D&D 5E What’s So Great About Medieval Europe?
- Thread starter doctorbadwolf
- Start date
Eyes of Nine
Everything's Fine
Harn - incredible setting, terrible rules (or maybe I should say, rules straight out of the worst excesses of the 80's)
doctorbadwolf
Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Really? I’d read that it was more accurate than the average Middle Ages set tv drama, but not like, actually accurate. Maybe I read wrong?
G
Guest 6801328
Guest
Butcher what? Their own observations? The people they're observing? WTF?
All I said was that outside observers often* notice things about cultures (and that might be a corporate culture, or skateboarding culture, or whatever) that members of that culture themselves don't notice.
But I didn't make a leap to, "...and therefore they will write better RPGs based on that culture" or "...and therefore it's entire justified to colonize them" or whatever TF you're imagining.
Maybe you're reading more into my comment than was actually there?
FFS.
*No, I don't have an actual number for "often".
doctorbadwolf
Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Any description or explanation of the thing observed. Not sure why you went on that wild ride in the rest of your post, so I’ve no idea how to respond to it.
Doug McCrae
Legend
Tekumel and Glorantha are well-researched rpg settings. Glorantha's main area, Dragon Pass, focuses on a conflict between pseudo-Celts and pseudo-Romans. It's at its most "real" when it comes to religion. Tekumel is medieval but non-European.
MAR Barker, the creator of Tekumel, was a professor of Urdu and South Asian studies. Greg Stafford, creator of Glorantha, didn't have Barker's academic credentials but I'd consider him to be a scholar of religion.
MAR Barker, the creator of Tekumel, was a professor of Urdu and South Asian studies. Greg Stafford, creator of Glorantha, didn't have Barker's academic credentials but I'd consider him to be a scholar of religion.
Jaeger
That someone better
Challenging moderation
Toning down: and bowing out of this thread with the following:
During the Satanic Panic in the 80's and 90's a group of people had very strong "opinions" as to what wasn't appropriate content for RPG's.
The pressure brought to bear by this social minority caused TSR to "remove references to demons, devils, and other potentially controversial supernatural monsters from the 2nd Edition of AD&D."
To this day the people behind pushing Dungeons & Dragons as a Satanic game, imposing censorship, and wanting to control what content was appropriate for RPG’s are reviled by the greater RPG community.
Gamers had a technical term during the satanic panic for people who want to control what is appropriate for RPG’s: The Bad Guys.
Today a similar pressure is being applied. While the Ideological paradigm of this group is different, the goal is the same: To control what is and is not appropriate content for an RPG. And not only to control and censor appropriate content, but to also dictate who can even create it.
At what point did people who want to control what content is appropriate for RPG’s stop being the bad guys?
As for the Orwellian Angle:
By the posters’ own admission in post #176, his argument stems from the concept of Cultural Appropriation. Which is itself a branch of Marxist Critical Theory. The ideological paradigm of his “opinions” are deeply rooted in Marxism. The socioeconomic theory created by Karl Marx, who wrote those cornerstones of modern socialist philosophy; the Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital.
1984 is an explicit critique of the natural results of embracing Marxist socialist philosophy. And it was a very prescient novel, given what we now know what when on in the USSR, Communist China, North Korea, Cambodian Khmer Rouge, Cuba, East Germany, etc…
And if you feel that I am making a ridiculous logical leap between someone advocating restrictions of what content is appropriate RPG material based on them espousing the Marxist dialectic of Cultural Appropriation, and their willingness to go full 1984 on people who disagree with them if they had the chance...
Look at what the poster said they would like to enforce in “appropriate” game design. Then contemplate the level of control that would be required over the RPG industry, retailers, and hobby, to make that desire reality...
You may also feel free to completely ignore everything I've just said. This is just the crazy internet after all.
FlyingChihuahua
Hero
Gladly.
TheSword
Legend
I find this debate fascinating because in essence there is no fixed line about what is acceptable and not acceptable. There are some things we know are wrong (the British holding onto the Elgin Marbles) and some we are pretty comfortable with (Neil Gaimon retelling African myth). The term should probably be Cultural Misappropriation. It’s when we get it badly wrong that there is an issue, or when we don’t adapt with the times. I suspect fiction has a greater leeway than a lot of uses, because it isn’t forced on people and is more open to interpretation, than say a business logo or a sports team.
