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.

 

[Fergurg]

Mod Edit: My apologies - I gave you the wrong impression. Discussing moderation here was an exception to our standard operating procedure, and I didn't make that clear. I was making a clarification, not inviting free-for-all discussion.

From this point on, if you have a problem with the moderator directives, please take them to e-mail or PM. Let us not clutter up the thread with this further. Thank you.

~Umbran

 

[KirayaTiDrekan]

Has anyone around here play or have read the original BR? If so how do the rules support the genre? What is the setting like? How do the rules and/or setting support diversity and inclusiveness?

I read it and ran one session. Most of the diverse qualities were present in the setting as opposed to the rules. The rules were an early form of what became True20 and were thus somewhat...I don't want to say generic, but applicable to a variety of settings and genres, with Blue Rose being the first sample setting, so to speak.

My impression was the rules took some of the concepts from the 3.5 Unearthed Arcana (generic classes in particular) and then ran with them. The setting was ok for what it was trying to do but could have used a bit more conflict and/or bad guys. I am very much in support of Blue Rose, but I would like to see the setting be a little less idyllic and/or have a bit more detail on villains/creatures/events that threaten that idyllic setting.

 

[Stacie GmrGrl]

I hope they focus this edition of Blue Rose as a genre book of romantic fantasy with examples of different setting tools and examples so we can then use those tools to create our own settings in this genre. I also hope they go over a lot of the fantasy novels that make up this genre and show how this take on the AGE system can be used to pull it off.

As for everything else being discussed... I think the only reason they made the comment about BR bringing awareness to being inclusive is because back in 2005 I can't remember any other RPG actually making it really a part of its game design motif and it being a game about romantic fantasy, which is a genre where one of the main elements of this genre of fantasy is dealing with the ideas of being aware of the differences between people and life, forming relationships and coming together of communities and even a kingdom where everybody is accepted and the relationships that form truly matter. Life, nature, and inclusiveness matter within the majority of romantic fantasy, as that's just how this particular genre of fantasy simply is.

So yes any game based on romantic fantasy must go over all these topics... Not as any political statement but because its quite genre specific and appropriate and it kinda has to be noted in any advertising about the game because it relates to what romantic fantasy is all about so we all can then decide for ourselves to support it or not.

I'd like go know how the AGE system will pull this off. I plan on getting the Dragon Age RPG when it comes out and from what I have seen of the DA: Inquisition game, which does quite a lot of romance in it... Maybe AGE system will work.

 

[KirayaTiDrekan]

I've been collecting the Dragon Age RPG, though, sadly, I haven't gotten a chance to play it, yet. The Dragon Age video games are also at the forefront of being inclusive with the range of relationship options in the games and the inclusion of Krem, a transgender NPC, in Dragon Age: Inquisition.

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

If you want to look at other settings with politicial leanings embedded within them:

World of Darkness: Left-wing horror, since it focuses on alienation of the self from society.
Call of Cthulhu: Right-wing horror, since it presents human society as something fragile that needs to be protected against the alien Other at all costs.

That doesn't mean either can't be enjoyed by gamers of particular political leaning, but these games were never really "apolitical" in the first place.

 

[Mikaze]

Well this is certainly timely considering what's going on with Gencon.

Personally I was onboard primarily for optimistic, non-grimdark fantasy with the inclusiveness simply deeply appreciated. Now I'm grateful for it on a very different level.

 

[Nellisir]

I read it and ran one session. Most of the diverse qualities were present in the setting as opposed to the rules. The rules were an early form of what became True20 and were thus somewhat...I don't want to say generic, but applicable to a variety of settings and genres, with Blue Rose being the first sample setting, so to speak.

My impression was the rules took some of the concepts from the 3.5 Unearthed Arcana (generic classes in particular) and then ran with them. The setting was ok for what it was trying to do but could have used a bit more conflict and/or bad guys. I am very much in support of Blue Rose, but I would like to see the setting be a little less idyllic and/or have a bit more detail on villains/creatures/events that threaten that idyllic setting.

My impression was much the same. I liked the setting quite a lot, but it was also a bit...vanilla (?) and could have used more sophistication, I think. But it was also recognizably true to the foundation upon which it rested. The Blue Rose books are some of the few that I kept when I sold most of my d20 collection.

True20, which evolved out of Blue Rose, had a lot of potential. Personally, I couldn't stand it's presentation and graphic design. It looked good in BR, and terrible in the "core" True20 books. It went too generic.

 

[shamsael]

(and don't let the Anita Sarkeesians of the world hear that you've reduced a woman's love to something you roll dice for... their heads would explode)!

I'm not a feminist by any stretch, but this argument is ridiculous. Let's pretend we don't already reduce to a die roll a living creature's ability to survive despite the protagonist's righteous desire to kill it.

Not being an Anita Sarkeesian myself I can't say for sure, but I would bet that if the same die roll governs the love of any creature, man or woman, there's by definition no sexism involved.

 

[shamsael]

Isn't fantasy supposed to be about imagining a life you couldn't otherwise live? I'm sad to think that there are enough people in the world with a lack of real world romance and politics that we can support an RPG based on imagining them.

 

[TreChriron]

Isn't fantasy supposed to be about imagining a life you couldn't otherwise live? I'm sad to think that there are enough people in the world with a lack of real world romance and politics that we can support an RPG based on imagining them.

I imagine a world someday where we don't toss a group of people under the bus as having a "lack of romance and politics". Or what about "I find it sad to think that there are enough people in the world with a lack of conflict and adventure that we can support an RPG based on imagining them..."

Let's start with your original supposition. "Imagining a life you couldn't otherwise live" Excellent. So, can I otherwise live these?

• Playing a sentient animal who is a spy for the White Witch, watching the human lands to ensure policies don't ruin the untouched north...
• Playing a courtier in a "medieval realm" castle surrounded by fellow courtiers from the Elven, Dwarven, Orcish and Gnomish lands...
• (as a hetero-male) playing a homosexual lover to the Prince who is constantly harried by his evil uncle who wants to usurp the throne...

I mean. The list goes on and on. Fantasy is fantasy. Maybe I like to insert a little political or romantic themes into the mix? When I fantasize about make-believe I don't want to jump head first into current headlines (they already hurt my soul). I want to escape. And you may have a perfect romantic life, but maybe some of us want to fantasize about other romantic possibilities?

You may not want to (or see the "need" to... whatever that word is doing in our discussion about hobby happy times...) play Blue Rose, but can't those of us who might be interested have the game?