Shadowrun: How can they properly use Native Americans?

[DarkCrisis]

I know current editions tend to barely mention the Native American elements that inhabited earlier editions and their lore.

But just cutting it all seems easy way out instead of re-adapting things.

I’m not a scholar on Native American stuff but what would Shadowrun need to change to bring that flavor back?

I always liked the SR had big Native American representation and now it’s just a half paragraph of background lore

Or is it best left as a footnote?

 

[MGibster]

If the producers of Shadowrun want to bring some of that flavor back they'll probably need to hire some sort of cultural consultant to go over things. I'm never going to argue that representation should be a footnote, but I'm not really sure what the best way forward would be. Games like Shadowrun and Werewolf were some of the few major RPGs that had any sort of Native American representation, but some aspects of both games haven't aged very well.

One of the biggest problems is just how do you portray Native Americans in Shadowrun? On one had, in real life, Native Americans are a fairly diverse group. Native American is about as useful a designation as European. A Frenchman is not an Englishman, who is not a Dane, who in turn is not a Spaniard. i.e. They all come from distinct cultures with their own language and customs. How do you distill all Native Americans into some form that's acceptable at the game table? Coyote and Crow did this by suggesting Non-Native players play members of fictional tribes. But if you have a setting like Shadowrun, what Native American groups are in charge? Is it the Lakota? Diné? Cherokee would seem to be an obvious choice because they're quite numerous. But someone's going to be unhappy.

 

[Theory of Games]

With the culture-police sensitive gamers that patrol this hobby, CGL should leave it alone. The setting is actually very popular. Loved by some.

If they want something to do, fix the core system.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

Shadowrun's lore (and, debatably, its mechanics) are rooted in the late 80s and early 90s. A time not necessarily known for its cultural sensitivities. Now, let's be fair, they were not alone in this. Some of the more cringey World of Darkness books spring to mind as well.

However, huge amounts of Shadowrun's in-world history are linked to these problematic elements, that would require massive retrofitting (see also the Goblinization and the racist tropes associated with all that). Think about how long it's taken for D&D's depiction of orcs to shift.

First, as @MGibster mentioned, they can start by hiring some cultural sensitivity consultants. Then, the next time they have a new edition, they make the massive changes to the history and the present that are needed. Just say "hey, we need to get with the times and this is how it is now. We apologize for previously insensitive tropes and depictions in this game." If they wanted to, they could create an in-world explanation like some big magical event that changes history, but I don't think that'd be necessary.

 

[DarkCrisis]

Shadowrun's lore (and, debatably, its mechanics) are rooted in the late 80s and early 90s. A time not necessarily known for its cultural sensitivities. Now, let's be fair, they were not alone in this. Some of the more cringey World of Darkness books spring to mind as well.

However, huge amounts of Shadowrun's in-world history are linked to these problematic elements, that would require massive retrofitting (see also the Goblinization and the racist tropes associated with all that). Think about how long it's taken for D&D's depiction of orcs to shift.

First, as @MGibster mentioned, they can start by hiring some cultural sensitivity consultants. Then, the next time they have a new edition, they make the massive changes to the history and the present that are needed. Just say "hey, we need to get with the times and this is how it is now. We apologize for previously insensitive tropes and depictions in this game." If they wanted to, they could create an in-world explanation like some big magical event that changes history, but I don't think that'd be necessary.

I think it would be more in-settting to just say there was a large mis-information campaign and now the truth is leaked

 

[MGibster]

irst, as @MGibster mentioned, they can start by hiring some cultural sensitivity consultants. Then, the next time they have a new edition, they make the massive changes to the history and the present that are needed. Just say "hey, we need to get with the times and this is how it is now. We apologize for previously insensitive tropes and depictions in this game." If they wanted to, they could create an in-world explanation like some big magical event that changes history, but I don't think that'd be necessary.

Minus the cultural consultants, this was the direction PEG, Inc. took with their Deadlands setting. When the game was released in 1996, the game was set in 1876 and the US Civil War had pretty much come to a stalemate. In effect, the Confederacy had won. Oh, and there's no slavery. I'm fairly certain Pinnacle removed the slavery because we're playing a game for fun, and the Confederacy being around provided opportunities for Cold War style spy vs. spy adventures, but it did play into the Lost Cause narrative. A few years back, PEG, Inc. went ahead and revamped the setting via magic. Now the US Civil War ended with a Union victory though the war dragged on a little longer than it did in reality.

Quite honestly, I'm never going to play a Shadowrun game so long as the rules are Godawful. I don't care how much I love the setting, the rules are too painful.

 

[DarkCrisis]

Minus the cultural consultants, this was the direction PEG, Inc. took with their Deadlands setting. When the game was released in 1996, the game was set in 1876 and the US Civil War had pretty much come to a stalemate. In effect, the Confederacy had won. Oh, and there's no slavery. I'm fairly certain Pinnacle removed the slavery because we're playing a game for fun, and the Confederacy being around provided opportunities for Cold War style spy vs. spy adventures, but it did play into the Lost Cause narrative. A few years back, PEG, Inc. went ahead and revamped the setting via magic. Now the US Civil War ended with a Union victory though the war dragged on a little longer than it did in reality.

Quite honestly, I'm never going to play a Shadowrun game so long as the rules are Godawful. I don't care how much I love the setting, the rules are too painful.

Anarchy is the best version of the rules ATM. Though IMO it goes to far into “simplified”

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

I think it would be more in-settting to just say there was a large mis-information campaign and now the truth is leaked

I'd buy that. In some cases, all it would take would be a few subtle tweaks, though I think some of the changes required might need a stronger hand.

Minus the cultural consultants, this was the direction PEG, Inc. took with their Deadlands setting. When the game was released in 1996, the game was set in 1876 and the US Civil War had pretty much come to a stalemate. In effect, the Confederacy had won. Oh, and there's no slavery. I'm fairly certain Pinnacle removed the slavery because we're playing a game for fun, and the Confederacy being around provided opportunities for Cold War style spy vs. spy adventures, but it did play into the Lost Cause narrative. A few years back, PEG, Inc. went ahead and revamped the setting via magic. Now the US Civil War ended with a Union victory though the war dragged on a little longer than it did in reality.

Interesting. I am not that familiar with Deadlands.

Quite honestly, I'm never going to play a Shadowrun game so long as the rules are Godawful. I don't care how much I love the setting, the rules are too painful.

I played it back when it first came out and loved it. These days, way more into Cyberpunk Red or Cy_Borg. I tried going back and found the mechanics way too cumbersome.

Anarchy is the best version of the rules ATM. Though IMO it goes to far into “simplified”

Agreed. I thought they were really onto something with it, and it's a shame that it barely got any support.

 

[Jd Smith1]

Forget the political correctness, fix the rules first.

 

[MGibster]

Interesting. I am not that familiar with Deadlands.

At the time, I just thought it was completely unrealistic the Confederacy could have achieved victory. I could accept undead gunslingers, mad scientists with flame throwers, Baptist preachers performing miracles, and even Buffalo Soldiers using steam powered jetpacks, but I could not accept not being crushed by the Union. I had a similar problem with Shadowrun. Native Americans make up about 2% of the population. I don't care if they've got magic, I don't buy them beating the US government, or at the very least, having that victory last.