D&D General Settings of Hope vs Settings of Despair

[overgeeked]

I think this is exactly where I am right now. I used to think that maybe humanity was inherently at least neutral, with the average persons good nature being dominant over any evil they had. Sure there was bad individuals who would set things back, but over time things would keep slowly improving. Two steps forward, one step back.

But now I'm starting to wonder, maybe we are inherently the bad guys? Maybe our darker natures will always win out, and every bit of progress we ever make is doomed to be torn down again and again.

I think it comes down to empathy. It’s not as widespread as we seem to think. It seemingly ebbs and flows. Those with empathy ascend, do some good, then those without empathy ascend and tear it all down. Lather, rinse, repeat.

 

[Remathilis]

I think it comes down to empathy. It’s not as widespread as we seem to think. It seemingly ebbs and flows. Those with empathy ascend, do some good, then those without empathy ascend and tear it all down. Lather, rinse, repeat.

That's kinda a good way to hammer down part of my dilemma. How much net empathy should the setting have? A hopeful setting would have generally high empathy, while a despairing world would have lower empathy. That's not to say individuals or even groups would be less empathetic, but that a harsh world may turn others hearts cruel. Such a place may (for example) turn away an outsider rather than other than hospitality.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

The nice thing about the empathy framing is that it means that not everyone has to have it in a setting, but those that do function as de facto points of light.

Maybe most people in a terrible cyberpunk setting will sell you out for a few credits, but the fact is, not everyone will, and that makes the setting more bearable, even if your allies are a street vendor, the staff of a struggling diner, a homeless person and an elderly widow.

 

[Hussar]

I think this is where you get into categorizing fiction in multiple categories at once. "Dystopian fiction" can be Handmaid, Hunger Games, 1984, Logan's Run, or Soylent Green, but only some of them are considered science-fiction because...uh, the presence of advanced technology instead of simply social differences?

I know that you've dropped out of the thread, and fair enough, but, all those works are absolutely SF. "Advanced technology" is not required, at all, for SF. If your (and I mean this as the general you, as in anyone) definition of SF excludes any of those works, that's not a commonly accepted definition of SF.

 

[Hussar]

That's kinda a good way to hammer down part of my dilemma. How much net empathy should the setting have? A hopeful setting would have generally high empathy, while a despairing world would have lower empathy. That's not to say individuals or even groups would be less empathetic, but that a harsh world may turn others hearts cruel. Such a place may (for example) turn away an outsider rather than other than hospitality.

Personally, I would lean into the "more empathy" style setting. Sure, there's lots of bad stuff, but, by and large, given the choice, people will choose empathy over hate. So, the whole, much criticised, "Cantina scene" is not out of place in the setting. Anyone who chooses to "None of those kind served here" are coded as evil. Take a stand in the setting design. In a hopeful setting, anything that is against "hope" (however you define that) is evil and is presented as straight up wrong.

 

[Fifinjir]

Thinking more about it, outside of my current moods about the real world, a reason I might like a “despair” setting is that I can give the bad guy something to point to and say “see? This is why I’m right”, and the main characters would actually have to use their heads a bit to refute them.

 

[overgeeked]

The nice thing about the empathy framing is that it means that not everyone has to have it in a setting, but those that do function as de facto points of light.

Maybe most people in a terrible cyberpunk setting will sell you out for a few credits, but the fact is, not everyone will, and that makes the setting more bearable, even if your allies are a street vendor, the staff of a struggling diner, a homeless person and an elderly widow.

Yeah. And some of those points of light might sell you out for just the right price. That would be some tasty RP.

 

[Scribe]

That's kinda a good way to hammer down part of my dilemma. How much net empathy should the setting have? A hopeful setting would have generally high empathy, while a despairing world would have lower empathy. That's not to say individuals or even groups would be less empathetic, but that a harsh world may turn others hearts cruel. Such a place may (for example) turn away an outsider rather than other than hospitality.

If I may, and I know I may not be the best source on this due to my own preferences.

What is the level of reserves, resilience, for the average people of the setting? People would seem to have more empathy, when they operate from a place of excess, of comfort.

Are your people suffering? Scrounging for food, or clothing or shelter?

Once things start to get real, we see what people are really about.

 

[zakael19]

People would seem to have more empathy, when they operate from a place of excess, of comfort.

Actually, that tends not to be true? Empathy is about understanding somebody else's internal state and tends to be correlated with pro-social behavior; some studies suggest that the more power and status somebody has the less empathetic they are while those from lower social strata have sometimes been observed to exhibit higher empathy.

Cf: studies on empathy and altruism in communities struck by natural disasters & etc.

 

[Scribe]

Actually, that tends not to be true? Empathy is about understanding somebody else's internal state and tends to be correlated with pro-social behavior; some studies suggest that the more power and status somebody has the less empathetic they are while those from lower social strata have sometimes been observed to exhibit higher empathy.

Cf: studies on empathy and altruism in communities struck by natural disasters & etc.

Maybe empathy isnt the right word, I'm struggling to find.

If I cannot provide for my kids, I'm not going to provide for yours. I would starve for my kids, but at that point I'm not making donations to the local soup kitchen.

Communities banding together, supporting eachother, I get that. I guess I'm not sure what the word I'm looking for is for when a society in decline, has people start to look out for themselves first.