SPECIAL NOTICE
Malicious code was found on the site, which has been removed, but would have been able to access files and the database, revealing email addresses, posts, and encoded passwords (which would need to be decoded). However, there is no direct evidence that any such activity occurred. REGARDLESS, BE SURE TO CHANGE YOUR PASSWORDS. And as is good practice, remember to never use the same password on more than one site. While performing housekeeping, we also decided to upgrade the forums.
This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.

Thirsty Sword Lesbians, no, really

Started by Warder, October 14, 2020, 05:29:43 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

BoxCrayonTales

#270
Quote from: Dimitrios on October 27, 2020, 02:58:54 PM
Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser on October 27, 2020, 01:50:44 PMany game based on the Chronicles of Narnia, or on the stories of Thomas Ligotti (both ideas I've seen proposed) would have the same problem -- those stories, or at least the really important parts thereof, are ultimately not about the kinds of conflicts or challenges that lend themselves well to rule-based gaming.

This reminds me of the complaints I used to see about Call of Cthulhu that it "didn't recreate Lovecraft's stories". My response to that is "why would I want to role play those?". The brilliance of CoC is taking Lovecraft's (and others') work and finding the aspects of it that do work well as an rpg.
Don't typical CoC campaigns end with total party kills? I'm pretty sure most Lovecraftian stories end with the protagonist either dying or going crazy, so that's hardly "didn't recreate Lovecraft's stories."

There are no aspects of Lovecraftian fiction that work well as an RPG, because typical RPGs aren't nihilistic horror stories. I'm pretty sure we already had at least one thread complaining that modern Lovecraftian games are just typical RPGs with a purely cosmetic Lovecraftian skin and don't actually have anything to do with the themes of Lovecraftian fiction.

EDIT: I'm pretty sure Bloodborne is a Lovecraftian video game, at least if we count the endings.

SHARK

Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser on October 27, 2020, 01:50:44 PM
Quote from: jhkim on October 27, 2020, 12:16:15 PMI think judging *either* DC Heroes *or* Blue Rose based on how well they support Conan adventures is utterly ridiculous.

You're missing my point. "No place for Conan in Aldea" isn't about specific characters in specific games, it's shorthand for my primary criticism of BR as a commercial gaming product: Put as directly as possible, I don't think the core tropes of romantic fantasy as a literary genre translate particularly well to what, in my observation and experience, most RPG'ers actually want out of their games, or to what the nature of games as games facilitates very well.

Romantic fantasy stories are ultimately centered on relationships and personal growth, and the vast majority of the genre's core dramatic conflicts tend to be internal, emotional and interpersonal; Mercedes Lackey's fantasy, for example, is notable for how seldom actual physical violence is depicted "on stage" (though the fallout afterwards is often examined with respectable directness). Success and failure are less about whether a character beats a challenge or wins a conflict through skill, power or cleverness than about whether he makes the right choice in the first place. By contrast, anything structured as a game is, by definition, an exercise in teamwork manoeuvring within a rules system to accomplish common goals and victories, which lends itself far better to the simulation of external physical conflicts -- action scenes, fights, clever use of spells and powers, etc. -- than to the kinds of drama favoured by the source material.  (You can see a parallel phenomenon with the World of Darkness games: no matter how hard the creators tried to build a game that encouraged deep, angsty, emotional roleplaying of characters facing a variety of dooms, in practice the games had a tremendous tendency to turn into, as I once heard them described, "Hammer-flavoured superheroes".)

To sum up, it's less about complaining that characters of one genre don't fit in another and more about concluding that this particular genre itself works less well as an RPG milieu than might be hoped, because of the fundamental nature of RPGs themselves. Nor is this limited to Blue Rose specifically; I have argued before that any game based on the Chronicles of Narnia, or on the stories of Thomas Ligotti (both ideas I've seen proposed) would have the same problem -- those stories, or at least the really important parts thereof, are ultimately not about the kinds of conflicts or challenges that lend themselves well to rule-based gaming.

Greetings!

Excellent commentary, Stephen. I agree. The foundational premises of Mercedes Lackey, et al, romantic fantasy books are primarily internal conflicts, romance, and relationships. The whole subject matter is problematic for 90% or more of gamers.

I've seen this kind of thing play out right in my own campaigns. Two of the players--both women--want to run their characters dancing about the city, pursuing their lovers, fucking, engaging in intrigue, and just swimming in the innuendo and nuances of emotionally charged relationships. Two other players--also women--are often on the fence; they want to go kill orcs and jump into heroic deeds and different kinds of exploration and politics, but they are also very much tempted to join the other two girls in partying, fucking, and emotional drama. Then, there are three men, that want to kill and loot.

