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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 8848356" data-attributes="member: 18">I don't think that's a "fact in evidence".That that's your view is absolutely fine. But you've provided no evidence to support it, and I'm at least moderately familiar with the history of RPGs and their designers, and an awful lot of them has pretty heinous ideas in the early days (Gygax being a great example - positively quoting a guy who was calling for the genocide of the Native Americans, for example). The early D&D crowd seems to have been moderately conservative, if anything, and wasn't seemingly particularly open to "off-beat" people who weren't like themselves. I'm not saying they were all bigots but I'm not seeing the "inclusive zeitgeist" you're claiming.When did it come in then? I feel like you see the start of it in the late '80s, but that it's more accidental than intentional in most cases (with notable exceptions like Mike Pondsmith's approach, which intentionally included minorities and excluded people of all kinds). I'd suggest most of the inclusivity of RPGs was accidental, to be clear, and more stemming from the basic concept of RPGs. RPGs differed from videogames and the like because if you wanted to play someone like you, many/most RPGs allowed it, or at least had no rules specifically preventing it.So I would absolutely say the much stronger push, the actual zeitgeist for inclusiveness largely from people who are 40 and under. You can see this in RPG design, even, I'd suggest. That was absolutely helped along by some of the older designers, but in many cases it clearly wasn't a particular goal or the like.</blockquote>

Verification