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

[Felix]

Buttercup:

By Buttercup
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.

I have already adressed this issue.

By Buttercup
Put another way, real world racism, sexism and other social injustices have actual living victims that you and I know.

And as such may be adressed. NOT endorsed, but adressed.

By Buttercup
Pretending to be a necromancer or a dealer in halfling slaves isn't and can't be real. So it's ok.

Perhaps you reach a point of mental instability where you cannot separate fantasy and reality. Is it still ok then? Ok, ok. That is pedantry, but you cannot ban things simply because it may be upsetting; ban it because it is presented in an untasteful way.

Perhaps you missed the thrust of my argument:

By me
...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".

DnD has captial "E" evil. It has banal evil. Evil runs the gamut in DnD. And yet "Social Injustice" is barred. Absurd. Not confronting the issue will not make it go away.

 

[Redleg06]

I take it you've never seen Chasing Amy.

I have, but all I remember is "Finger-cuffs"

 

[maddman75]

So many things to touch on here.

The Book of Vile Darkness also touches on serial killers, rapists, and sexual deviants. Those are unfortunatley not subjects of fantasy. Neither is slavery. So no, it does not automatically imply that it is only fantasy.

On females being physically weaker, yes on average females have 15% les muscle mass. So what. Adventurers aren't average. Saying that the average female has a strength of X means squat to a PC. Its just flavor text. This arguement has been fought before, and it wasn't pretty. Ended up with a closed thread and all.

Would I play in a game that featured racist or sexist cultures? Maybe. It depends on the context. It could be juvenile, and therefore crap. Or it could represent interesting RP opportunities.

Even playing a blatantly racist character could be interesting. I'd thought of playing a racist paladin before. All dwarves are grumpy and live in mines. All elves read poetry and dance in flower gardens. All orcs are evil and sadistic. Maybe even add a couple blatently false ones. Gnomes have tails, trolls turn to stone in sunlight. It would be interesting to see a good hearted but narrow minded character's perceptions challenged and changed as he went about in the world.

However, that is the purpose of 'mostly human' races in fantasy and sci-fi. It allows us to look at them remotely and contemplate our own nature. One area that it is rather blatent is in Star Trek. Klingons are both honor and agression. Vulcans are belief in science and the strength of reason. Ferengi are greed. Borg are reliance on technology. D&D races are no different.

To sum up, it has a use, but would require a properly set up setting, a DM who knows what he's doing, and a group that has some interest in looking at societal issues.

For most, its best to just go kill the orcs and take their treasure.

 

[hong]

I have not read the BoVD, but from what I hear, there are some Evil things in there.

YES! And I, for one, will be putting the nipple clamps of exquisite pain to good use. Oh yes, indeed.



Hong "I just read the BoVD for the articles" Ooi

 

[Terraism]

Hong "I just read the BoVD for the articles" Ooi

I think this is my favorite tag you've used so far, Hong.

 

[Alzrius]

originally posted by Fred Delles

Now, I have nothing against anyone creating a blatantly sexist or racist RPG for their personal use. Just keep it away from me, please.

Your comments?

I think a campaign setting could "get away" with publishing racist/sexist issues ("get away" in the sense that no one would be unduly offended), but only if it published them in the guise of something to be smashed by the heroes. Aside from the various "Evil" campaigns that Felix mentioned, D&D (and by trickle-down effect, d20) is a game about heroes, and we define heroes as helping to push what's right, and in this case its breaking those biases.

That said, what do you mean by a "blatantly" racist or sexist campaign? It can be obvious in a society, but this could just be another challenge for the heroes to overcome. I can see a swashbuckling-type campaign (I just got Dragon 301) where the PCs don masks and go out to fight against the oppressive society, helping people who are otherwise prejudiced against. Or perhaps they're popular heroes, but under the masks are members of the race/sex thats being oppressed.

I think what you're talking about here is another form of an "Evil" campaign that Felix mentioned. PCs who agree with and perpetuate racist/sexist issues probably cannot be called heroes, which is what the game is nominally about. It's just that this form of an "Evil" game is more likely it tick off the players than if it contained another form of Evil, such as PCs who served an evil god or raised zombies, etc.

The bottom line is, it all depends on how you role-play it.

 

[William Ronald]

While there are some NPCs with racist or sexist attitudes in my campaign, it is not inherent to the rules or the nature of the setting. Nor do I think they need to be in a setting.

The problem I would have with such a setting is that it might make players feel uncomfortable. Role playing is meant to be a fun activity. It is one thing to have some social obstacles for a character to over come, but if they become a major focus of a campaign it may become less enjoyable. A lot of people have seen the evils of racism and sexism first hand, so they may have good reasons for not wanting to see these real world evils in their campaigns.

Mind you, having a racist or sexist villain can help make the players dislike the NPC. (In general, the more player characters dislike a major villain, the more motivated they are in eliminating him. IMHO, of course.) I think the question is how maturely these issues can be handled by players and DMs.

It is up to each of us, based on our tastes and those of our players, to decide what elements of the real world intrude on our campaigns. So, I think this ultimately needs to be an individual decision.

However, I would suspect that a blatantly racist or sexist RPG or setting would likely draw a lot of negative publicity. (I did not see a flood of bad press for the BOVD, but I think the real world evils of racism and sexism would draw more attention than the evils of imaginary necromancers and fiends.)

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

It seems to me that this boils down to saying "I don't mind playing in a campaign that's labelled evil as long as it doesn't feature the things that really get my goat." (Presumably that's what hitting too close to home means). Whether this can be rephrased as "RACISM AND SEXISM ARE REAL EVIL, I couldn't have anything to do with that. On the other hand selling children as slaves, amputating all of peoples' limbs so I can keep them alive to sacrifice all at once to my dark gods, and ritual torture as sacrifice for the purpose of gaining spiritual power--those are OK in my books. Don't bother me in the least" is an open question.

Is evil (or EVIL or Evil) OK as long as it doesn't bother me? Apparently so.

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.

 

[Felix]

What Elder-Basilisk just said.

Felix stands up and applauds

 

[MGibster]

Same for racist. As for "racist", I mean between nationalities similar to real-life nationalities (blacks, Jews, etc.), not humans/elves/dwarves. Thankfully, no examples.

Legend of the Five Rings is filled with classism, racism, and a fair amount of sexism.

Classism: The samurai caste rules the lower classes with an iron fist. The lower classes have no representation in their government, they may not seek redress against samurai who wrong them, and they are subject to punishment by any samurai without trial.

Racism: Those who aren't Rokugani are looked upon as ignorant barbarians. Rokugani who have foreign names and features are sometimes social pariahs (outside of the Unicorn clan).

Sexism: In Rokugani the women are pretty much second class citizens subject to the whims of their husbands. Unless of course they become warriors or shujenga. Even so they are held to different standards as their male counterparts and expected to remain chaste.

All in all L5R is one of the best RPGs to come out in the past 6 years.

Marc