The men complain pointedly about how the women--especially the two deeply focused on romance, sex, and emotional drama--tend to ruin the game for them, because they make the game center on things that just don't interest them. But the girls love it.

*shrugs*

It's a very different style of game play--and I agree, in general, the very basis of it isn't really suited to adversarial challenges, or groups at all. It's meant for one person having sex and emotional drama with one or more other characters, sometimes joined by a companion. Having a group of five or six people all gathered together....not so much. It's very challenging to organize and pull off, because having more than one or two people simply creates too many divergent and incompatible stories and goals. Essentially, the primary difference between a novel and a game. Lackey is great for novels, but far less so for a roleplaying game, despite some people's fervent desires to translate the genre of books into a game play experience.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
"It is the Marine Corps that will strip away the façade so easily confused with self. It is the Corps that will offer the pain needed to buy the truth. And at last, each will own the privilege of looking inside himself  to discover what truly resides there. Comfort is an illusion. A false security b

jhkim

Quote from: SHARK on October 27, 2020, 04:12:12 PM
Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser on October 27, 2020, 01:50:44 PM
Quote from: jhkim on October 27, 2020, 12:16:15 PMI think judging *either* DC Heroes *or* Blue Rose based on how well they support Conan adventures is utterly ridiculous.
You're missing my point. "No place for Conan in Aldea" isn't about specific characters in specific games, it's shorthand for my primary criticism of BR as a commercial gaming product: Put as directly as possible, I don't think the core tropes of romantic fantasy as a literary genre translate particularly well to what, in my observation and experience, most RPG'ers actually want out of their games, or to what the nature of games as games facilitates very well.

Romantic fantasy stories are ultimately centered on relationships and personal growth, and the vast majority of the genre's core dramatic conflicts tend to be internal, emotional and interpersonal; Mercedes Lackey's fantasy, for example, is notable for how seldom actual physical violence is depicted "on stage" (though the fallout afterwards is often examined with respectable directness). Success and failure are less about whether a character beats a challenge or wins a conflict through skill, power or cleverness than about whether he makes the right choice in the first place.
Excellent commentary, Stephen. I agree. The foundational premises of Mercedes Lackey, et al, romantic fantasy books are primarily internal conflicts, romance, and relationships. The whole subject matter is problematic for 90% or more of gamers.

OK, I think I understand your point here a little better, Stephen. However, I think the example of Conan still seems silly.

1) You claim that Blue Rose doesn't provide what most RPGers want out of their games -- and I think that's true. Blue Rose isn't written for "most RPGers", nor should it be. There already exists an RPG for the large majority of gamers - that's Dungeons & Dragons. Other RPGs like Blue Rose should *not* be written to do exactly what D&D does - they should be written for the minority of players who want to try something different. Games like Ars Magica or Call of Cthulhu do things very differently, and I think that's a good thing.

The question is, is Blue Rose a fun game to play for the 5% or less of gamers who really want to try something in the genre of Mercedes Lackey and similar authors?

2) I disagree with your characterization of romantic fantasy. I haven't read that much Mercedes Lackey - only the Exile series in Valdemar. But I've read a lot of Tamora Pierce. Exile's Honor has less violence than Conan stories, but it has more violence than Tolkien. Exile's Honor has more violence than The Fellowship of the Ring. It has fights and assassination attempts, and concludes with a climactic battle. Alberich is far more of a fighter than Frodo or Sam. Yes, there is a storyline of internal growth -- but the same thing is true in Tolkien, where Frodo's personal struggle with the Ring and his friendship with Sam is a central to the books.

Protector of the Small by Tamora Pierce is one of my favorite fantasy series of all time, and while again, it's less violent than Conan - it's still very much about external threats. It's a coming-of-age story, with Kel who is a very action-oriented jock who grows to turn the tide in Tortall's war.

Of course, D&D games are different than Tolkien's writing - but then, Blue Rose adventures don't have to be exactly like Mercedes Lackey. In my Blue Rose mini-campaign, I drew in a bunch of inspirations - including Scooby Doo. I didn't end up running much more of Blue Rose, but it seemed to me just as workable as a dozen other RPGs. Not every RPG should be about Conanesque monster-killing.