What should determine the acceptable is not how much research has been done - that will always be up for academic debate, not to mention the fact that academic positions and opinions change over time and are very subject to trends in thinking. Instead the question comes down to one of taste. If a subject is dealt with tastefully (Neil Gaimon) then people will largely accept it. If it’s done in bad taste it will be rejected. Quality of writing, originality of characters, uses to which the culture is put, will matter a lot. Stereotypes in and of themselves probably matter less than the use to which they are put. Stereotypes are part of fiction like it or not, both when they are being used and when they are subverted.
I also think the further back in history you go, the less the risk of harm. Obviously. Though again this will depend on how tasteful the work is. It’s really easy to lump everything in one box and use the stamp Cultural (mis)Appropriation to criticize a work. This is reductive and I think you have to work harder to demonstrate harm the further back you go.
Whether an RPG set in medieval Japan is acceptable will depend on how tastefully it is portrayed, not how well researched or accurate it is (though meticulous research and consultation may assist with this - I don’t believe it is essential). The statement that you can’t write about cultures other than your own without sharing authorship with someone of that culture is clearly wrong. It’s an opinion, but I would suggest one that isn’t widely accepted.
There is a real debate about whether using the legends and myths of other cultures actually causes harm to people in that culture. That is Not a concept that is broadly accepted yet - though people are making the arguments. Even if widely accepted, all companies and individuals will have to decide how they feel about the matter in question on a case by case basis. Inevitably some companies will be edgier than others.
I’m not willing to write a guide on what is tasteful and what isn’t. I’d be very wary of anyone who claimed they can. The days of Mary Whitehouse are long gone I hope. Instead people should vote with their wallets. I for one enjoyed and appreciated Tomb of Annihilation and have bought every edition. Of L5R because I was impressed with the writing and the quality of the work. I therefore think mainstream companies should keep producing work of that quality.
I also think people should argue specifics rather than make general blanket statements like have been made earlier. If you don’t like how a work has portrayed something then explain why and make a case for how harm has been caused. I’m not convinced by the arguments I’ve seen that portrayal as Samurai as honorable to the point of self-destruction causes material harm to modern Japanese.
Let keep an open mind and remember all creative enterprise requires taking a leap of faith and can be highly subjective.
What should determine the acceptable is not how much research has been done - that will always be up for academic debate, not to mention the fact that academic positions and opinions change over time and are very subject to trends in thinking. Instead the question comes down to one of taste. If a subject is dealt with tastefully (Neil Gaimon) then people will largely accept it. If it’s done in bad taste it will be rejected. Quality of writing, originality of characters, uses to which the culture is put, will matter a lot. Stereotypes in and of themselves probably matter less than the use to which they are put. Stereotypes are part of fiction like it or not, both when they are being used and when they are subverted.
I also think the further back in history you go, the less the risk of harm. Obviously. Though again this will depend on how tasteful the work is. It’s really easy to lump everything in one box and use the stamp Cultural (mis)Appropriation to criticize a work. This is reductive and I think you have to work harder to demonstrate harm the further back you go.
Whether an RPG set in medieval Japan is acceptable will depend on how tastefully it is portrayed, not how well researched or accurate it is (though meticulous research and consultation may assist with this - I don’t believe it is essential). The statement that you can’t write about cultures other than your own without sharing authorship with someone of that culture is clearly wrong. It’s an opinion, but I would suggest one that isn’t widely accepted.
There is a real debate about whether using the legends and myths of other cultures actually causes harm to people in that culture. That is Not a concept that is broadly accepted yet - though people are making the arguments. Even if widely accepted, all companies and individuals will have to decide how they feel about the matter in question on a case by case basis. Inevitably some companies will be edgier than others.
I’m not willing to write a guide on what is tasteful and what isn’t. I’d be very wary of anyone who claimed they can. The days of Mary Whitehouse are long gone I hope. Instead people should vote with their wallets. I for one enjoyed and appreciated Tomb of Annihilation and have bought every edition. Of L5R because I was impressed with the writing and the quality of the work. I therefore think mainstream companies should keep producing work of that quality.
I also think people should argue specifics rather than make general blanket statements like have been made earlier. If you don’t like how a work has portrayed something then explain why and make a case for how harm has been caused. I’m not convinced by the arguments I’ve seen that portrayal as Samurai as honorable to the point of self-destruction causes material harm to modern Japanese.
Let keep an open mind and remember all creative enterprise requires taking a leap of faith and can be highly subjective.
Son of the Serpent
Pupil
There were bits and pieces of another conversation somehow transplanted into this post. Corrected version below.
Similar Threads
- Locked
