D&D General Settings of Hope vs Settings of Despair

[Hussar]

Perhaps that is so, for some folks. For me, it just...isn't cathartic.

I deal with enough "is there any point to it all?" IRL. I don't need to be reminded of the idea that what you're doing can feel like it's pointless.

Fair enough. Tastes obviously vary.

I talked about the elevator pitch I did for a Despair campaign where the world was dying. That's the point of the campaign. How do you act knowing that at any point in time, everything will die. And, it's not a question of if, it's when. The world is dying. When it will die isn't known, but, it's not a faraway time. It's measured in years or maybe decades.

To me, that's a really interesting setting to start from. You know that there is no future. So, what will you make your present? Do you rage against the dying of the light? That sort of thing.

One of the elements of the Scarred Lands setting that really spoke to me was the Elves. In Scarred Lands, the elven god was killed in the wars with the titans. Because of this, no more elves are born. The current generation of elves is the last. They can have children with other races, but, "elf" will be extinct very soon. I loved the concept. How do you play your character knowing that not only are you the last of your kind, but, when you die, no god will be there to pick up your soul. Death is forever. For an elf, that's a fascinating twist for me.

 

[Brendan Byrd]

EDIT: You can still tell a story about heroes using swords to end tyranny, it's fine and it's a traditional narrative... but don't you dare naughty word call it "hope." You're not selling people hope, you're selling people ideology.

I'm inclined to think that these games "sell" in-game agency.
Hope and despair are, to me, flavors.

 

[Retros_x]

I think that the idea that you can study history to avoid making the mistakes of the past is trite and unwarranted optimism

Why do you think it could be beneficial to study history if not learning something that we can use today.

 

[Retros_x]

If you have to tighten your belt a little to help a neighbor, you will. If you have to starve to prevent a neighbor from starving, well…sorry neighbor.

Only us rich and privileged people think that it is that way. In reality its more vice-versa, the richer humans are the better they fare, the less they help others. In general the more dire a situation is the more supporting each other is happening in communities. You can see it when hurricane hits a region, you can see it in many slums or poor cities and nations, you can see it in indigenous tribes - people support each other much more when they are more in need. We in the rich 1% (globally speaking) are used to having all our dependencies on our real social network being replaced by business services. But at our heart we are a social species, because our brain is wired so. Living in groups has shaped us as humans evolutionally speaking and thus building connection and collaboration and mutual support is basically written in our genes.

 

[Brendan Byrd]

Just to quibbe. It's not so much @EzekielRaiden that it is noble to for doing the right thing when you'Re guaranteed to fail, it's rather that stories about that theme, ie. tragedies, are cathartic. Or, if they are done right anyway, they should be cathartic. They're not meant to be aspirational. Their meant as a vent for bad feelings to bleed off in a non-destructive way. It's why all those sad movies are still very popular. Sometimes you need to hear the dog getting shot and having a good cry to feel a bit better afterward.

I'm not interested in "sad movies" when what I want is: to play a character in a fantasy role-playing game.
I hope for fun, not "catharsis".

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Fair enough. Tastes obviously vary.

I talked about the elevator pitch I did for a Despair campaign where the world was dying. That's the point of the campaign. How do you act knowing that at any point in time, everything will die. And, it's not a question of if, it's when. The world is dying. When it will die isn't known, but, it's not a faraway time. It's measured in years or maybe decades.

To me, that's a really interesting setting to start from. You know that there is no future. So, what will you make your present? Do you rage against the dying of the light? That sort of thing.

One of the elements of the Scarred Lands setting that really spoke to me was the Elves. In Scarred Lands, the elven god was killed in the wars with the titans. Because of this, no more elves are born. The current generation of elves is the last. They can have children with other races, but, "elf" will be extinct very soon. I loved the concept. How do you play your character knowing that not only are you the last of your kind, but, when you die, no god will be there to pick up your soul. Death is forever. For an elf, that's a fascinating twist for me.

Unfortunately, NGL, for me, if I knew there was no hope like in that former example, I probably would just...waste away. I can't bring myself to be cruel to others, and hedonism has no appeal. I know I'm incapable of any physical fighting (or even much in the way of manual labor), and trying would just mean I suffer as I die.

The latter is somewhat more interesting, because there are different kinds of "survival". Being an "elf" biologically might not survive, but that gives a choice of how to memorialize your culture.

That is, for example, there are no more Mycenaean Greeks, nor Minoans. We don't even know how to read all of their language. We only recently learned how to read part of it (translating Linear B, the script that is Greek rather than Minoan). Yet they continue to affect us today, in various ways, and we continue to look back at them and wonder, and try to understand. That's a legacy, despite the dramatic break. Egypt (Kemet), Harappa, all sorts of ancient places, are legacies too. Even if your people end, your culture doesn't have to. While I think it might be hard to grapple with at times, that, at least, is a question I could be motivated to answer. "Your world is guaranteed 100% doomed, you don't know when it's gonna happen but it IS going to happen, these are the last days and nothing will survive it, not even a legacy will remain", by comparison, is "okay, so...maybe try to have a good time for a bit, maybe help somebody if you see them suffering, but otherwise, lay down and die, it'll be less grief that way."