VisionStorm

Quote from: SHARK on October 27, 2020, 03:52:06 PM
Quote from: VisionStorm on October 27, 2020, 11:21:23 AM
Quote from: Omega on October 27, 2020, 12:59:10 AM
Quote from: Mistwell on October 26, 2020, 10:49:27 PM
I am not being disingenuous and you're emphasizing the wrong word in my question. I am not being naive about the reaction, I am ASKING WHY. As in I genuinely want people to articulate the reasons they object to this specific thing, and not their general feelings of this company being icky for being SJW. It's not that I am surprised by people's reactions - I am asking for your reasons.

Thought I'd voiced mine before on this but here goes again.

Its the same objection I have to any "woke" material and especially to hateful "woke" statements and accusations as in their promotionals. This applies to any company that uses similar low stunts like this. Its the same reason I have a particular hate for Mearls and others of his ilk after he "fired" players from D&D. Or how 4e D&D had to piss on players of prior editions, or how WOTC has slapped a great big "WACIST!" label on all older product. And every other stunt companies and designers have pulled in the last 10 years.

And I particularly despise these things when all they are is an outrage marketing gag to get free advertising.

If you have to attack someone to promote your product. Then your product is not dirt. It is less than dirt.

That's the thing about Mistwell's intrusion into this topic. He's like "I'm totally not being disingenuous at all, guys! I've no idea WTF you're talking about. I'M JUST ASKING FOR...REASONS!"

Meanwhile there's like 17+ pages of "reasons" in this thread that have been hatched out over and over again. People have brought up the adversarial, ideologically purist marketing like three dozen times. A few also criticized the fugly has hell art as well. I may have mentioned something about the silly game play concept at one point (which revolves around "redeeming" lesbian adversaries, rather than killing them, in order to "kiss" them *wink, wink, nudge, nudge*), but by and large there have been pages upon pages criticizing the marketing. Yet somehow totally not disingenuous Mistwell has managed to miss that.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron on October 27, 2020, 02:27:19 AM
These goons are way behind. 12 year old boys have been using D&D to play lesbianstripperninjas since at least 1983.



Greetings!

The *GAMEPLAY*--wait, wait, VisionStorm! I must have been sleeping and missed that class. Can you elaborate for me? Kissing and no doubt much more--dealing with Lesbian adversaries....redeeming them? WTF?

Who are the Lesbian adversaries? Do Lesbians fight different kinds of monsters and villains than Conan the Barbarian, or Sir Lancelot of the Round Table?

How are such adversaries "Redeemed"? Redeemed from what, and TO what?

This game sounds so fucking retarded. Mistwell must have been eating too many Cheetos or something not to see this truth. ;D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

I don't know the specifics about action resolution or how fighting and adversaries work, but based on the KS description...

QuoteThirsty Sword Lesbians by April Kit Walsh is a roleplaying game that celebrates the love, power, and existence of queer people—specifically queer people with swords and a lot of feelings. Flirting, sword-fighting, and barbed zingers all mix together in a system designed for both narrative drama and player safety. This innovative take on the Powered by the Apocalypse engine is a breeze to learn and ensures that no matter how the dice fall, something interesting happens to move the story forward.

In this game, you will solve problems with wit, empathy, and style, fight when something is worth fighting for, and redeem (or seduce) at least a few of your adversaries. You're part of a community that embodies important ideals and you'll strive to protect it and make your world better.

Play as one of nine character types: Beast, Chosen, Devoted, Infamous, Nature Witch, Scoundrel, Seeker, Spooky Witch, and Trickster. Each explores a particular emotional conflict that drives the drama and shapes your character's story. Are you a Beast, faced with the dilemma of expressing your inner truth versus fitting in to a society that demands you conform? A Devoted, who sacrifices for others while struggling to care for yourself? A Trickster, who craves closeness but fears vulnerability? In long-term play, you may even resolve your initial arc and advance into a different playbook as you continue to change and grow, facing new challenges.


So the game apparently emphasizes flirting, witty one liners or "barbed zingers" and resolving emotional conflicts and other story-focused stuff over combat. They don't provide much detail about what types of adversaries you face, but the rules supposedly provide "robust guidance and support" for making "appealing adversaries" (whatever that's supposed to mean)...

QuoteThirsty Sword Lesbians provides clear, robust guidance and support for running the game, including how to make appealing adversaries, set the tone, structure play, and create a safe environment at the table. Handy reference sheets help you narrate appropriate twists and drama on the fly, depending on the feelings and character types you have in play.

