Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Clint_L" data-source="post: 9387958" data-attributes="member: 7035894">I agree with the overall gist of your post. However, I don't agree with this statement, not because of the way that you are using it, but because of the way others have used similar sentiments (historical realism) to justify making game choices that many would find objectionable.Because ALL depictions of faux-historical societies that I have ever seen in a TTRPG have almost all of the historical differences, including wrongs, removed. OD&D settings were not more similar to actual Medieval English culture than 5e settings. It's like discussing whether Universal Studios or Disneyland is more realistic. D&D, in order to be playable, has always just had the merest bit of medieval lipstick applied.So really, this is about choosing which lipstick you and your players prefer. A shade of lipstick that is a bit more racist? Misogynistic? Hierarchal? Inequitable? It's a fantasy game, and if that makes it feel more realistic and immersive to you, I ain't gonna judge, unless I'm playing.My own home campaign had a story develop in which the low level characters helped a group of sex workers fight back against a pimp. We're all consenting adults, everyone was comfortable with the themes, I certainly didn't get into too much realism, and it was by all accounts a very satisfying story arc, with a few long term ramifications (my spouse's character afterwards kept sending money back to the emancipated sex workers, to help them establish their own collective).On the other hand, at school I don't go near a plot like that with a ten foot pole, and would redirect any choices the players made that headed in such a direction. We all agree up front that L wants to keep his job so it is a PG campaign, and that is that. If a student starts crossing the line, which happens not infrequently, I remind them of the agreement and they make a different choice.On that last point, and circling back to the premise of this thread, one thing that I think has changed, and decidedly for the better, is that D&D doesn't rely on assumptions as much as it used to. New groups are much more likely to discuss ground rules up front, or raise objections when they find the play erring in a, well, objectionable direction.I think this is a sign of cultural change within D&D related to the much increased diversity of its player base. Speaking for myself, it was easy to assume that everyone was on the same page when we were all a bunch of 13 year old white boys from Nanaimo. I mean, we were still wrong, but not as wrong as we would have been if some of us were [gasp] girls. But these days, a new group at my club is mixed between genders, ethnicities, religious points of view, and so on, and so being up front about assumptions, and changing them from assumptions to understandings, is imperative.</blockquote>

Verification