#Feminism Is A Collection of 34 "Nanogames" From Designers Around The World

Hussar · May 11, 2017

-Wing-Zero- said:
has anyone ever been girldescended(condescended) to? it's a new phrase i just made up to apply a gender tag to a negative behavior because it's easier to make blanket statements this way.

See, this is the kind of thing that makes discussing these kinds of games so difficult. It adds nothing to the conversation, is entirely motivated by the poster's particular politics and is just troll bait.

Why is it so hard to actually stick to the topic?

I totally agree with [MENTION=6867728]ArchfiendBobbie[/MENTION]'s description of Call of Cthulu and I also agree that Paizo has made great strides forward in making their games more inclusive. That's fantastic. But, it is also slightly beside my point though. Sure, CoC includes guidance on how to deal with race relations in early 20th century America. Fair enough. But, that's not really what the game is about though, is it? I don't think it's terribly controversial to say that Call of Cthulu is not a game about dealing with the issue of race relations in early 20th century America. Does anyone think that it is?

So, if someone bangs out an RPG dealing with race relations (in whatever time period), instead of arguing with the politics behind the game, why not just take it as a game. In and of itself. The game posits X and Y as true. Does the game succeed in bringing X and Y to the table for the purposes of exploring X and Y?

Are these nano-games the greatest thing in the world? Probably not. Are they going to take the hobby by storm and knock off D&D out of top spot? Almost certainly not. These are niche games that appeal to very niche sets of players. Arguing with the initial set-ups of the games isn't actually accomplishing anything. All that does is dive down a deep dark rabbit hole where everyone gets pissed off and starts shouting from their soapbox. Completely pointless.

But, what we can do is examine these games, and see if they actually do what they're supposed to. Are they successful in what they are trying to do? I don't know. I haven't read them. All I've read is [MENTION=12377]77IM[/MENTION]'s reviews. From what 77IM has said, it appears that most of the games actually do succeed in what they set out to do. Fair enough. That's enough of a recommendation to give them a spin, AFAIC.

Jumping up and down about how these games don't fit into your particular political views isn't really productive. Nothing good will come from that conversation.

Dannyalcatraz · May 11, 2017

Hussar said:
Yes, because an RPG focused on racial issues would be such a terrible thing for the hobby that we shouldn't even acknowledge it's existence.

Funny how games like FATAL have never raised this. Should we ban any mention of FATAL? Or, maybe Book of Vile Darkness, since it deals with mature themes that might offend someone out there.

Just for the record, there is a racially focused RPGout there, and it is usually lumped together with FATAL for its sheer offensiveness: the white supremacist RPG RaHoWa. The less said of it, the better.

(HYBRID- while clearly racist and sexist- is also possibly more the work of a deranged mind than an actual RPGintended to be played.)

Hussar · May 11, 2017

Dannyalcatraz said:
Just for the record, there is a racially focused RPGout there, and it is usually lumped together with FATAL for its sheer offensiveness: the white supremacist RPG RaHoWa. The less said of it, the better.

(HYBRID- while clearly racist and sexist- is also possibly more the work of a deranged mind than an actual RPGintended to be played.)

Sadly that does not surprise me. :/

To be fair there are a ton on issues based rpg's out there that are actually pretty good.

Celebrim · May 11, 2017

Hussar said:
Jumping up and down about how these games don't fit into your particular political views isn't really productive. Nothing good will come from that conversation.

Earlier, one of the posters made a statement that if there was a game that focused on political beliefs he didn't subscribe to, that he'd be really excited by that and would purchase it and play it continually.

At first I thought that I could prove him wrong by suggesting political microgames that he would not want to play.

But then I realized as I was brainstorming that that any political microgame even if nominally was supposed to encourage discussion of things I actually believe would also be offensive to me, because it would trivialize things I consider too important (or in some cases, sacred). Further, any such game that took on a truly complex and serious topic, would invariably if it had just a simple tag line not actually teach the subject in a way that was respectful either to the subject or the mentality of those that I wanted to reach.

In short, I started to realize from this exercise that I had the opposite opinion of the poster completely. Not only was I offended by these games that didn't have exactly my politics, but I probably would have been even more offended by (and embarrassed by) a game that was trying to represent itself as having my politics and viewpoint. I don't think that there is such a game as #mybeliefs because I don't think you can put my beliefs down into some one page didactic microgame and record them correctly much less teach others why I believe like I do.

