Oriental Adventures, was it really that racist?

[Bill Zebub]

Generally the player controls their character's own self-perceptions.

In any case, the problem with such systems is not that they track someone's internal sense of their own honour, it's that they tend to confuse honour as a measure of social standing with one's sense of ones own ethical behaviour and make it both at the same time.

It's like you murdered that guy two towns back by stabbing him in the back and now it affects the way the current lord two in this town deals with you, despite the fact that he has no way of knowing that you did that thing.

Oh, I meant a game mechanic in the mystical/magical sense. Not in anybody’s perception. Unless, of course, they have a power that lets them see it.

Sort of like a Luck rating.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Not really interested in getting back into this topic but this turn in the conversation caught my attention.

I feel like there is a bit of a double standard here. When posters from group A say they are bothered by something or want people to speak up, then a lot of folks say we need to be quiet and listen. But then when a poster isn't bothered and says he doesn't need people to speak up (I don't think he was saying people should be silent, I think he was expressing skepticism towards people who are loud about this because it feels paternalistic to him: I could be wrong, not sure the poster's full range of views here), the poster is told he doesn't speak for 'all your people' (and that we must say something otherwise we are complicit). If you believe in listening to people from that group, shouldn't you also consider what this person has to say and not attack them?

I can see where he is coming from in some respects. My wife is from Thailand. Obviously if someone says something outrageously offensive, I need to say something. But I also need to read my wife and let her defend herself, and, probably more importantly, I have to consider if my reaction is going to make things worse for her (this has happened once before). Also my reactions are not always going to the the same as hers. There were things I thought would upset her, but she was totally fine with, or even appreciated (awkward things people said but they were done with good intentions, which to her is the most important thing). And the issue of treating a group of people like children, that is a real issue and it is insulting to people when that seems to be going on. It can also come off as sounding like "We know better than you".

Yeah, I think it is the difference between standing in solidarity WITH people, and trying to stand FOR them, which is generally not cool. However, it gets complicated by the question of who has the power to effect change? I mean, to put it simply, if some big dude starts pushing my wife around, I don't care if he's racist or not, and I don't care if she can generally handle her own problems, I'm going to be in between them, and if he doesn't can it right quick I'm gonna punch his lights out. I am definitely not going to wait to find out if its OK with her, I'm just plain 50 pounds heavier and 6 inches taller than she is! Its more complicated if its some other sort of power, because it then gets wrapped up in the question of someone else's powerlessness, etc. I think we are well-advised to let people deal with the issues that are facing them, and just be willing to do something if asked, but also willing to act on our beliefs when it seems necessary. At best its a test of good judgment for sure. I know I've got it wrong once or twice too as you allude to.

 

[J.Quondam]

One byproduct of the way things have gone the last few years and I think one of the most prevalent takeaways we are going to see perpetuated in the near future is that creative folks are going to have a sharp tendency to stay in their lane. They will feel a need to write and create art that is solely within their personal frame of reference and not veer outside of that in the slightest, because it is safer that way.

Maybe another way to look at it though is not that creators will stay in their own lane, but rather that they'll simply avoid - or at least be more careful in - certain other lanes?

I mean, a creator who does not intend to provoke a negative response, probably will just be more circumspect, work in collaborations, do deeper research, etc, in order to make their work as broadly palatable for their audience. Similarly, any creator who does intend to provoke a response of some sort is not going to stop doing what they're doing, because "being edgy" is probably what they're going for, anyway.

And most hopefully, maybe broad efforts to assuage, avoid, and/or adapt to tough issues like this could encourage the most innovative creators to open up entirely new lanes to the mainstream.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Yeah the parade-of-horribles argument does seem fairly popular.

I am happy to have a conversation with you, but I am not going to continue engaging you if you are going to keep sniping at me like this. I am attempting to reach across the aisle and bridge our disagreement. Personally I think this was a valid concern. You can disagree but I think it is a real thing, and I think it is something a lot of creative people are experiencing in the present climate.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Yeah, I think it is the difference between standing in solidarity WITH people, and trying to stand FOR them, which is generally not cool. However, it gets complicated by the question of who has the power to effect change? I mean, to put it simply, if some big dude starts pushing my wife around, I don't care if he's racist or not, and I don't care if she can generally handle her own problems, I'm going to be in between them, and if he doesn't can it right quick I'm gonna punch his lights out. I am definitely not going to wait to find out if its OK with her, I'm just plain 50 pounds heavier and 6 inches taller than she is! Its more complicated if its some other sort of power, because it then gets wrapped up in the question of someone else's powerlessness, etc. I think we are well-advised to let people deal with the issues that are facing them, and just be willing to do something if asked, but also willing to act on our beliefs when it seems necessary. At best its a test of good judgment for sure. I know I've got it wrong once or twice too as you allude to.

And obviously when you are out in the world with your wife, things are different (especially if you are concerned about things like some of the attacks that have happened).