Basically it's a touchy-feely story game about "oh, so random!" stuff going on. I'm not even sure what the setting is suposed to be about, but the world is so focused they include, not one, but six different settings in a 224 (approx.) page book (I'm sure they're all well detailed with that type of page count  ::) ).

QuoteFor even more inspiration, it features The Starcross Galaxy campaign setting along with five more settings from these contributing authors:


  • Lesbeans Coffehouse by Dominique Dickey
  • Neon City 2099 by Jamila Nedjadi
  • The Three Orders of Ardor by Whitney Delaglio
  • Les Violettes Dangereuses by Jonaya Kemper
  • Yuisa Revolution by Alexis Sara

We also provide ample guidance on how to create your own tales of fighting with swords and falling in love, along with a world building worksheet, variant rules, and a set of starting scenario seeds to play with. Because the game focuses on feelings and relationships, it's a lens you can use to play in a variety of genres. If you like slashfic of characters with swords, you'll love this game.

Abraxus

Thanks for the synopsis VS. Looks like an rpg destined to be played at a very few select tables lol.

Hell most of my players and others too would laugh at the KS description of the rpg. Empathy seriously LOL.The rpg makes little sense and it should be could a called Safe Zone the rpg. I thought seducing an npc or enemy is wrong. Given how many woke SJW pearl clutch and toss their hand against their collective heads when it comes to Charm magic in rpgs. Saying it is physical assault yet we have an rpg whose main purpose is to seduce the opposition. Some fucking hypocritical double standards.


Shasarak

Quote from: VisionStorm on October 27, 2020, 05:31:30 PM
Thirsty Sword Lesbians by April Kit Walsh is a roleplaying game that celebrates the love, power, and existence of queer people—specifically queer people with swords and a lot of feelings. Flirting, sword-fighting, and barbed zingers all mix together in a system designed for both narrative drama and player safety. This innovative take on the Powered by the Apocalypse engine is a breeze to learn and ensures that no matter how the dice fall, something interesting happens to move the story forward.

In this game, you will solve problems with wit, empathy, and style, fight when something is worth fighting for, and redeem (or seduce) at least a few of your adversaries. You're part of a community that embodies important ideals and you'll strive to protect it and make your world better.

Play as one of nine character types: Beast, Chosen, Devoted, Infamous, Nature Witch, Scoundrel, Seeker, Spooky Witch, and Trickster. Each explores a particular emotional conflict that drives the drama and shapes your character's story. Are you a Beast, faced with the dilemma of expressing your inner truth versus fitting in to a society that demands you conform? A Devoted, who sacrifices for others while struggling to care for yourself? A Trickster, who craves closeness but fears vulnerability? In long-term play, you may even resolve your initial arc and advance into a different playbook as you continue to change and grow, facing new challenges.

What do they mean when they say the system is designed for Player safety?

Do they mean that the books have special rubber corners to stop those unfortunate blindings that can sometimes happen if you use sharp cornered books?

Do they mean that all the multi syllable words have been removed so that no one accidentally learns something new while reading the book?

Inquiring minds want to know!
Who da Drow?  U da drow! - hedgehobbit

There will be poor always,
pathetically struggling,
look at the good things you've got! -  Jesus

SHARK

Quote from: VisionStorm on October 27, 2020, 05:31:30 PM
Quote from: SHARK on October 27, 2020, 03:52:06 PM
Quote from: VisionStorm on October 27, 2020, 11:21:23 AM
Quote from: Omega on October 27, 2020, 12:59:10 AM
Quote from: Mistwell on October 26, 2020, 10:49:27 PM
I am not being disingenuous and you're emphasizing the wrong word in my question. I am not being naive about the reaction, I am ASKING WHY. As in I genuinely want people to articulate the reasons they object to this specific thing, and not their general feelings of this company being icky for being SJW. It's not that I am surprised by people's reactions - I am asking for your reasons.

Thought I'd voiced mine before on this but here goes again.

Its the same objection I have to any "woke" material and especially to hateful "woke" statements and accusations as in their promotionals. This applies to any company that uses similar low stunts like this. Its the same reason I have a particular hate for Mearls and others of his ilk after he "fired" players from D&D. Or how 4e D&D had to piss on players of prior editions, or how WOTC has slapped a great big "WACIST!" label on all older product. And every other stunt companies and designers have pulled in the last 10 years.

And I particularly despise these things when all they are is an outrage marketing gag to get free advertising.

If you have to attack someone to promote your product. Then your product is not dirt. It is less than dirt.

