Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 9580210" data-attributes="member: 18">I strongly disagree that kids need or want "counterbalancing". If that was true, 40K would have fallen out of favour with teenagers long ago, rather than going from strength to strength.Kids who are beyond the weepy/clingy (so like, what 8? 9?) age are way more armoured against apocalyptic scenarios like that than adults are, are way more accepting of them in "Oh well" kind of way, and so on.The actual people who you're talking about aren't "kids" at all, it's 20-somethings, particularly mid-late 20s, that's who need "sincere heart and humour" or they can't take stuff. It's no accident that the utter cults that form around "sincere heart and humour" shows are mostly actually filled by 20-somethings (as demonstrated extremely well by countless fandoms in the '10s, particularly on Tumblr). In fact, a lot of them are in their 30s and 40s, or even older.I will say it's important to kids that the dark can be fought, but not that there's some cheery comfy cozy cup of tea MFers doing so.With respect, it 100% is your own biases.So is the difference between what you call chiarascuro fantasy and grimdark. One man's grimdark is another man's chiarascuro, if people just look at it differently. Grimderp is real but that's usually just bad writing by not very bright and/or thoughtful writers, same with goofy dark.I used to like the "sincere heart and humour" stuff myself but it's become so trope-y and repetitive in its execution, or most of it has, that's almost become almost like gothic literature, absolutely predictable and feeling very "put on" rather than genuinely sincere - even when it is! Simply because it's hitting notes we've seen hit a hundred times before (and often not as well as the previous attempts). Ironically I'd draw a similarity to the "crosses the line twice" sentiment you express - it's very easy for "sincere heart and humour" stuff to do exactly that, and end up just looking fake as hell, even if the author totally, totally means it.I attempt to avoid bias here by looking at what I liked when I was a kid and seeing if kids still like that, and hell yeah they do.I feel like it's a big risk to try and inject "sincere heart and humour" into a setting you're writing/designing, because really that stuff flows from the characters, and when you try and jam it into a setting, or make a dark setting full of weirdly cheery characters, I think that can go very wrong.I feel like I'm not expressing this as clearly as I could be, but if see a wanker in a tweed suit with round glasses and a kindly expression and neat goatee and greying big hair if masc-presenting or greying big hair tied back haphazardly if femme-presenting, perhaps with random steampunk prosthetic limb, I know we're in for a very stereotypical and tired time.Kids don't need comfy. Kids don't cozy. That's stuff for older people or small children, not kids (as in like, people the age we were when most of us started playing). To be clear I know you're not saying they do, but a lot of stuff that tries to have "sincere heart and humour" immediately veers very hard into cozy/comfy stuff.I will say I think it's a little safer to inject a bit heart into a setting that to try and go for the full "sincere heart and humour" deal. Like sincerity, humour, those are relevant to a TV show, less so a setting. The PCs will provide humour. There's no question. There's no need for designers to add in any of their own and indeed it can be counterproductive to insist on doing so. Likewise sincerity - that's going to be on the group and the DM, not the setting.Sorry I'm really blathering on and still haven't fully gathered my thoughts on this, but I think it's very much less-is-more here re: "heart and humour", especially with settings rather than TV shows or books.</blockquote>

Verification