In another prior thread we had a discussion of the morality of Monopoly, which began as a game designed to teach a certain moral system, namely, a game designed to teach Georgist economics. In it I noted that, as in Georgist economics, the landlord and the taxman are the bad guys, and because the game is almost solely about rent seeking behavior, ultimately no one ends up winning. Someone ends with all the cash, but there is (if played by the original rules) generally less cash in play at the end than the beginning (free parking house rules tend to mess this up). The posters I was discussing this with noted that they had never known these things and never learned any of the lessons the game was supposedly trying to teach. As such, this made the game IMO a great failure, for the lesson that the other posters assumed that the game was about was 'Greed is Good' - something that would have broke the heart of the designer and made the designer regret they'd ever created the game.

Aside from that, Monopoly is also IMO, a very flawed game which has succeeded mostly out of people's ignorance of the alternatives or a lack of alternatives. In this day and age, there is no reason to play it accept as a historical curiosity.

I suspect that any attempt to teach complex lessons through simple didactic microgames are doomed to failure.

That got me thinking about what do I consider a game with my politics, which, to greatly simplify them to the point many will probably get the wrong idea, are often considered 'conservative' or 'Classical Liberal' (ei, Adam Smith, John Locke, Bastiat, Hayek, etc.) and so forth.

Well, it would probably look a lot like D&D, a game created by Gary Gygax, informed by the politics of Tracy Hickman, and in no small part inspired by the works of JRR Tolkien. It wouldn't look exactly like that game, because my views don't exactly agree any of those individuals, but the framework is close enough that it can be easily adopted to my purposes. Or it might look like a game like Civilization or Settlers of Cataan. What's particularly interesting is that there are games that I mechanically admire, but will not play, because they in various ways get too close to things I consider important. The very impulse to deal with a sacred subject through a leisure activity - that is to say, a sort of vanity - is not one that I approve of. Nor is it one that I think is particularly helpful and useful, because it results in bad art. Consider works like Tolkien's 'Lord of the Rings', CS Lewis's 'The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe', George MacDonald's 'The Princess and the Goblin', Gene Wolfe's 'The Book of the New Sun', Orson Scott Card's 'Speaker for the Dead', JK Rawlings 'Harry Potter' series, or John C. Wright's 'The Golden Oecumene' trilogy. That is the art of 'my culture' or 'my politics', and it's at its best and more powerful and most important when it is the least didactic, and most cringe worthy when it gets overtly preachy (as in some of the later Narnia books or later OSC novels). And equally, when art that is not of my culture or politics is at its best, say Ursula K. LeGuin's masterful 'The Left Hand of Darkness', is when it's least preachy and most nuanced and is most showing and not telling. Now compare the works I mentioned earlier to the sort of dreary simplistic allegorical morality tales of the Victorian era meant to be instructive to children in good morals, which were so rightly parodied by Mark Twain. There is no contest. They may be try to teach something akin to my culture and my politics, but I will only castigate them as embarrassing, heavy handed, and counter-productive.

I think the same is going to be true of games.

Celebrim · May 11, 2017

As a second point, it's not at all true that good politics make for good games. In fact, we can provide a very strong counterexample that even terrible politics can make for a good game. HP Lovecraft manages to combine the worst of Enlightenment era racism and humanist arrogance with Bertrand Russell's nihilism, blended through the lens of a neurotic failure watching the intellectual foundations of his world crumble. His beliefs are in many ways almost the very antithesis of what I believe in, offered up in deliberate mockery (at times) of my own beliefs. There probably isn't a poster here, left or right, conservative or liberal, that isn't greatly offended by vast swaths of the man's philosophy and writings. Yet, the game created from this world building is not only a quite good one, it probably has a legitimate claim on being the greatest RPG system of all time, with some of the best content ever created for an RPG.

Politics are just a lousy way to judge RPGs and an even lousier inspiration for a game.

Darkness · May 11, 2017

-Wing-Zero- said:
has anyone ever been girldescended(condescended) to? it's a new phrase i just made up to apply a gender tag to a negative behavior because it's easier to make blanket statements this way.

You were asked not to post in this thread again. Take a week off.

Gradine · May 11, 2017

To be perfectly honest, with a few notable (and perhaps inevitable) exceptions this thread has been a rather pleasant surprise.

In fact, I think it's a great example of why it's good to have this kind of "loophole" in the rules, wherein if the forum's grand poobah moderator starts a thread about a political game it's been fairly open season in the conversation within the thread about the politics of said game, so long as said conversations have been respectful and civil. I mean, we've had civil and respectful discussion on the relative merits of the conflict between second-wave and third-wave feminism, and... less than civil distractions that have been fairly quickly responded to by moderation. The leeway necessary to even have a conversation about this game in the first place seems to be the rules working as intended to me.