That's the thing about Mistwell's intrusion into this topic. He's like "I'm totally not being disingenuous at all, guys! I've no idea WTF you're talking about. I'M JUST ASKING FOR...REASONS!"

Meanwhile there's like 17+ pages of "reasons" in this thread that have been hatched out over and over again. People have brought up the adversarial, ideologically purist marketing like three dozen times. A few also criticized the fugly has hell art as well. I may have mentioned something about the silly game play concept at one point (which revolves around "redeeming" lesbian adversaries, rather than killing them, in order to "kiss" them *wink, wink, nudge, nudge*), but by and large there have been pages upon pages criticizing the marketing. Yet somehow totally not disingenuous Mistwell has managed to miss that.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron on October 27, 2020, 02:27:19 AM
These goons are way behind. 12 year old boys have been using D&D to play lesbianstripperninjas since at least 1983.



Greetings!

The *GAMEPLAY*--wait, wait, VisionStorm! I must have been sleeping and missed that class. Can you elaborate for me? Kissing and no doubt much more--dealing with Lesbian adversaries....redeeming them? WTF?

Who are the Lesbian adversaries? Do Lesbians fight different kinds of monsters and villains than Conan the Barbarian, or Sir Lancelot of the Round Table?

How are such adversaries "Redeemed"? Redeemed from what, and TO what?

This game sounds so fucking retarded. Mistwell must have been eating too many Cheetos or something not to see this truth. ;D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

I don't know the specifics about action resolution or how fighting and adversaries work, but based on the KS description...

QuoteThirsty Sword Lesbians by April Kit Walsh is a roleplaying game that celebrates the love, power, and existence of queer people—specifically queer people with swords and a lot of feelings. Flirting, sword-fighting, and barbed zingers all mix together in a system designed for both narrative drama and player safety. This innovative take on the Powered by the Apocalypse engine is a breeze to learn and ensures that no matter how the dice fall, something interesting happens to move the story forward.

In this game, you will solve problems with wit, empathy, and style, fight when something is worth fighting for, and redeem (or seduce) at least a few of your adversaries. You're part of a community that embodies important ideals and you'll strive to protect it and make your world better.

Play as one of nine character types: Beast, Chosen, Devoted, Infamous, Nature Witch, Scoundrel, Seeker, Spooky Witch, and Trickster. Each explores a particular emotional conflict that drives the drama and shapes your character's story. Are you a Beast, faced with the dilemma of expressing your inner truth versus fitting in to a society that demands you conform? A Devoted, who sacrifices for others while struggling to care for yourself? A Trickster, who craves closeness but fears vulnerability? In long-term play, you may even resolve your initial arc and advance into a different playbook as you continue to change and grow, facing new challenges.


So the game apparently emphasizes flirting, witty one liners or "barbed zingers" and resolving emotional conflicts and other story-focused stuff over combat. They don't provide much detail about what types of adversaries you face, but the rules supposedly provide "robust guidance and support" for making "appealing adversaries" (whatever that's supposed to mean)...

QuoteThirsty Sword Lesbians provides clear, robust guidance and support for running the game, including how to make appealing adversaries, set the tone, structure play, and create a safe environment at the table. Handy reference sheets help you narrate appropriate twists and drama on the fly, depending on the feelings and character types you have in play.

Basically it's a touchy-feely story game about "oh, so random!" stuff going on. I'm not even sure what the setting is suposed to be about, but the world is so focused they include, not one, but six different settings in a 224 (approx.) page book (I'm sure they're all well detailed with that type of page count  ::) ).

QuoteFor even more inspiration, it features The Starcross Galaxy campaign setting along with five more settings from these contributing authors:


  • Lesbeans Coffehouse by Dominique Dickey
  • Neon City 2099 by Jamila Nedjadi
  • The Three Orders of Ardor by Whitney Delaglio
  • Les Violettes Dangereuses by Jonaya Kemper
  • Yuisa Revolution by Alexis Sara

We also provide ample guidance on how to create your own tales of fighting with swords and falling in love, along with a world building worksheet, variant rules, and a set of starting scenario seeds to play with. Because the game focuses on feelings and relationships, it's a lens you can use to play in a variety of genres. If you like slashfic of characters with swords, you'll love this game.

Greetings!