 

[Irlo]

Creators create things. Writers write, artists make art, and game designers produce games. They make deliberate decisions that convey information and emotion. None of them, presumably, want to convey negative impressions unintentionally. So they do the work. Collaboration, research, whatever, to make sure the lane is clear. At the very least they can glance into the rear-view mirror before swerving.

Honestly, I don't care if thoughtless would-be game designers who are inclined to publish without reflection and insight are dissuaded from publishing. In fact, that's probably a good thing. Actual creative people will continue to work, and we'll get better games out it.

 

[Hussar]

And most hopefully, maybe broad efforts to assuage, avoid, and/or adapt to tough issues like this could encourage the most innovative creators to open up entirely new lanes to the mainstream.

Honestly, that's probably the takeaway really.

Heck, one only has to look at genre fiction from early 20th century to now. The genre has expanded considerably and there seems to be absolutely no lack of creativity in the genre despite the fact that there has been a push to be more inclusive and more mindful for decades.

If being mindful was going to result in the stunting the growth of the genre, we would have already seen it. Fifty years ago, a woman SF writer was practically unheard of. Many wrote under male names - Andre Norton, James Triptree Jr. just to name a couple. Hell, in the 90's, J. K. Rowlings wrote under the name J. K. because her editor insisted that no one would buy fantasy novels written by a woman.

Editors don't do that for kicks. Not if they want to stay in a job. It's 100% their job to know the market and, at the time, the market pretty much said that unless you were writing about dragons, women couldn't write fantasy. I'm exaggerating, I know, but, the point very much does remain.

I mean, Hell, Margaret Atwood swore up and down that A Handmaids Tale wasn't science fiction because she knew that if she admitted that it was, it would be dumped into the SF ghetto and entirely ignored as literature.

The thing to remember here and the takeaway for me is that things really have gotten better. They have.

 

[gamerprinter]

Bushido itself is actually pretty much a 19th century invention. It would be a bit squicky imposing it on China due to the part it played in the rise of Japanese Nationalism.

But to my mind that's not the real issue. The issue is that what people want from Fantasy Japan is Japanese Feudalism and imposing that kind of social structure on China is a real distortion.

Actually, not true. During the Sengoku Era roughly 1480 to 1580, was the century of war, and for the first time every provincial daimyo was raising an army to make the rather loose confederation of the empire of that time, governed under a single ruler to unite the empire. House codes are rules demanded of the samurai of a given house, and these rules varied - some were not Bushido like at all, rather more brutal. House Takeda was one of the major provinces and powerful armies, although it's daimyo supported Tokugawa's forces, it had the largest cavalry in Japan at the time. The house code of Takeda was almost a match of the current rules of Bushido.

After America forced Japan to open in 1868, Japan made enormous efforts to modernize, militarize, and utilize some of the samurai beliefs, before they die. Scholars created the modern version of Bushido, derived from the Takeda house code. While the word "bushido" was never used in the feudal period, the essence of the idea is based on a real samurai house code. Noting, of course, if you understand the rules of Bushido, nobody can follow them all, the rules contradict each other. Never bring dishonor on yourself or your house, but obey every command of your lord, even if he asks you to dishonor yourself and several of the other rules of Bushido. Loyalty precedes all other rules of Bushido.

 

[Mordhau]

Actually, not true. During the Sengoku Era roughly 1380 to 1580, was the century of war, and for the first time every provincial daimyo was raising an army to make the rather loose confederation of the empire of that time, governed under a single ruler to unite the empire. House codes are rules demanded of the samurai of a given house, and these rules varied - some were not Bushido like at all, rather more brutal. House Takeda was one of the major provinces and powerful armies, although it's daimyo supported Tokugawa's forces, it had the largest cavalry in Japan at the time. The house code of Takeda was almost a match of the current rules of Bushido.

After America forced Japan to open in 1868, Japan made enormous efforts to modernize, militarize, and utilize some of the samurai beliefs, before they die. Scholars created the modern version of Bushido, derived from the Takeda house code. While the word "bushido" was never used in the feudal period, the essence of the idea is based on a real samurai house code. Noting, of course, if you understand the rules of Bushido, nobody can follow them all, the rules contradict each other. Never bring dishonor on yourself or your house, but obey every command of your lord, even if he asks you to dishonor yourself and several of the other rules of Bushido. Loyalty precedes all other rules of Bushido.

Yeah but from what I understand the modern conception, that honour was everything during the Sengoku period of Japan that we see reflected in games like Legends of the Five Rings, "Honour is stronger than steel" was not really anymore true of Japan than it was of medieval Europe.

 

[gamerprinter]

It was always idealistic - thus unrealistic. It's a romantic notion today. During the Sengoku period, some samurai fought under one lord in one battle and then fought against that lord, under another lord in the next battle - and that isn't considered dishonorable. So the idea of Bushido honor is myth, but it's still sought out be each samurai to varying degrees, always failing of course, as is the nature of the code.