The thing about politics (and particularly identity politics, which this game represents) is that for some people these kinds of politics are an infuriating and divisive distraction, that for some people they can't ignore or avoid them because they impact every aspect of their lives. Which makes this a fairly niche product in the first place, since the former group would avoid it (if not savagely attack it) on general principle, while I imagine a significant amount of the latter, should they enjoy tabletop RPGs (or other role-play activities) in the first place, might enjoy such activities because it gives them a reprieve from the kinds of

they have to deal with in the real world. There was a comment earlier (I forget from who, so apologies) that this product seems to be intended more for educators and activists, maybe some therapists too, which strikes me as probably very true. As has also been pointed out several times, the lack of major gameplay mechanics in most of these activities makes them less of interest to tabletop RPGs fans anyway. And thanks to [MENTION=12377]77IM[/MENTION]'s excellent review and analysis, it seems like a pretty good product for that crowd. That makes it probably less relevant to this forum than it would have first appeared in the OP, but I honestly think the forum is a little better for having had the conversation here.

As for "politics as inspiration", I suppose I take the opposite opinion of [MENTION=4937]Celebrim[/MENTION] (so I guess I agree with [MENTION=12377]77IM[/MENTION] in some ways, though I can't imagine getting as much enjoyment or interest out of games or other works inspired by viewpoints I strongly disagree with; certainly not those I'd consider to be actively harmful towards a specific group). Maybe less so with games that are more gameplay-focused than narrative-focused. But if I'm reading a novel or watching a movie or taking in some sort of other passive narrative entertainment, the biggest crime an author could commit would be to fail to say anything. There's room, in some genres, for mindless entertainment at times; and there's definitely something to be said for subtlety (though at the same time, some anvils need to be dropped). You could be preaching to the choir, or to the picketing protestors outside, but for goodness sake do something interesting with something at least halfway relevant to my life, or why should I even bother?

I can understand not wanting to get preached at, but just as there's an artistry to subtlety, there's also an artistry to the sermon. There are some preachers, even if I kinda disagreed with them, that I'd let sermonize the phone book to me, you know? I made it through most of the Ender's Game series, after all.

Celebrim · May 11, 2017

Gradine said:
To be perfectly honest, with a few notable (and perhaps inevitable) exceptions this thread has been a rather pleasant surprise.

In part, to keep it that way, I've had to resist any impulse to actually discuss the games in detail. There is this sort of irony that I'm fairly sure the politics here is something most people in the thread are in closer agreement on than the games itself, which are an expression of politics. I mean, I don't even think some of the more trollish posters (who are obvious trolls) are actually motivated by a belief that women are inferior. I think that there is going to be a general agreement that women and men should be equal before the law and are of equivalent worth and value.

It's the details, and particular, how our culture and government and other large social groups should respond to that that drives us apart and into sometimes heated disagreement.

Part of the reason that I've been able to resist the impulse, is that because I've no intention of reading the document, and part of that is because I considered 77IM's attempt to put a positive spin on the document after having done so, so entirely damning that I didn't really need to. While his additional information did show that some of the games that weren't provocative really weren't provocative, the additional information about the games that provoked my negative reaction only confirmed further that my negative reaction had been warranted. So, I have a totally different take away: "Thanks, 77IM, you largely proved my point."

(Much of the criticism of people reviewing the document without reading it strikes me as so much like the criticism that 4e critics faced before 4e was released. Let's not go there, except to say that I find both comments about 'you have to read it first' totally disingenuous.)

If you find my comment that 77IM helped prove my point odd and just wrong, which I suspect that you do, just step back a moment and inspect your own rationalizing attempt at justifying the document, which was this: "There was a comment earlier (I forget from who, so apologies) that this product seems to be intended more for educators and activists, maybe some therapists too, which strikes me as probably very true."

So, as 77IM documented, this includes a game which is by his admission is just the rules for 'Spin the Bottle' with some added religious ritual thrown in. Do you consider that to be a game which is, "this product seems to be intended more for educators and activists, maybe some therapists too, which strikes me as probably very true."?

I think that there are far easier explanations available, but you are throwing them out in favor of one that shows the product in the most favorable light. And regardless, when you tell me that 'Spin the Bottle' is a game intended for educators and activists with a straight face, I hope you forgive that I can't hold back a hearty belly laugh. And that's to leave aside how weak the justification really is. (And now I may have killed the thread, because here I am discussing the games.)

In fact, I think it's a great example of why it's good to have this kind of "loophole" in the rules...

I don't know that it is a loophole, and it doesn't always work, but the mods have generally been more tolerant about discussing issues actually raised by games if doing so wasn't deliberate trolling. However, this treads on the 'don't discuss the moderators rule'.

I can understand not wanting to get preached at, but just as there's an artistry to subtlety, there's also an artistry to the sermon. There are some preachers, even if I kinda disagreed with them, that I'd let sermonize the phone book to me, you know?