Thank you, VisionStorm! So, the game is just as we suspected all along. It is more woke emotional toilet paper. That's all these people exist for, is a constant consciousness of their own woke ideology, their entire sexual identity and emotional dysfunction. This whole prospectus of their game drips with SJW BS. "Safe Spaces" indeed. ;D It's not about *gaming* and *adventure*--it's about stories of being emotionally dysfunctional trans hedonists swallowed up in trainloads of melodrama and their sexual identity.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
"It is the Marine Corps that will strip away the façade so easily confused with self. It is the Corps that will offer the pain needed to buy the truth. And at last, each will own the privilege of looking inside himself  to discover what truly resides there. Comfort is an illusion. A false security b

VisionStorm

Quote from: SHARK on October 27, 2020, 06:32:00 PMGreetings!

Thank you, VisionStorm! So, the game is just as we suspected all along. It is more woke emotional toilet paper. That's all these people exist for, is a constant consciousness of their own woke ideology, their entire sexual identity and emotional dysfunction. This whole prospectus of their game drips with SJW BS. "Safe Spaces" indeed. ;D It's not about *gaming* and *adventure*--it's about stories of being emotionally dysfunctional trans hedonists swallowed up in trainloads of melodrama and their sexual identity.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Pretty much. It's just about angsty melodrama, weird sexual exploration and emotional stuff.

Quote from: sureshot on October 27, 2020, 05:51:09 PM
Thanks for the synopsis VS. Looks like an rpg destined to be played at a very few select tables lol.

Hell most of my players and others too would laugh at the KS description of the rpg. Empathy seriously LOL.The rpg makes little sense and it should be could a called Safe Zone the rpg. I thought seducing an npc or enemy is wrong. Given how many woke SJW pearl clutch and toss their hand against their collective heads when it comes to Charm magic in rpgs. Saying it is physical assault yet we have an rpg whose main purpose is to seduce the opposition. Some fucking hypocritical double standards.

Yeah, I don't even know where the "empathy" stuff figures in, but apparently you solve problems in this game through "empathy" or some such. The whole implication about sexual assault also crossed my mind: If you have to defeat your opponents first, and then "seduce" them, wouldn't they be unable to consent, given that you have power over them? It gets into weird territory, especially for a segment of people who would also tell us that not asking for affirmative consent every two seconds is "rape".

Quote from: Shasarak on October 27, 2020, 06:30:07 PMWhat do they mean when they say the system is designed for Player safety?

Do they mean that the books have special rubber corners to stop those unfortunate blindings that can sometimes happen if you use sharp cornered books?

Do they mean that all the multi syllable words have been removed so that no one accidentally learns something new while reading the book?

Inquiring minds want to know!

IDK, rolling dice is dangerous business. Those d4s are liable to take someone's eye out with those pointy edges, and stuff. We need all the "safety tools" we can get. Maybe they'll teach us how to build papier-mache armor out of their book's pages. :P

Abraxus

It's the extremely hypocritical double standard by Work SJW Gamers VS. As long as those on the approved SJW Woke list do it then it's okay and not sexual assault. Anyone else it is most definitely sexual assault.

Somehow none of the Woke SJWs don't notice that or chose to ignore it because it pushes LQBT representation to the forefront.

My niece is almost two years old and will probably ask a much older me if we were mind controlled or something to that effect.

GameDaddy

#279
Quote from: jhkim on October 27, 2020, 05:24:38 PM

The question is, is Blue Rose a fun game to play for the 5% or less of gamers who really want to try something in the genre of Mercedes Lackey and similar authors?

I wouldn't know. I haven't read any books by Mercedes Lackey.  Is Blue Rose fun to play? Yes! Do RPGers of the female persuasion like it? Yes, very much. It doesn't focus on combat like a wargame oriented fantasy roleplaying game like Dungeons & Dragons, ...and Warhammer, for example, do. It concentrates instead much more on magic, ongoing narratives, epic mythology, romance, and intrigue, and bills itself as the Roleplaying Game of Romantic Fantasy

In Europe there was an Age of Chivalry that began in the Arthurian era after the Romans left Northern Europe. It evolved during the time of Charlemagne, and one of the clearest books that survived from that era was Parzival by Wolfram Von Eschenbach. It's a historical fiction book I like, actually, and it was written in the first years of the thirteenth century, just about the time the Crusades began in Europe.  Described as a Romance of the Middle Ages, the book is about a Knight, Parzival, and his quest to find the Holy Grail. In the years 1211-1212, When Parzival was finished, or near finished, saw Frederick the Great's election as Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire, and his adventurous return to the fatherland from the First Crusade (where Jerusalem was reclaimed for Christendom) to claim his patrimony against his enemies. His coronation in 1215 at Charlemagne's ancient Capital at Aix-la-Chapelle (Aachen) occurred very near the end of Wolfram's life. I thought Blue Rose would be great to run games about this, as well as  other stories like the French Horn of Roland which is set in about the same timeframe, and I was right. Blue Rose is great for this sort of RPG Games. 

