Tempted to Run Blue Rose backwards

[Nisarg]

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?

Well you may not have noticed but I think everyone on this thread who's expressed dislike at the concept of the genre BR emulates has nevertheless PRAISED green ronin for their effective portrayal of said genre. The Genre is intellectually unworthy, but the RPG itself is well executed.
As for "developing our own setting"; that is in essence what this thread is all about (in a way) as we're discussing how to change the setting into something that is not "romantic fantasy" but IS more realistic from a socio-political point of view... the consensus on this apparently being that Aldis would actually be a really crappy authoritarian place where all their talk of "tolerance" and "diversity" would be only so much bunk.

So, what are you doing in this thread?

Nisarg

 

[Nisarg]

I don't think 'many many' people would be unhappy with a nation that values diversity, acceptance of differences, the right of privacy, has a criminal justice system that doesn't concentrate on punishment, grants basic education is free to anyone within the borders, and welcomes any non-Shadow-aligned religion. Most Aldins don't think the other nations are evil so much as they pity them their ignorance and hope they will eventually grow up.

Except that such a nation is completely unworkable in reality; for starters, ANYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH THE MAGIC DEER IS EXILED.

Even in the "Unmodified" setting they seem to have to exile a hell of a lot of people... no wonder Aldis is "surrounded by enemies".

Basically Aldis is a dictatorship ruled by people who think they know what is best for the public at large, which the common people have no right to determine or control. They dictate laws which they claim are about "diversity" or "equality" or "security", which in reality strip away personal liberties. They claim to be in favour of "tolerance"; but define anything which doesn't fit their personal philosophy/religion as being "intolerant".. it is of course "allowed" to be "intolerant of intolerance".. making it all a disgusting word game where really all that gets accomplished is the government's enemies get denigrated.

The "right to privacy" only extends as far as what the nanny state needs to make sure you aren't being "intolerant" or "shadow-aligned", meaning virtually no real privacy... you might have privacy to perform the sexual act of your choice, but you certainly don't have privacy to think or say what you like.

The criminal justice system doesn't focus on incarceration, that's true. It focuses on BRAINWASHING or EXILE. Yes, that's a vast improvement, and isn't at all convenient for the state.

And of course basic education is granted! Its highly important that little boys learn not to be "intolerantly" masculine, and little children of both genders learn about the importance of obeying the MAGIC DEER, the perfection of the government taking care of you, and the fun of HATING "INTOLERANT" PEOPLE.

Actually, I'm starting to think that you don't really need to "change" anything in the setting to make it a dystopia, aside from the assertion that the typical aldisian is happy with the current state of affairs.

Nisarg

 

[Desdichado]

RPG's themselves tend to reflect elements of late 20th/ early 21st century social values in any case-- it's unavoidable given the audience they're written for, us late 20th/ early 21st century folks. Some of what seems to be happening here is that people are having a hard time applying those social values to the "medieval" setting of Blue Rose, where if they were considering a more modern, "Urban Arcana" type setting there might not be so much mental dissonance.

Actually, I think there'd be even more. The setting makes even less sense in an Urban Arcana type environment. I think Nisarg described why the setting is so unsatisfying to me with the line here:

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.

Not only does that disagree with my sense of taste, it's also in stark contrast with my actual worldview. I was destined to not be interested in the setting. However, I think the rules have a lot of potential; in fact, they seem to be along the lines of exactly what I was hoping for a rules-lite interpretation of d20. So, I'm in a position where Blue Rose is a product that for one aspect of it, I'd really want a copy. For another aspect of it, I'd want to avoid it like the plague. Hence the internal conflict, and hence the discussion on the message boards.

 

[Desdichado]

Actually, I'm starting to think that you don't really need to "change" anything in the setting to make it a dystopia, aside from the assertion that the typical aldisian is happy with the current state of affairs.

And the assumption that such a "Utopia" is actually good. It seems the setting has built into it the assumption that there's an actual, objective definition of good that is met by the values of Aldis. It's not just the opinion of the citizens of Aldis, it's an actual demonstrable fact.

But like you say, that's a relatively easy change to make, I suppose.

 

[JPL]

Well, the setting asks that you pretend that people --- even a large group of people, a nation, not just a few --- can be basically good and decent and noble.

