Would you buy/play a blatantly racist or sexist campaign setting?

[Fred Delles]

Fred:
A lot of Evil in DnD is phooey, I agree. But there is more real life evil in DnD than you might think. What about the banal evil? Not the arch-fiend capital "E" evil, but the everyday, run of the mill, "just doing my job" kind?

Would this be a good reason to institute sexism?:
Playing a campaign very true to Qing Dynasty China. Female characters must either
A) endure a -4 DEX mod due to bound feet, or,
B) endure social stigma as all high class women have bound feet.

I'm only trying to illustrate that racism and sexism are today's Big Evil. Where it once used to be heresy, and someday might be bias based on species (a la Alien Nation), I feel that evil should be treated with equanimity. Allow sexism, racism into a campaign? Sure. But, like everything else in the campaign, it must be well developed with good in game reasons for existing. It's the same standard I hold for all Evil.

Kamard:
No doubt.

Well, as for the bound feet in China, I'd let that pass because it is something that happened in real life. Besides, there are no role-playing penalties, only some interesting bits to think and argue about. Social stigmatas only add to the fun of the game.

Besides, aren't most adventurers considered "low class"?

Such is the same for "banal evil". Only makes things more fun, though it would be hard to argue for the ideals of banal evil, for we are generally against it in real life.

For both, they MUST be well-developed or you will really get burned as a DM (or even a player).

 

[the Jester]

I've played in dnd campaigns where anti-elven racism was the biggest threat, but that doesn't exactly answer the question.

I think a game with a racist or sexist setting could be fine if it was done right. For instance, what if the point of the game was to overthrow the system? What if it was a Civil War-era rpg? What if it was set in WWII France? What if it was historically accurate and set in ancient Rome (where women were virtually property)?

The catch is, does the game assume that racism or sexism is right? I can see playing in games that deal with these themes, but not in a game that supports or preaches these themes. I'm interested in different social systems; I have various cultures in my campaign that are racist (whether by that you mean 'these elves are predjudiced against those elves' or 'gnomes predjudiced against humans') and other cultures with weird gender-role issues or strange sexual mores. I don't pretend that those are all peachy and the proper attitudes to hold in your life, though.

Heck, the one shot I ran for Diaglo, Olgar Shiverstone and their friend dealt with elves vs. elves...

 

[Tom Cashel]

Is Darth Vader a racist character because he wears black and has a black man doing his voice?

I take it you've never seen Chasing Amy.

 

[DanMcS]

I take it you've never seen Chasing Amy.

"What's a Nubian?"

 

[hammymchamham]

I'd never play one that was blantanly racist towards say "Whites" or "Blacks" or "Yellows" or sexist. I would have racism towards various races in DnD, maybe a world where Elves and Humans just don't get along (would actually make a Half Elf interesting to play).

 

[Felix]

Shoot, Fred, in some of the games I've played in, you get toasted if your lineage isn't well developed!

Speaking of lineage and adventurers being low class, you should talk to my buddy, the perinnial King's son.

There are role playing penalties, there just arn't any game mechanics for them. My barbarian can't get a word in edgewise when the party is talking to a government official simply because he is a barbarian. Kinda limits my options. But hey, I deal with it. I chose to be the barbarian, didn't I?

I hope you decide that the point Redleg and I am making has merit; including the social conditions of racism and sexism in a campaign setting does not automatically equate to "I can't believe they published this trash". Of course it has to be detailed and well developed; gamers demand that of every aspect of the product. Merely consider that a large slave trade, or women forced to bind their feet, effectively crippling them, can add another facet to your gaming world. It can make it more detailed, less sterile, and give it a gritty feeling you lose when genders are described as "this one can do anything that one can do".

Yes, in-game regeimes will opress people. In-game regeimes will murder people. In-game regiemes will disenfranchise people. Well? The players are supposed to be heroes, after all, arn't they? Fight for Goodness, and afterwards I will be in the Story Hour forum lapping it up with the best of them.

 

[I'm A Banana]

It largely depends...

It would have to be treated with tact and care, and the right element of fantasy "distance."

Like, make a human subrace that has strong, strong gender divisions (+2 to Str, Dex, Int for Men, +2 to Con, Wis, Cha for Women, to go with the stereotypes), where they have a tribal culture where the men go and hunt and kill things and the women are the spiritualists and shamans of the tribe...

I could live with "cultural" distinctions....where things are treated differently based on fantasy race (not real-world race...that, I'm affraid, has very little valid general basis for the stereotypes)....heck, I could even stand a subrace of humans who had a caste system where the different castes were designated by skin color (perhaps going from Gold for the kings to the black of the earth or funerals for the Outcasts), and perhaps had slightly different bonuses/penalties (Kings get a +2 Cha, -2 Str. Servants get a +2 Con, -2 Int, or something).

This could, in a fantasy game, be explained by highly devided evolution or adaptation...in the case of the gender difference, it evolved so that there could be Prodivders and Caretakers. In the case of the caste society, it's almost like they're several different races in one culture.

This, I don't really have a problem with...it helps illustrate some of the gender/racist points of history...I mean, that's why Hags are always female and why 2e Bariaur were divided on gender lines...

A lot of this is because you can come at this from a lot of different angles, and find fantasy justifications for the fantasy divisions...the caste society was laid down by the Gods. The gender roles were defined by the Creator. And you're free to go reverse or look at it as the villain, if you want.

I mean, I wuoldn't have a *huge* problem with a fantasy Earth where each culture was a different race -- say, to go with a very negative stereotype, all tribal peoples were Orcs. But, then, the campaign should definately not consider that a commentary on the society, but rather an exploration of what *could* have happened, had it been this way.

If, instead, it was done to simply insult or belittle some real-world gender or race, then no....this is supposed to be fun, and it's not fun if I insult anybody who I may play with.

 

[KenM]

My take on this, the way alignments were written in first edtion AD+D, "Lawful Good: you will obey the laws of the land, and behave as not to break the law. " So, if I bring in a paladin brought up in nazi Germany......................

Think about it. scary. I would not play in such a game.

 

[Buttercup]

How about rephrasing the question:

"Would you buy/play a blatantly Evil campaign setting?"

People have bought evil campaign settings. People play evil characters regardless of setting. Publishing companies print books with content self-labeled as evil.

But I think that a campaign setting formed to be obviously sexist or obviously racist would be decried, accused of bad taste, the company submitted to boycott, and the company's publisher would move to abnegate the contract to avoid guilt by association.

Meanwhile many gamers desire gaming mechanics so that their Necromancer may continue to, more effectively, dominate the souls of the innocent. I have not read the BoVD, but from what I hear, there are some Evil things in there.

Curious, isn't it?

No, it isn't curious at all. (IMO, natch.) Because necromancers don't exist in real life. The stuff in the BoVD is fantasy. You may be bothered by it, or you may not be, but it harms no one. OTOH, plugging real world injustices into game mechanics is hitting way too close to home for some people, especially if it appears to endorse repugnant and cruel acts which have occurred or continue to occur in the real world.

Put another way, real world racism, sexism and other social injustices have actual living victims that you and I know. Making light of their problems is, well, it's indecent. Pretending to be a necromancer or a dealer in halfling slaves isn't and can't be real. So it's ok.

 

[Darkness]

My take on this, the way alignments were written in first edtion AD+D, "Lawful Good: you will obey the laws of the land, and behave as not to break the law. "

Was that all that was to LG? 'cause this is kinda missing the Good part...