Interestingly, about half the playtest group for Blue Rose was composed  of women, an amazing ratio for RPGs, so it's pretty safe to say that if a bunch of women got together to design an RPG, Blue Rose would be it. Nice game, lots of fun to play, and the ladies find it very alluring.
Blackmoor grew from a single Castle to include, first, several adjacent Castles (with the forces of Evil lying just off the edge of the world to an entire Northern Province of the Castle and Crusade Society's Great Kingdom.

~ Dave Arneson

Stephen Tannhauser

Quote from: jhkim on October 27, 2020, 05:24:38 PMThe question is, is Blue Rose a fun game to play for the 5% or less of gamers who really want to try something in the genre of Mercedes Lackey and similar authors?

I have absolutely no problem with acknowledging "those who like this sort of thing will find this the sort of thing they like" as a perfectly reasonable stance.

The problem I have is the tendency of the marketing and the fans to turn that difference in gaming preference into a moral judgement, not just about other players' gaming but about life -- which I admit is not something unique to one side, or to these topics specifically.  However, that there is a deliberate and self-conscious component of advocacy to the game's content and its promotion cannot, I think, be reasonably denied, any more than anyone could reasonably claim (to steal examples from Dan Davenport's review again) there isn't an environmentalist message in games like Werewolf: The Apocalypse or Blue Planet.

QuoteI disagree with your characterization of romantic fantasy.

I'll stipulate to not having read the authors you cite and to the point that there is more of an "action-adventure quotient" in other works in the genre. Nonetheless, I'd argue that this basic perspective is still mostly accurate for game criticism purposes, largely because much of it is taken from the game designers' own descriptions of what they were hoping to capture in the genre -- some of Green Ronin's blog posts about the BR design process should still be available on their site.
Better to keep silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt. -- Mark Twain

STR 8 DEX 10 CON 10 INT 11 WIS 6 CHA 3

Stephen Tannhauser

#281
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on October 27, 2020, 03:52:16 PMThere are no aspects of Lovecraftian fiction that work well as an RPG, because typical RPGs aren't nihilistic horror stories.

Exactly; the entire psychological point of anything called a "game" as an activity, I would suggest, is the reward of accomplishment and victory that comes with successfully executing its in-play tasks through the challenges of the rules (which needn't require that one wins the game itself, only that one plays to the best of one's own ability while playing). Cosmic horror as a genre, conversely, is ultimately about the meaninglessness and ephemeral nature of even the longest-lasting "victories" on the human scope. There cannot but be a certain amount of psychological conflict between those perspectives.

That is not to say that there can't be honest affirmation in saying, "Better to light the candle and enjoy its light, however brief, than to grieve for how soon it must go out." But I think RPGs generally work better if this kind of conflict between the game and the story content is either avoided to begin with, or explicitly resolved as the point of the game.
Better to keep silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt. -- Mark Twain

STR 8 DEX 10 CON 10 INT 11 WIS 6 CHA 3

Omega

Quote from: Slambo on October 27, 2020, 10:43:24 AM
Funny thing, Conan is an Avenger now, and DC hasn its own sword and sorcery characters in theirnprehistory that often crossed over via time magic shenanigans in ye olden times. I realize ot doesnt really refute jhkim but its just funny to me.

1: Saw that. How long till they neuter him?

2: DC has a fairly popular fantasy world character in the form of Travis Morgan. Warlord. Theres been a couple of crossovers as the fantasy realm is actually somewhere deep underground in contemporary DC earth. Theres even an episode of the Justice League animated series where they travel to that world and meet Warlord and co.

Theres also the popular, but short lived, Amethyst fantasy series that on rare occasion crossed over since it too was connected via another dimension. Theres been a few others, but those two, especially Warlord have endured the best.

Omega

Quote from: jhkim on October 27, 2020, 05:24:38 PM
1) You claim that Blue Rose doesn't provide what most RPGers want out of their games -- and I think that's true. Blue Rose isn't written for "most RPGers", nor should it be.

The question is, is Blue Rose a fun game to play for the 5% or less of gamers who really want to try something in the genre of Mercedes Lackey and similar authors?

2) I disagree with your characterization of romantic fantasy. I haven't read that much Mercedes Lackey - only the Exile series in Valdemar. But I've read a lot of Tamora Pierce. Exile's Honor has less violence than Conan stories, but it has more violence than Tolkien. Exile's Honor has more violence than The Fellowship of the Ring.