Not perfect, not a utopia...just maybe a little better than old JPL on an average day, y'know?

Some folks will have a much easier time imagining any number of wizards and dragons than imagining a world where humanity behaves a little more like it should.

Others will look at this imaginary society and question whether it really is better than the "real world" [you can see the classic Star Trek as a model of tolerance and progress, or you can look at it as a white male imperialist power trip]. One man's meat is another man's poison, and Blue Rose's vision of "a better world" is certainly not going to be to everyone's taste.

I see a romantic setting like Blue Rose as more of a metaphorical construct...maybe it's overly simplistic to have a "good kingdom" fighting an "evil kingdom", but we each fight that same fight internally every day, and I hope that at least on that personal level, it's possible for our better half to win.

Me...I would be very sad indeed if I could no longer imagine some sort of person, or a world, better than myself.

 

[Nisarg]

Well, the setting asks that you pretend that people --- even a large group of people, a nation, not just a few --- can be basically good and decent and noble.

I see a romantic setting like Blue Rose as more of a metaphorical construct...maybe it's overly simplistic to have a "good kingdom" fighting an "evil kingdom", but we each fight that same fight internally every day, and I hope that at least on that personal level, it's possible for our better half to win.

Except that what is defined as "good" and what is defined as "evil" seem to be pretty arbitrary and partisan in favour of a certain real-world political view.

Me...I would be very sad indeed if I could no longer imagine some sort of person, or a world, better than myself.

I wouldn't consider someone who's overwhelming moral standard is "I must OBEY THE MAGIC DEER" to be ethically or morally better than myself in any way.

Nisarg

 

[WayneLigon]

Except that such a nation is completely unworkable in reality; for starters, ANYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH THE MAGIC DEER IS EXILED.

No, they are not. OK, from the posts I can't tell if you actually own this game or not. If so, I want chapter and verse where it says these things. Otherwise, you've moved from just projecting your own somewhat cynical world view on the setting to something else.

 

[CrusaderX]

Well, the setting asks that you pretend that people --- even a large group of people, a nation, not just a few --- can be basically good and decent and noble.

No, the setting is asking you to believe that a certain world view is good and decent and noble. And some people are simply saying that this Aldis world view is not really good and decent and noble after all.

 

[Von Ether]

Actually, I am determined to someday run an Isrador-oriented campaign of Midnight where the Orc conquerors are devoted servants of the one true god, who feel it is the Orcish Burden to bring religion and civilization to the "barbaric" lands of the human races.
The Orcs would also have british accents... in fact, in my previous Midnight campaign the Orcs were ALREADY that way, I just didn't think at the time of running the game from their point of view.

Nisarg

Planet of the Green Skins ... I was going to run a world, Planet of the Apes style, with orcs instead.

Btw, I like the whole good guy Liche idea but I suggest a twist if you want to "agendaize" it.

The liche kingdom is mostly hard working people who simply want to get by. They may or may not some one who's different, but they don't have time to care. It only comes up the most when the different person is a jerk.

Most lich nation residents look "scary" since they are larger than average, have strange adorements ... such as tattoos and piercings, love loud music, speak strange languages and fool around with necromancy. Something that seems to set the other two kingdoms on edge.

i.e. the blue collar crowd from the Harely Davidson riders to the neighborhood bar drinkers.

Now if we can just stat out the liche's "calvary" of riders in leather on undead horses that constatly make roaring sounds.

 

[JPL]

"Except that what is defined as "good" and what is defined as "evil" seem to be pretty arbitrary and partisan in favour of a certain real-world political view."

Partisan, certainly. I don't know if "arbitrary" is the right word, though. Even if one does not share the belief in certain principles underlying the moral universe of this setting --- like tolerance for sexual diversity, respect for nature, and gender equality --- "arbitrary" suggests that these were just picked out of a hat or something.

"I wouldn't consider someone who's overwhelming moral standard is "I must OBEY THE MAGIC DEER" to be ethically or morally better than myself in any way."

I take it that the premise of the setting is that the Magic Deer is in fact a reliable indicator of Right and Wrong. The real world equivalent would be more like "I must obey the will of God," and that's really just another way of saying "I must do what is right."

In the real world, there will be a lot of disagreement between different people following different Magic Deer, or interpreting the will of the Magic Deer in different ways.