When there's even the ghost of a chance that something could differ, awesome. I don't have to succeed (though that is obviously preferred), the attempt matters. "Till shade is gone, till water is gone, into the Shadow with teeth bared, screaming defiance with the last breath, to spit in Sightblinder’s eye on the last Day." I dream of saving worlds like the World of Darkness setting, which I don't believe is beyond saving. But if I genuinely know that it's beyond saving, and not just that, but it could expire any minute...I'm gonna get my affairs in order. If I can fling myself at something that might be useful to someone I like, sure, but otherwise, no point. Caring just deepens my suffering while changing nothing.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I'm not interested in "sad movies" when what I want is: to play a character in a fantasy role-playing game.
I hope for fun, not "catharsis".

In fairness to Hussar, catharsis is fun for some folks, and not all catharsis is about sadness.

The new Doom games, for example, were surprisingly cathartic for me. The gameplay isn't sad in the least. It is over-the-top gory violent. I am, IRL, something of a pacifist, or a weenie if you prefer a more frank assessment. I have frustrations; I find various ways to exorcise them. Doom was, much to my surprise, a really surprisingly fun experience--and it gave me a place to vent frustrations, to let out any aggression, in a way that is both entirely harmless and (at least theoretically) morally upstanding, y'know, beating the everloving crap out of demons.

All "catharsis" means is letting out pent-up emotions (usually, socially-disapproved or personally-uncomfortable ones) in a way that, if not constructive, is at least non-harmful. That process can be fun. The specific kind of catharsis being referenced isn't fun for me, but I understand why it could be pleasant for others.

 

[Remathilis]

Fair enough. Tastes obviously vary.

I talked about the elevator pitch I did for a Despair campaign where the world was dying. That's the point of the campaign. How do you act knowing that at any point in time, everything will die. And, it's not a question of if, it's when. The world is dying. When it will die isn't known, but, it's not a faraway time. It's measured in years or maybe decades.

To me, that's a really interesting setting to start from. You know that there is no future. So, what will you make your present? Do you rage against the dying of the light? That sort of thing.

One of the elements of the Scarred Lands setting that really spoke to me was the Elves. In Scarred Lands, the elven god was killed in the wars with the titans. Because of this, no more elves are born. The current generation of elves is the last. They can have children with other races, but, "elf" will be extinct very soon. I loved the concept. How do you play your character knowing that not only are you the last of your kind, but, when you die, no god will be there to pick up your soul. Death is forever. For an elf, that's a fascinating twist for me.

The former is always been my problem with zombie apocalypse stories. Assuming there is no way to end said apocalypse or enough people left to rebuild, the Walking Dead style world where you eke out survival amongst the ruins of civilization trying not to be eaten seems miserable.

The latter reminds me a bit of the Doctor Who revival when the Doctor was the last of his kind. That has potential for me, but even still I think I'd need a chaser of something positive stomach it long term.

I realize the final element of my puzzle. Despair doesn't make for a good long-term investment. Unless you can make things somewhat better (or at least keep things from getting worse) all you are doing is fighting the current against destruction. That's fine for a single story, but assuming you want to keep going, how do you keep that struggle fresh and advance the timeline? If things suck X amount today, they either continue to suck X tomorrow, improve to W, or get worse to Y. How then you do tell Y and Z?

I think this conversation has helped me clarify my thoughts on all this. I'm going to go with hope after all. I have no issues with despair (as I said, I ran a Ravenloft game for years where the best they got was status quo, but I guess that's better than annihilation). But I do think I need that hope injection this time. Thank you all for your ideas.

 

[Misanthrope Prime]

I'm inclined to think that these games "sell" in-game agency.
Hope and despair are, to me, flavors.

Technically what is being sold is propaganda. All art is propaganda, and if you think the art you like isn't, that's because you've spent the last few decades of your life drinking the Kool aid

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

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.

I'd say it's pessimistic to say they all tear it all down. It's a setback, but there is still a "net advancement", so to speak. It still sucks.

For that reasons ,I didn't really feel like D&D 4E Points-Of-Light approach wasn't really a "despair" setting to me. I mean, there was presumably despair when Nerath fell. But... enclaves of civilizations remain. And now our heroes can reconnect the points of light and possibly start nationbuilding (that was a theme of my 4E campaign).
But maybe I am just misinterpreting Remalithis understanding of Setting of Hope or Despair. Despair to me sounds like there nothing good in the future waiting or possible. But from a sci-fi view ,I guess a galaxy ruled by facist empire or Earth after some nuclear holocaust might feel pessimistic, because really bad things are in this imagined future of ours, and it's clearly a step back from what we have now. But if you're working to fight to rebuild it, I see hope. But it is less optimistic or hopeful than, say Star Trek, that posits that humanity finds aliens and builds a community with them, and you're now just exploring the world for curiosity ,not because the people at home need you to find a cure for their ailments or the allies to fight for freedom?

I would say that Star Trek and its optimistic future was created after the end of a world war, but also during an uneasy time of cold war. Was its optimism a welcome counter-response to the bad things we had seen in the world and the unease on its future, or was it just continuing a theme, that things were getting better? Mind you that some setting details, like the 3rd World War or the Eugenic Wars were introduced later in the show, some even when the Cold War had ended, so it might never be clearly definable what aspects of the Zeitgeist influenced which part, and what positive or negative feedback loops might exist.