D&D General Al-Qadim, Campaign Guide: Zakhara, and Cultural Sensitivity

[doctorbadwolf]

I can understand people preferring to play in a more modern theme park version of historically-inspired gaming, I really can. To me though, it seems disingenuous to present a setting that looks kinda like a place and period in history, but with all the parts we don't like cut out.

IT's not a "theme park", there is nothing disingenuous about imagining a more optimistic world, using historical settings as inspiration does not obligate anyone to including anything specific from that setting, and frankly your wording here is needlessly dismissive and comes across like you think your mode of play is somehow superior to others.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Stuff like Al-Qadim pushes that envelope though.

I don't see how. It's about as much a Southwest Asia analogue as Dragonlance is a Central and Western Europe analogue.

But even if it were literally set in Al Andalus, or Egypt, or Persia, so what? That doesn't obligate anyone to including slavery and religous persecution any more than playing in a land of European fables come to life. It's a fantasy game, with dragons and wizards. The "stuff we don't like" isn't important to the story or the gaming experience, and calling people disingenuous for not including them is BS.

It's not even about history. Find me a cop game that deals with civil rights violations.

Yeah, these days I can't even really stomach shows like Brooklyn 99, that go out of their way to show a fantastical world where the cops are the good guys, because the reality is a bit too visceral for me, living in a county that the Guardian did a big piece about a few years ago detailing the astronomical rate of lethal police action compared to the rest of the nation.

But if I were to play a game wherein you play as a cop? Nah. Lynching, murder, extortion, sexual assault and coercion, etc, are things that the bad guys do. Full stop. If a game has a premise that manages to make me comfortable playing a cop, I'm only gonna do it if we are playing in the magical fantasy version of reality wherein that doesn't make my PC an enforcer of the threat of violence by the dominant socio-political ethnic group.

 

[Reynard]

I don't see how. It's about as much a Southwest Asia analogue as Dragonlance is a Central and Western Europe analogue.

But even if it were literally set in Al Andalus, or Egypt, or Persia, so what? That doesn't obligate anyone to including slavery and religous persecution any more than playing in a land of European fables come to life. It's a fantasy game, with dragons and wizards. The "stuff we don't like" isn't important to the story or the gaming experience, and calling people disingenuous for not including them is BS.

Yeah, these days I can't even really stomach shows like Brooklyn 99, that go out of their way to show a fantastical world where the cops are the good guys, because the reality is a bit too visceral for me, living in a county that the Guardian did a big piece about a few years ago detailing the astronomical rate of lethal police action compared to the rest of the nation.

But if I were to play a game wherein you play as a cop? Nah. Lynching, murder, extortion, sexual assault and coercion, etc, are things that the bad guys do. Full stop. If a game has a premise that manages to make me comfortable playing a cop, I'm only gonna do it if we are playing in the magical fantasy version of reality wherein that doesn't make my PC an enforcer of the threat of violence by the dominant socio-political ethnic group.

Right. My point wasn't to bring up real world politics so much as to say that in almost all of our fantasy games, we are embracing idealized, "fun" versions of those things, regardless of genre or milieu. As such, I don't think it is a great sin to leave out the ugly parts of "history" when we pretend to be elves.

 

[Micah Sweet]

IT's not a "theme park", there is nothing disingenuous about imagining a more optimistic world, using historical settings as inspiration does not obligate anyone to including anything specific from that setting, and frankly your wording here is needlessly dismissive and comes across like you think your mode of play is somehow superior to others.

I said I get it. Obviously I think my way is superior, for me, or I would play differently. That's what preferences are. Other people can play as they want, for whatever reason they want, and that's fine. Explaining my preferences doesn't automatically denigrate your own.

And as I said, I make allowances for my players if someone has an issue. This stuff might not even come up, depending on the adventure.

 

[Dukey]

IT's not a "theme park", there is nothing disingenuous about imagining a more optimistic world, using historical settings as inspiration does not obligate anyone to including anything specific from that setting, and frankly your wording here is needlessly dismissive and comes across like you think your mode of play is somehow superior to others.

If you use the name of an existing setting and completely change the spirit of it, it is disingenuous if you claim it to be the same setting with the same name after all of these changes. It would be better to create a new setting if you change a lot of things vital to that setting.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Right. My point wasn't to bring up real world politics so much as to say that in almost all of our fantasy games, we are embracing idealized, "fun" versions of those things, regardless of genre or milieu. As such, I don't think it is a great sin to leave out the ugly parts of "history" when we pretend to be elves.

Using the "it's just a pretend elf-game" cliche is never going to work for me. You do you though.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Right. My point wasn't to bring up real world politics so much as to say that in almost all of our fantasy games, we are embracing idealized, "fun" versions of those things, regardless of genre or milieu. As such, I don't think it is a great sin to leave out the ugly parts of "history" when we pretend to be elves.

Oh i know, sorry, my intent was to agree emphatically with what you were saying, using cop stories as the main example. (see also, Dresden Files, which really wants the cops to be mostly good folks doing their best, but has gotten more nuanced about that over time)

 

[Micah Sweet]

I do think you can get away with theme park settings, as long as you're very clear (preferably in a sidebar) that that's what you're doing. Plenty of products in the 90s did this.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I said I get it. Obviously I think my way is superior, for me, or I would play differently. That's what preferences are. Other people can play as they want, for whatever reason they want, and that's fine. Explaining my preferences doesn't automatically denigrate your own.

And as I said, I make allowances for my players if someone has an issue. This stuff might not even come up, depending on the adventure.

You are ignoring the part where you directly denigrated other people's preference by referring to it as disingenuous.

If you use the name of an existing setting and completely change the spirit of it, it is disingenuous if you claim it to be the same setting with the same name after all of these changes. It would be better to create a new setting if you change a lot of things vital to that setting.

Nope. None of that is true beyond your own game and preferences for it.

And if you view slavery and oppression as so vital to medieval Islamic states that removing them makes it no longer really those places, well, I'm not sure how to politely respond to that idea, other than to say that it is incredibly reductive and ignores centuries of culture, advancement, and history, that are not at all defined by those elements.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I do think you can get away with theme park settings, as long as you're very clear (preferably in a sidebar) that that's what you're doing. Plenty of products in the 90s did this.

Not having state sponsored slavery or not featuring rape and child abuse doesn't make a setting into a "theme park".