The "Good Society" in Fantasy Gaming

[S'mon]

I similarly take a 'realistic' approach to humans/elves/dwarves/orcs/goblins etc. Everyone's out for their own interests. Humans are a mixed bunch. They join together in friendship, they soak up knowledge from their surroundings, and build great civilizations. They're also xenophobic, short-lived, and ignorant. Orcs, conversely, are selfish, violent, and hateful, but they respect the natural world, they're strong warriors when you need one, and their competitiveness can lead to great accomplishments. Same idea for all the other races. To me, this is postmodern morality...

Fixed it for you.

IMO '60s Trek is Classical Liberal/Whig/Cold War Democrat morality and in the 'modernist' tradition; STTNG is Left-Liberal/New Left/post-68 'postmodernist' tradition.

 

[Jack7]

I'm enjoying reading your opinions folks. Unfortunately time for my own responses is limited right now due to business projects. But I'm gonna return to this later.

Didn't want anyone to think I was ignoring them.

Please carry on if you wish.

 

[Joakar]

I agree with thos above that argued for moral greys and complex ethics. There is no such thing as a "good" or a "bad" society, and there has never been. Maybe there has been some confusion in the discussion above, where "civilization" and "barbarism" are seen as moral counterparts to "good" and "evil", and I think equating "civilization" to "good" has no ground whatsoever.

If you look at the real world and focus on cultures that have been called "civilized" you can see what I mean: Greece had a widespread use of slaves and waged wars based solely on profit and taking useful lands and riches. Rome had slaves and gladiatorial matches, but they allowed conquered people to mostly govern themselves, allowed religious freedom, and the structures they built in the lands they conquered (aqueducts and such) prevented diseases traditionally spread by drinking from rivers.

Even now we can't encapsulate such things as "good" or "evil", so a fantasy setting that relied on such characterizations is simple and puerile. Some people may prefer a simple and fairy tale-like setting, and it's alright, you can play what you want. However, if you want a more "realistic" game (how realistic can we get in a world populated by elves, trolls and gnomes?) you should think in moral greys and never simplify based on ethic assumptions. Creatures considered "evil" from a culture's standpoint are only "enemies" if you look at it objectively. From a kobold's point of view, all humans are inherently evil.

Even Tolkien's creations are based on this: Boromir wanted The Ring and succumbed to its temptation, but for the noble cause of defending his people.

 

[Niccodaemus]

Even Tolkien's creations are based on this: Boromir wanted The Ring and succumbed to its temptation, but for the noble cause of defending his people.

In Middle-earth, every one was susceptible to evil, even Galadriel, Gandalf, and of course Saruman. But evil races were evil. There was no grey about that.

I'll reiterate... to me, the question isn't about what society is "good". It is a question of tangible evil. It is one of the reasons I enjoy fantasy settings, and what to me distinguish them from real life. Clarity.

I think for Tolkien, it was fairly simple. "Creation" was good, and abomination of Creation was evil.

 

[Umbran]

Even Tolkien's creations are based on this: Boromir wanted The Ring and succumbed to its temptation, but for the noble cause of defending his people.

Boromir started wanting the Ring because he wanted to defend his people, and he didn't understand the Ring's power. Later, at the breaking of the Fellowship, he wanted the Ring because he wanted it, and defending people was a rationalization.

 

[Desdichado]

Now all that being said, I ask you, in your opinion: "Should the civilizations of man, elves, dwarves, and other such allied peoples be civilized and should they represent those ideals and principles generally considered to be 'good'"?

If so why, if not, why not?

And what exactly should be the "Good Society" in D&D and fantasy role play/adventure games? How should it operate and what should it represent?

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "should." The game itself should allow for multiple interpretations of the fantasy genre, and how it can be played. Especially in recent years, where darker fantasy the likes of George R. R. Martin, Joe Abercrombie, Glen Cook, Brent Weeks, R. Scott Bakker, Scott Lynch and probably a dozen other guys who write about anti-heroes or even outright villains in societies that are manifestly not good, and yet manage to be bestselling authors in the fantasy genre, the game should not be so prescriptive.

What's the appeal of these kind of non-good dark and gritty types of stories? Same thing that made James Bond super popular in the '60s, The Godfather super popular in the '70s, and more recent offerings like The Sopranos, Dexter or dozens of others--we're a more cynical society than we used to be, and we want some of that represented in our entertainment, because it reflects society and the world as we perceive it.

On top of all that is just the appeal of doing something new. If you've been playing the "good guys" for the better part of thirty years, like I have, then playing the anti-hero in a dark and gritty setting is a nice change of pace that I won't get tired of anytime soon.

So, whether or not they should be good; that can only be answered at each individual table, and is subject to each individual suite of tastes and preferences that the players bring with them. For me personally, the answer is "no." For that matter, I also don't want to have anything to do with elves or dwarves either--my setting has neither.

As to your other question, what should such a society represent--I don't know. To me, the purpose of good societies in the game was always just about easy and obvious hooks to lead players and their characters to adventure. The good society is threatened. You have to protect it. The good society is where you go after you've been adventuring and you need to rest, recuperate and spend your loot, without worrying about something happening to you.

I also don't have much use for that paradigm anymore either; taking your loot into society is probably one of the most dangerous things you can do, because society is full of criminals, con men, thieves, fantasy Mafia, and corrupt rulers. Then again, I've also abandoned the notion that adventures are something that you have to go seek out. Adventures can happen anywhere, and since I'm a big fan of crime and spy stories, urban "adventuring" is actually my favorite kind.

Granted, I know my game doesn't really resemble D&D as its creators envisioned it anymore. Probably doesn't resemble D&D as it's played by most gamers either. But I'm OK with that. In many ways, I think my game more closely resembles fantasy as it's been written by a lot of new writers in the genre, though. I'm not a fantasy traditionalist; I've been caught up in the zeitgeist that's changing the face of the genre right before our eyes, and have been for a long time... before a lot of these writers became prominent or well known.

 

[The Shaman]

Could someone please hit [MENTION=2205]Hobo[/MENTION] with an experience point for me?

 

[Mallus]

Could someone please hit [MENTION=2205]Hobo[/MENTION] with an experience point for me?

I tried!

 

[Corathon]

Now all that being said, I ask you, in your opinion: "Should the civilizations of man, elves, dwarves, and other such allied peoples be civilized and should they represent those ideals and principles generally considered to be 'good'"?

Elves and dwarves are, BTB, of good alignment on the average. Their societies should reflect that. Human societies don't necessarily have an average alignment of good. Some will be good, some evil, others neutral. That leaves room for the corrupt civilization so common in Sword & Sorcery as well as for outposts of law and weal.

If so why, if not, why not?

It should be the way I described it for the sake of verisimilitude, and because it offers more interest and more possibilities for adventures.

 

[prosfilaes]

Elves and dwarves are, BTB, of good alignment on the average. Their societies should reflect that.

And that's my problem. Dwarves and elves may have nice wonderful societies internally but should a few starving humans show up on their borders, they'd lucky to be greeted with just threats. There are many "neutral" human cities that may have a higher crime rate but accept elves and dwarves and half-orcs as part of their society.

Kender and Golarion's gnomes seem to be good examples of CG races; I can't think of any great examples of LG races.