There is certainly room for great sermonizing. I could list a lot of great speakers that give excellent sermons. Even though I disagree with him about just about everything, Carl Sagan mastered the art of giving a sermon probably better than any other widely recognized 20th century speaker. All that time listening to sermons of more traditional religions might have made little impression on his beliefs, but they certainly informed his speaking style. But generally speaking, sermons are mostly effective only to the receptive. I get a great chuckle out of Saganists that say things like, "If only the religious would hear this, then...", and apparently don't get any of the irony. I assure you that I listened and thought about it.

I made it through most of the Ender's Game series, after all.

I wasn't even thinking of Ender's saga when I wrote that. Try most of the later works of the Alvin Maker or Homecoming series if you want to get a sermon.

Gradine · May 11, 2017

Celebrim said:
If you find my comment that 77IM helped prove my point odd and just wrong, which I suspect that you do, just step back a moment and inspect your own rationalizing attempt at justifying the document, which was this: "There was a comment earlier (I forget from who, so apologies) that this product seems to be intended more for educators and activists, maybe some therapists too, which strikes me as probably very true."

So, as 77IM documented, this includes a game which is by his admission is just the rules for 'Spin the Bottle' with some added religious ritual thrown in. Do you consider that to be a game which is, "this product seems to be intended more for educators and activists, maybe some therapists too, which strikes me as probably very true."?

I think that there are far easier explanations available, but you are throwing them out in favor of one that shows the product in the most favorable light. And regardless, when you tell me that 'Spin the Bottle' is a game intended for educators and activists with a straight face, I hope you forgive that I can't hold back a hearty belly laugh. And that's to leave aside how weak the justification really is. (And now I may have killed the thread, because here I am discussing the games.)

I'd ask that you not make assumptions regarding me or my reactions, please. I of course find your point of view completely rational and logical. This is not a document that was written for you, and anything shedding more light on it is going to further drive that point home.

As for the "educators, activists, & therapists", yes, there are activities in the document that seem more geared towards college-aged kids exploring the intersections of their identities and particularly their sexualities than in spurring discussion and debate about specific feminist ideologies. I'd also forgive you for not understanding that this kind of thing lies pretty much directly in the intersection between "college-aged kids exploring their identity/sexuality" and "activist". I'd also forgive you for thinking that is patently ridiculous, or silly, or frivolous. It doesn't make it any less true for them.

But again, this document isn't so much for you. Those particular games hold absolutely zero appeal to me too, for what it's worth.

I wasn't even thinking of Ender's saga when I wrote that. Try most of the later works of the Alvin Maker or Homecoming series if you want to get a sermon.

I had a friend who tried to get me to read Empire once, which is exactly where he lost me.

There is certainly room for great sermonizing. I could list a lot of great speakers that give excellent sermons. Even though I disagree with him about just about everything, Carl Sagan mastered the art of giving a sermon probably better than any other widely recognized 20th century speaker. All that time listening to sermons of more traditional religions might have made little impression on his beliefs, but they certainly informed his speaking style. But generally speaking, sermons are mostly effective only to the receptive. I get a great chuckle out of Saganists that say things like, "If only the religious would hear this, then...", and apparently don't get any of the irony. I assure you that I listened and thought about it.

XP for the truth inherent in this paragraph; Sagan is a great example of what I was talking about. The only thing I quibble with is the notion that sermons are mostly effective only to the receptive. I suppose that's true as a tautology (given a certain definition of "receptive"), but I think you'll find conversion happens on a personal level more often than you'd think.

77IM · May 11, 2017

Celebrim said:
Part of the reason that I've been able to resist the impulse, is that because I've no intention of reading the document, and part of that is because I considered 77IM's attempt to put a positive spin on the document after having done so, so entirely damning that I didn't really need to. While his additional information did show that some of the games that weren't provocative really weren't provocative, the additional information about the games that provoked my negative reaction only confirmed further that my negative reaction had been warranted. So, I have a totally different take away: "Thanks, 77IM, you largely proved my point."

You're welcome! I am glad to have helped you clarify your thoughts on the matter.

I take a little bit of issue with your use of the term "positive spin" as it implies some insincerity on my part. I can see how some of what I posted might sound like spin, but that's really just me giving these games "the benefit of the doubt." I'm trying to balance that with "calling it like I see it," and that's a very hard line to walk, especially on such a touchy subject.

And yeah, the spin-the-bottle game looks totally stupid. I think we agree on that one.

#Feminism Is A Collection of 34 "Nanogames" From Designers Around The World

Hussar

Legend

Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator

Hussar

Legend

Celebrim

Legend

Celebrim

Legend

Darkness

Hand and Eye of Piratecat [Moderator]

Gradine

The Elephant in the Room (she/her)

Celebrim

Legend

Gradine

The Elephant in the Room (she/her)

77IM

Explorer!!!