Of course, D&D games are different than Tolkien's writing - but then, Blue Rose adventures don't have to be exactly like Mercedes Lackey. In my Blue Rose mini-campaign, I drew in a bunch of inspirations - including Scooby Doo. I didn't end up running much more of Blue Rose, but it seemed to me just as workable as a dozen other RPGs. Not every RPG should be about Conanesque monster-killing.

1: Agreed here. There are tons of niche games out there and have been from the get go. I mean we had Bunnies & Burrows by 76 which is pretty much Watership Down: the RPG. Superhero 2044 in 77, and Boot Hill in 75 to play westerns. And others big and small like Call of Cthulhu in 81.

2: I think there is alot of leeway in what some consider is or is not romantic fantasy. For me Lackey's books are, but say John Carter and some other ERB books are not because one emphasizes the romance and the other really does not. And Im not even sure the Lackey books emphasize the romance as much as they focus on the angst. Least the few I read. Kat knew the line better and got to visit with Mercedes. But unfortunately shes gone and any insights into this lost.

2b: I think games like Blue Rose are meant to be a sort of catch-all rather than focused just on one author. You can play a broad range of styles. Much like D&D. It encompasses everything with focus on none.

Contrast that to say Empire of the Petal Throne or Bunnies & Burrows, or Albedo, which are focused on one author and you'd have a harder time adapting those to other works or gameplay styles. Though Albedo gives alot of leeway, within limits.

jhkim

Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser on October 28, 2020, 11:12:23 AM
Quote from: jhkim on October 27, 2020, 05:24:38 PMThe question is, is Blue Rose a fun game to play for the 5% or less of gamers who really want to try something in the genre of Mercedes Lackey and similar authors?
I have absolutely no problem with acknowledging "those who like this sort of thing will find this the sort of thing they like" as a perfectly reasonable stance.

The problem I have is the tendency of the marketing and the fans to turn that difference in gaming preference into a moral judgement, not just about other players' gaming but about life -- which I admit is not something unique to one side, or to these topics specifically.  However, that there is a deliberate and self-conscious component of advocacy to the game's content and its promotion cannot, I think, be reasonably denied, any more than anyone could reasonably claim (to steal examples from Dan Davenport's review again) there isn't an environmentalist message in games like Werewolf: The Apocalypse or Blue Planet.
I'll buy that there is advocacy in Blue Rose, but I didn't see anything in the original Blue Rose marketing that was about moral judgement of any other RPG players. It's not just me - back in reply #238 jeff37923 specifically said that the Blue Rose marketing was "inoffensive and not antagonistic" -- as opposed to the Thirsty Sword Lesbians marketing.

I'm generally in the camp of letting people play what they play without moral judgement. I think that the criticism of Blue Rose escalated this sort of judgement, when the game and its fans weren't doing anything like that. Now many years later, we're at the point of much more constant judgement, and we're worse off for it.

I think we should be able to have games with differing themes (like environmentalism in Werewolf: The Apocalypse and Blue Planet as you say) without moral judgements of the gamers who play them.


Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser on October 28, 2020, 11:12:23 AM
QuoteI disagree with your characterization of romantic fantasy.
I'll stipulate to not having read the authors you cite and to the point that there is more of an "action-adventure quotient" in other works in the genre. Nonetheless, I'd argue that this basic perspective is still mostly accurate for game criticism purposes, largely because much of it is taken from the game designers' own descriptions of what they were hoping to capture in the genre -- some of Green Ronin's blog posts about the BR design process should still be available on their site.
I don't think your description matches up with that. Your description made it sound like romantic fantasy was mainly about internal struggles and/or romance. As Blue Rose describes it, the difference is more that romantic fantasy protagonists still face external challenges, but they do so in the context of a growing circle and community.

For example, Protector of the Small is a classic romantic fantasy. Its protagonist is Keladry of Mindelen, who is the first girl to begin training as a knight in the kingdom of Tortall. It is coming-of-age young adult fantasy, where she goes from candidate, to page, to squire, to knight. One could compare it to Harry Potter, but instead of a glasses-wearing magician, it has an athletic jock trying to grow and prove herself.

High fantasy is more often about loners roaming from place to place in the wilderness, but romantic fantasy is more being a part of a team. In scifi, the difference would be like Guardians of the Galaxy (wandering loners) versus Star Wars (joining in a movement).