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

[SemperJase]

I'm amazed that racism and sexism are more taboo than rape, torture, and murder for pleasure.

 

[Zappo]

Uhm... interesting.

I certainly wouldn't play a game where racism was the whole point such as that horrible "White Warriors".

I certainly would play a game where racism was just as it is IRL - ie, it exists, it is more widespread than I'd like it to be, and it isn't based in any real fact.

I certainly would play a game with "speciesism", where you have races (=species) that are deemed inhuman, stupid and brutal, but you are justified because they are orcs after all.

But a game where they actually gave human women -2 to all stats, or black people -2 to INT...? Well, if it is built around racism I wouldn't play, as I said. But if racism isn't prevalent, I don't know. I'd have to give it a try. Then again, I wonder if/how can you make a game with similar rules and not make it based around racism.

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

To put it in another way:

Let's take two campaign settings. Both features blue-eyed, blond-haired, fair-skinned elves that consider themselves the only true sentient race, the rightful ruler of all creation; and who treat all other peoples, even fellow elves of other subraces, to be just barely talking cattle.

These nazi elves are unbearable racist bastards. Quite a common archetype, isn't it ?

In setting A, they are described as such, and their given alignment is clearly labelled as evil. Player characters are not expected to be from that race.

In setting B, their alignment is chaotic good, the background explains that they are "justified" in their attitude, several rules are introduced in order to back their pretention of being übermenschen (well, überelfen); and player characters are expected to be these racist elves and go on racist crusades.



Setting A is OK, although cliché, setting B is just right out.



That's, IMHO, the difference between a setting that feature racism and a setting that is racist.

Standard D&D (at least in its treatment of elves) only differs from Setting B by a matter of degree-- and a small degree, at that, when you consider xenophobic elf settlements in the trees.

I've seen descriptions of such elven communities in several D&D products, yet they all staunchly maintain that said Elves are Chaotic Good and on the side of right.

One reason I like to play Orcs. Orcs are cruel, brutal, stupid, and evil-- but at least their descriptions and alignment are honest about it, so a renegade orc can struggle against his own people and try to redeem them without people telling him that there's nothing wrong for him to fix.

 

[Aloïsius]

To put it in another way:

Let's take two campaign settings. Both features blue-eyed, blond-haired, fair-skinned elves that consider themselves the only true sentient race, the rightful ruler of all creation; and who treat all other peoples, even fellow elves of other subraces, to be just barely talking cattle.

These nazi elves are unbearable racist bastards. Quite a common archetype, isn't it ?

In setting A, they are described as such, and their given alignment is clearly labelled as evil. Player characters are not expected to be from that race.

In setting B, their alignment is chaotic good, the background explains that they are "justified" in their attitude, several rules are introduced in order to back their pretention of being übermenschen (well, überelfen); and player characters are expected to be these racist elves and go on racist crusades.



Setting A is OK, although cliché, setting B is just right out.



That's, IMHO, the difference between a setting that feature racism and a setting that is racist.

Warning : Gez is just elf-trolling. Be cautious

 

[AngelTears]

In my Sturmsgård campaign starting in January (look for the similarly named thread). The players will be higher officers in prison or concentration camp. They will be responsible for developing magical items and creations, that make the BoVD look like cheesecake.

The empire exceedingly racist towards non-humans, and similar events like Kristalnacht have happened in that empire. At the moment they are rounding up all the half elves and sending them to the front or to prison camps.

The concept of human rights or dignitity are foreign concepts.

As for dealing with the darker aspects (Evil is an overused word and silly in its own way, since I din't consider anything being inherently evil, or there being an embodyment of evil.), I think I would play in such a campaign if, and only if they are treated with a seriousness they are due.

Every campaign world should have inequalities, since they are fantastic sources for roleplaying.

-Angel Tears

 

[WayneLigon]

I take it you've never seen Chasing Amy.

To this day I cannot pass an Archie comic without almost busting out in laughter because of that movie.

Deny, deny, deny...

 

[Arnwyn]

We play in a campaign setting in which a *region* (not the whole campaign world) has sexist attitudes. However, we certainly don't use any game mechanics to simulate this.

Also, as a poster noted above, I too think it's strange that sexism and racism is decried, but no one is saying anything about killing and murdering... (IMC, for over 10 years, not one character with a "good" alignment has ever instigated a fight to the death - ie. drawn their weapons and attacked first without any form of provocation.)

 

[WayneLigon]

Re: Re: Re: Would you buy/play a blatantly racist or sexist campagin setting?

Racism is alive and well in D&D... and I'm not talking about interspecies racism (such as Dwarves vs. Orcs)... but intraspecies racism (High Elves vs. Dark Elves, Dwarves vs. Duergar)... and notice the skin colors in the case of the elves...

That's more of a Good vs. Evil conflict than an inherantly racist one. If the High Elves were in conflict with the Dark Elves because of some perceived (and non-existant) cultural bias, then the conflict would be racist. They're in conflict with the Dark Elves because the Dark Elves are your classic 'usually Chaotic Evil' race that seeks to overthrow their good counterparts at all costs.

A note about skin colors. Despite what some cover depictions have shown (the most notable one that I can think of is the old Waterdeep cover with the beholder and his servants; the dark elf there is depicted as having the same skin color as a black human) Dark Elf skin is black. As in, Color=#000000. Not brown, not tan, bistered, black-a-vised, brunet, dark, dusky, umber, mocha, cafe-au-lait, coffee, chocolate, caramel, khaki, earthen or even woody. Black. As in, not a color a human is capable of possessing. Let's give it a rest.

 

[herald]

I could play in a game that that had racism and sexism as part of a story line.

I would however not however play a bigot, no matter what the advantage would be. And if the game proved to be unpleasant because of that, I would leave the game.

 

[Emiricol]

Xenophobia doesn't make a country evil, whether it is an Elven nation or not.

Going on the warpath to conquer sovereign nations throughout the region and enslaving them based on the fact that they are a different race or subrace and stealing all their valuables in the name of liebenstraum for your master elfen race "probably" is evil.