Tourism, it seems to me, is the essence of RPGs. We boldly go to new places, meet new people, and try new things. Afterwards we go home to safety and, perhaps, reflect on our experiences. We exchange stories with other travellers.

Some style a certain sector of tourist experience 'emo tourism'--safely wallowing in vicarious emotions without risk. Others reply that 'macho tourism'--safely facing imaginary violent death--is no more aesthetically pleasing when considered in that light.

In point of fact, both tendencies are part of the current of RPGs, and will be observable in a large majority of roleplaying groups. Gentlemen, you should understand that overpoliticisation is bad for rational thought.

Come on droog, find you testicles already. Of course it's all "tourism". But Macho = good, Emo = fag.

The problem I have is that some of my games powered by trad systems could be considered emo. I'm not even a true emo

Regards,
David R

Quote from: David RThe problem I have is that some of my games powered by trad systems could be considered emo. I'm not even a true emo

You think that because, as a GM, you were pitching instead of catching? D'nile, not just a river in Egypt anymore.

My group will never fit either of those terms.
 The players are now 4 women and 1 man.....with me as the GM.

Kind of like Charlie's Angels in a way - except much more intelligent.


- Ed C.

I disagree.

There is a significant difference between "emo tourism" and "macho tourism," and that difference is the mechanical system of the game.  You claim that tourism is the essence of RPGs, but this only true of "emo tourism" games, where failure is not a possibility (neither is success, for that matter, which is why these sorts of games are ultimately unsatisfying for many players).

Traditional RPGs do involve some amount of macho tourism.  I know that hardass one-liners and tough guy posturing have been a part of every game I've ever played.  But these sort of games have a mechanical system that makes failure an actual possibility.  So one can posture all one wants, but if the dice betray you, nobody thinks they look like an idiot.

"Emo tourism" games have mechanics that determine which one of the histrionic attention whores playing the game gets to talk.

There's a difference.

In misery tourism - because, let's face it, "emo" is not about anger or joy, but fear and sadness - you are having an imaginary experience of something which is in reality very profound. Like trying to avoid being sent to a death camp (We All Had Names) or raping or being raped (Poison'd). So that misery tourism is a superficial imaginary experience of something profound.

In macho tourism you're having an imaginary experience about something superficial; macho is never profound. So that macho tourism is a superficial imaginary experience of something superficial.

To be superficial about something profound is usually not thought well of in society. To be superficial about something superficial is alright.

Quote from: Kyle AaronTo be superficial about something profound is usually not thought well of in society. To be superficial about something superficial is alright.

But what if you're not superficial about the profound subject? What if you deal with the subject matter with nuance ? Is it still emo tourism ?

Regards,
David R

Quote from: DwightCome on droog, find you testicles already. Of course it's all "tourism". But Macho = good, Emo = fag.

Like this guy?



Indeed, I am beginning to wonder whether the reputation of the macho tourist (as exemplified in Fear of Girls) may not have some basis in fact. The renowned inability of our roleplaying brethren to be comfortable with women may mask a repressed homosexuality that finds an outlet in shiny armour, spiky weapons and homoerotic group formation.

Quote from: Jackalope"Emo tourism" games have mechanics that determine which one of the histrionic attention whores playing the game gets to talk.

For example?

Quote from: Kyle AaronTo be superficial about something profound is usually not thought well of in society. To be superficial about something superficial is alright.

I assure you that being superficial about profound things is very well thought of in society and gets you invited to dinner parties.

I've never seen a D&D player who suggested that his macho adventures were somehow meaningful, in the sense that dickheads like Mr. "We All Had Names" do.

Well, except the occasional Planescape fan.  But they don't really realize that the rest of us think they're all a bit twee.

Hell J, if you guys think Planescape fans are twee (and I consider myself one of them), I'm a tad nervous to find out what you guys think of Jorune fans (of which I am one of ...oh... about ten)

Regards,
David R

Droog, I think that you have excluded the vast middle demographic again, because you don't even consider the possibility of Metrosexual Tourism as it applies to RPGs.

What about Chav Tourism ?

Regards,
David R