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!

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.

​

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.

 

[TreChriron]

I liked the original game. True20 was refreshing take on the d20 mechanics. I'm not as familiar with AGE system, but I think I need to pick up some Dragon Age when the hardcover comes out.

Anyone played AGE? Thoughts?

 

[Ace]

SNIP

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. SNIP

"

That's not your or anyone else's call really, People need simple neutral, apolitical facts in areas are interested in, not an assumed leftism is correct slant The assumptions you are going by are called entryim and wholly unnecessary and in fact bad for the hobby

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."

So? Its their space and no one has a right to be included in private space nor does anyone have an obligation to like, respect or even tolerate anyone else in that private space.

In fact everyone will find it copacetic to stay out of each others ways. Anti Trans or Gay or even Racist gamers don't need reeducation, they need to be left alone to their own space and if that space has no room for interesting differences, its on them. They aren't hurting you by excluding you and as i said, you don't have a right to inclusion. If they prefer MYFAROG to Blue Rose, so be it.

On those grounds I'd like to prevent a TTRPG version of the underlying cause of the Gamergate BS, For the love of dice, do not try to hijack other peoples resources for your political agenda when a lot of people in the tangential hobby don't share it or just don't care.Instead make the games you want and offer them to the market and knowing gamers you'll sell plenty. Blue Rose sold very well because it was great end of story, take advantage of the low cost of entry to make make great games and they'll sell.

The only way for a free country or an open hobby to work is when you run into unpleasant opinions re: gender identity ex roles, violence, sexual preference, race and all that the solution is to address the points with facts if you feel like it in any case accept that a lot of people have opinions you aren't going to like, won't change their mind and there is nothing you can or should do about it,. You don't need to police public discourse in gaming like some Stalinist putsch just say it like it as and let the smart people figure it out. I have a lot of confidence in gamers to make good calls and you should too. This is also why I have a serious issue with the guys at Evil Hat pushing the satirical Gamergate card game off DTRPG, its shows they don't respect me to make my own choices, have no confidence in me or my fellows and are willing to use economic muscle to make it harder for me to make those choices. This is the kind of conduct that is a direct insult and one that leads to a closed off hobby instead of an open one. Green Ronin has to their credit never done that.

That said if someone wants to buck the trends and chooses to make something that stands out like Blue Rose , Lou Porter or the others do, defend it, let your friends know as GR did and let the market figure it out. As I said earlier, I am quite far right yet I own a complete collection of Blue Rose, That's what quality does. Its sells games which benefits everyone.
.

 

[KirayaTiDrekan]

Not sure I'm understanding your point, here. You say not to squash opinions, but...what, exactly? Chris Pramas isn't allowed to make a statement because he owns a game company? I'm not allowed to agree with and support that statement? Evil Hat isn't allowed to make a statement by putting out a satirical product? Help me out here, what's your point?

Edit: Also, thanks for pointing out another game company that's deserving of more of my money. I had been planning on checking out Fate. Now its higher on my list of things to do.

 

[redrick]

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."

This is a great explanation of the value of active inclusivity. Well said.

 

[Ace]

Not sure I'm understanding your point, here. You say not to squash opinions, but...what, exactly? Chris Pramas isn't allowed to make a statement because he owns a game company? I'm not allowed to agree with and support that statement? Evil Hat isn't allowed to make a statement by putting out a satirical product? Help me out here, what's your point?

Edit: Also, thanks for pointing out another game company that's deserving of more of my money. I had been planning on checking out Fate. Now its higher on my list of things to do.

Evil Hat actually used its presence in the gaming industry to censor a product. Warning here this is the Kotaku subreddit .

I have a big problem with censorship and bullying and Evil Hat in this case acted in that fashion. No humor, no tolerance of divergent opinions is nothing to be proud of

Now Evil Hat, they do make good games and I don't feel bad about sending them a little accidental business. In fact I've played FATE more than a little before . It was fun and free and legal to download. You'll like it. I know I did. had they not acted as they did, I'd be pushing Dresden files for the group

The thing is I do no business with bullies or censors or narrow minded people . The principle of market choice and free speech is more important than they Evil Hat and bigger than all of us. Its the hobby's prime directive and should not be violated.

As such I cannot in good conscience play or run anything Evil Hat makes . However I won't fault you for doing it and as its your space feel free to play and enjoy their games many of which are high quality and this won't effect someone who wants to game with me which is I think the difference here. You can play anything in your space and I won't care so long as it doesn't spill over, The personal must not be political , there is too much of that already. There are too few of us to support infighting and we geeks need to hang together or our hobby will suffer.

As for what Pramas did, I have no issue at all. The only reason they aren't selling me any Blue Rose this time out is I already have it all and don't want any AGE games. Come back with new True 20 or Original System stuff and l OTOH and I'll be there,

Also your statement here

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."

Its not about you, really its not. Instead this looks like classic Entryism and even though I am sympathetic to your feelings on that matter, I simply have to not care, Go play with some other group if you aren't happy and leave the groups who dislike you to their own affairs. I hope that's clear .

After all that understand you and I have more in common gaming wise than you think I personally enjoy interesting and inclusive games and a diverse gaming hobby is generally a good thing but keeping that means everyone minds their own business and allows people without rancor or interference to find the games they want . Inclusiveness means intolerant or narrow voices also have value and this hobby benefits from Carcosa, Blue Rose and MYFAROG alike. Anything that appears to lay the ground work for a threat to that like entryism needs to be quashed.

 

[psiconauta_retro]

I wasn't aware of Blue Rose and this phrase of the 1st post caught my attention:

"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."

From the other answers I see that there are transgender characters and that the diversity and inclusiveness refers to sexual orientation. Which are the other diversity and inclusiveness related issues it deals with?

It sounds very appealing that, for the appropriate campaigns, there can be more robust rules for social interaction.

 

[fjw70]

How do the romantic relationships of BR work?

 

[remial]

Evil Hat actually used its presence in the gaming industry to censor a product. Warning here this is the Kotaku subreddit .

yeah, I went to the developer's web site and bought a copy of his game specifically because Evil Hat didn't want it sold.

Fred Hicks has also attacked Zak S. and Mandy Morbid of "I hit it with my Axe" and "D&D with porn stars" because they don't conform to his idea of what a feminist (or trans friendly) gamer should be.

I believe one of his lines was something along the lines of "Zak S. is one of those people I think should self-abort."

 

[Morrus]

We're not bringing those particular conflicts to EN World. If you want to discuss them, please find a different venue to do so. Thanks.

 

[fjw70]

I wasn't aware of Blue Rose and this phrase of the 1st post caught my attention:

"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."

From the other answers I see that there are transgender characters and that the diversity and inclusiveness refers to sexual orientation. Which are the other diversity and inclusiveness related issues it deals with?

It sounds very appealing that, for the appropriate campaigns, there can be more robust rules for social interaction.

Are the diversity and inclusiveness tackled through the rules or just as setting fluff?