all kind of views as, I've had groups of 100% BDSM people and that about as .alt as you can get. Whatever movement to inclusiveness is pretty welcome since gaming being what it is can create its own spaces that suit each group needs which is all anyone can ask for. Nobody gets in anyone else's space, the tolerant have spaces, the people needing safe spaces haven and them the trads and such have theirs too. The only real issue might be conventions but that happily I don't have to deal with.

On a personal note I also hope that people with other views take advantage of the low cost of entry to create cool stuff with independent views for themselves and when possible everyone. This is good for our community and while we are a creative lot sometimes we trod the same paths too much. I like these paths and I think most people do and vote with their wallet but good new ideas are good for the community .

Its not easy to do, even Lou Porter' abortion themed D20 Choice and Blood was no hit , no ones cuppa apparently but it had value as can Blue Rose.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

I think it's very fortunate that nobody has said that, then! :)

I thought with the XXX it was clear the quotes were there for paraphrasing or emphasis rather than an actual, direct quote but Ill know better next time ;-)

Injecting a moral high ground into the message is one way to do just that. And to reiterate, while I don't see that moral high ground in the first edition of the RPG, going out of your way to bring back the game with the message seems (sorry for my cynicism) as opportunistic as anything else.
 

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
I thought with the XXX it was clear the quotes were there for paraphrasing or emphasis rather than an actual, direct quote but Ill know better next time

It's more that you're injecting entire things which aren't there and attributing them to people who didn't say them - and then castigating them for saying the things you yourself created. Nobody claimed their game was better than anybody else's, let alone for the reasons you ... errr ... "paraphrase". I think that's just in your head; it's certainly not on that page, either explicitly or implicitly.
 

That's the thing about inclusivity, though. The straight, white, cisgender, male gamer doesn't ever worry about being included, about being represented. He knows that the game defaults to him and takes it for granted. Seeing a game make an effort, indeed make it a point, to include folks other than that "default" means we get to feel acknowledged.

Please do not reduce people of a race/gender/sexual orientation into a stereotype, even for a frame of reference.

Being inclusive and being vocal about it is not, in any way, pushing anyone down. It is saying, "Hey, we want everyone to have an equal space at the game table."

In itself, I agree that it need not push anyone down, so long as the language used doesn't create a new frame of reference that places other games or players of other games in a negative light to differentiate itself. Do you agree?

The setting (as I perceived it from the first edition) is inclusive. Some players are uncomfortable playing characters with a significantly different world view than themselves, but not all players.
 

KirayaTiDrekan

Adventurer
Please do not reduce people of a race/gender/sexual orientation into a stereotype, even for a frame of reference.



In itself, I agree that it need not push anyone down, so long as the language used doesn't create a new frame of reference that places other games or players of other games in a negative light to differentiate itself. Do you agree?

The setting (as I perceived it from the first edition) is inclusive. Some players are uncomfortable playing characters with a significantly different world view than themselves, but not all players.

Its not a stereotype in this instance, its a demographic. A stereotype would be assigning a personality trait to the straight, white, male, cisgender gamer. Plenty of non-gamers do that on a regular basis; no need to perpetuate it here.

Other companies and players and games need to have a negative light shone on them if they are indulging in negative stereotypes, bigotry, or discrimination. That said Mr. Pramas does not disparage any company, group, player, or game in his statement. He doesn't make any accusations and he doesn't state that Blue Rose will be better at being inclusive than any other game, just that inclusivity is one of its primary goals. The implication of a "new frame of reference that places other games or players of other games in a negative light" is reading something between the lines that isn't there. Posthuman Studios, Paizo, Wizards of the Coast - all have made public and vocal steps toward inclusivity. Green Ronin is simply emphasizing the point, so to speak, not placing itself above.

If a player is uncomfortable with the content of Blue Rose, they don't have to play it. However, demeaning it and those who do want to play it and arguing against its existence is a step beyond that. Its a step that says, "Not only am I uncomfortable playing characters with a significantly different world view, I'm uncomfortable with acknowledging that those world views exist in my space."
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top