Tempted to Run Blue Rose backwards

[WmRAllen67]

Well I suppose for me its the case that I don't really believe utopia is possible for humanity at this point in our evolution...

Which leads to the question of whether or not a Utopia actually is attainable-- if I'm interpreting it correctly, a utopian state is either an example of a "Golden Age" that has passed (Eden before the Fall, Atlantis) or an "Ideal state" according to the philosophy of the society proposing them (Plato's Republic, Civitas Dei, &c).

Now Dystopia, on the other hand seems closer every day...

And given that GR is actually emulating a genre, and does a fantastic job of doing so in BR, my issue is really with the genre itself, which presents a highly naive concept of reality. I have no problem with the concept of a nanny-state monarchy determined by a farcical woodland ceremony if said state was actually full of internal conflict from the many, many, people who would be unhappy with that kind of "government"; its the fact that said state is presented in the setting as being utopian, and all who object to it as being inherently evil or ignorant that chafes me... but like I said, that's the nature of the genre. I just know that if I ever actually play BR, I would play it against type just because I would find it infinitely more interesting and entertaining.

Granted, I haven't read it, but is there NO mention of internal conflicts in the country?

Could it be one of those "grey" areas for the DM to fill in?

The "Good Empire/ Bad Empire" treatment is common in a lot of roleplaying or fantasy as well, probably the most obvious example being "Mordor" versus "everyone else"... so it would only be the philosophical underpinnings that distinquish this one...

 

[Crothian]

Granted, I haven't read it, but is there NO mention of internal conflicts in the country?

There are in the book

Could it be one of those "grey" areas for the DM to fill in?

The way the game is set up to encourage Role palying and diplomatic conflicts makes it very easy to do so

 

[CrusaderX]

There's something about Blue Rose that screams to being run backwards: Playing Aldis as a total nanny-state where being "good" means that the government decides what you can and can't do, protects you from doing anything that might be harmful to yourself, regardless of how enjoyable ("ohh, I'm sorry, adventuring isn't actually legal anymore, because second-hand adventuring has been proven to be harmful to children.. THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!"), socially engineers generally inept programs of education, and drags anyone who isn't "tolerant" into "counselling camps". The Golden Hart is really not that benevolent, and only chooses mediocre rulers who will maintain its status quo.

Meanwhile Jarzon is actually a relatively fair state (a republic, not a theocracy at all), where personal civil liberties are the utmost concern, and people aren't willing to give up their rights and freedoms for the sake of greater "security" or "safety".

NOTE: I no more believe in the above than I believe in the original premise of Blue Rose. Both are relatively silly extremes in no way reflective of true political realities. My only point in starting this thread was to find out if anyone else felt the temptation to turn Blue Rose on its head, replacing one silly extreme with another.

Nisarg

Yes, I'd pretty much run it exactly as you described, as I mentioned in another thread. It seems the setting is just begging to be twisted in such a way, at least in some people's eyes.

 

[S'mon]

I used to shop at Aldis regularly and I didn't find it an 'authoritarian nightmare'. Aldis IRL is a German discount supermarket chain with many branches in the UK.

I wonder if there's a German RPG with a Kingdom of Krogers or Duchy of Asda-Walmart... hm...

 

[Crothian]

I used to shop at Aldis regularly and I didn't find it an 'authoritarian nightmare'. Aldis IRL is a German discount supermarket chain with many branches in the UK.

I wonder if there's a German RPG with a Kingdom of Krogers or Duchy of Asda-Walmart... hm...

I want the Republic of Piggly Wiggley

 

[S'mon]

Would anyone say that Eden has a pro-feminist, pro-pagan agenda because it publishes the Buffy the Vampire Slayer RPG? I've never heard that.

I'd say CJ Carella, writer of Eden's games was sympathetic to a "pro-feminist, pro-pagan agenda", yup. Qv his other games like Witchcraft. Doesn't make for a bad game, or a bad tv show - except for Willow's character integrity being messed with by Joss Whedon due to the demands of lesbian pressure groups, but that's writer cowardice. Early-season Willow and late-season Willow were both good characters, it was the implausible transition between the two in terms of the character's sexual orientation (from mostly straight to 100%-for-ever lesbian) that IMO was badly done.

 

[S'mon]

Well I suppose for me its the case that I don't really believe utopia is possible for humanity at this point in our evolution...

And given that GR is actually emulating a genre, and does a fantastic job of doing so in BR, my issue is really with the genre itself, which presents a highly naive concept of reality. I have no problem with the concept of a nanny-state monarchy determined by a farcical woodland ceremony if said state was actually full of internal conflict from the many, many, people who would be unhappy with that kind of "government"; its the fact that said state is presented in the setting as being utopian, and all who object to it as being inherently evil or ignorant that chafes me...

I have the same problem with Star Trek The Next Generation & subsequent series, including (weirdly) Enterprise. I think this would make it impossible for me to GM a game set in the Next Generation universe. I have no trouble running games in the Star Wars universe, both Rebel and Imperial (both are equally fun IMO), the view of human nature presented in Star Wars original-trilogy actually seems a lot more realstic to me than Trekkian utopianism, but maybe that just makes me right-wing or something...

 

[Afrodyte]

I think that a lot of people's dissatisfaction with Aldis stems from projecting their real-world beliefs and predjudices onto a fictional setting. From reading this thread, I have learned a lot more about the posters than I did about Aldis.

As cliche as it is right now, take a look at Lord of the Rings. When the films hit the box office and people revisted the books, a few people pointed out that the underlying assumptions of the books and films are not as positive as people believe. People's reactions to these ideas ranged from outright dismissal to vicious counter-attack. Too many of them focused on defending Tolkien instead of examining the ideas with an open mind and (more importantly) an open heart.

With Blue Rose, the situation is reversed but related. I see people more intent on disliking and maligning the setting than really trying to understand it as it was explicitly intended to do. I see people using their subjective values and experiences as an objective measure of the worth of the setting. If Aldis doesn't interest you, it doesn't interest you. It doesn't really matter why. It doesn't make it less "worthy" than the more well-regarded types of fantasy on these boards. Harping on the setting or its inspirations adds little to the discussion. I mean, honestly, if you dislike the trappings of romantic fantasy, why sling labels at Aldis rather than discuss something more substantial, like how you would use the mechanics or develop your own setting to fit the genre Blue Rose seeks to emulate?

 

[Rikandur Azebol]

Right Afrodyde !

For all disagreeing I propose Metallica song "So What".

I, personally, found Aldis funny. I laughed off whole kingdom and trying to infect DM with ideas of it falling into utter decadence like XVII century France.

And regularly practice Sorcery with my Knight of Lich King. Don't ask how he ended up in Aldis. It were impossible duty, and he enjoys this place ... so many people challenge him to duel, mostly hot head junior Knights of the Rose. For him it is real paradise ... if not the Shadowgate that he is guarding.

 

[Nisarg]

Granted, I haven't read it, but is there NO mention of internal conflicts in the country?

Could it be one of those "grey" areas for the DM to fill in?

Its not that there aren't internal conflicts, its just made brutally clear that the people who create this conflict MUST be EVIL or at best STUPID AND IGNORANT.

The absolute good of Aldis' system is, well, absolute. And all normal, good people support it absolutely.

Nisarg