Forum > Pen and Paper Roleplaying Games (RPGs) Discussion

No racist characters allowed

<< < (2/15) > >>

GeekyBugle:

--- Quote from: shoplifter on October 14, 2021, 09:41:32 PM ---Isn't that by the Zweihander guy? Not surprised it's pozzed. I was going to check it out, but not now.

--- End quote ---

Well, it's the same publisher and it says "Powered by Zweihander RPG"

SHARK:
Greetings!

Roll up a dashing, uber-Alpha masculine bastard that is a total Imperialist, Colonizing, misogynistic, and racist monster. Watch the fun unfold! *Laughing* Go forth and let the party dominate and plough through every sacred cow and special snow-flake icon that the game has established. Keep some cold beer handy, and light up some good cigars along the way. ;D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

HappyDaze:

--- Quote from: SHARK on October 14, 2021, 10:41:02 PM ---Greetings!

Roll up a dashing, uber-Alpha masculine bastard that is a total Imperialist, Colonizing, misogynistic, and racist monster. Watch the fun unfold! *Laughing* Go forth and let the party dominate and plough through every sacred cow and special snow-flake icon that the game has established. Keep some cold beer handy, and light up some good cigars along the way. ;D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

--- End quote ---
And, despite the virtue signaling od the author(s), there's nothing in the game's mechanics that would prevent you from playing the game this way (just like there's nothing in D&D's mechanics that would prevent you from playing a game centered on avoiding conflict).

kidkaos2:

--- Quote from: jhkim on October 14, 2021, 09:46:15 PM ---
--- Quote from: kidkaos2 on October 14, 2021, 09:29:34 PM ---On the one hand, it's the designer's game and they can obviously make whatever rules they want, and I'm all for including rules that include game mechanics for personality where appropriate such as in Pendragon, but on the other hand it strikes me as unethical for a roleplaying game designer to tell his customers that they aren't allowed to play characters with certain personality traits and/or aren't allowed to have their characters engage in certain behaviors.  Even though the rules are obviously easily ignored, it still seems to violate the spirit of a roleplaying game.  I'm curious about other players and game designers' thoughts about this.

--- End quote ---

I'm not familiar with the specific game - but in general, I don't think every RPG needs to allow every type of character. In some games, it's simply inappropriate to make a merciless lone wolf assassin, for example. TSR's Marvel Superheroes, for example, was pretty clear with its karma system that anti-heroes like the Punisher or Deadpool weren't PC material. On the other hand, some games are intentionally about playing malicious bastards, and it doesn't work to play a goody-two-shoes. Some games there are random-roll personality traits from among a limited set, and you don't get your choice of whatever you like. Some mini-games have only premade characters, and no option to create your own.

I don't think it's unethical for a given game design to only allow a limited range of characters. If you don't like the range of characters offered, you're free to change the game or buy a different game.

--- End quote ---

Maybe I wasn't clear.  The examples you gave were all of games where the character choices were dictated by the game setting.  This is a case where the choices are dictated by modern politics, not the game setting.  It is, in fact, against the setting.  The setting is 1776, and the personality and behavior rules are based on 2021 diversity values.  In 1776 it was standard for immigrants who couldn't afford passage on a ship to pre-sell their labor in indentured servant contracts, but the game specifically forbids this.  This isn't a case of forbidding lone wolf comic book heroes because they don't play well with a party-based game. 

This is saying the real 1776 was a racist and sexist place with indentured servants and Puritan colonies but the designers don't like that so they made rules that you aren't  allowed to play a character who is sexist, racist, or homophobic and shouldn't play mostly Christian characters.  It's the opposite of what you talked about - it's not removing elements that don't work for the game setting, it's removing any elements of the authentically historical 18th century from the game and forcing players to play modern social justice warrior characters with nonbinary pronouns in an American Revolution themed game.  Completely different situation than the ones you gave as examples or the example I gave of Pendragon where including moral codes of conduct are appropriate as chivalry is part of the setting.

HappyDaze:

--- Quote from: kidkaos2 on October 14, 2021, 11:40:07 PM ---
--- Quote from: jhkim on October 14, 2021, 09:46:15 PM ---
--- Quote from: kidkaos2 on October 14, 2021, 09:29:34 PM ---On the one hand, it's the designer's game and they can obviously make whatever rules they want, and I'm all for including rules that include game mechanics for personality where appropriate such as in Pendragon, but on the other hand it strikes me as unethical for a roleplaying game designer to tell his customers that they aren't allowed to play characters with certain personality traits and/or aren't allowed to have their characters engage in certain behaviors.  Even though the rules are obviously easily ignored, it still seems to violate the spirit of a roleplaying game.  I'm curious about other players and game designers' thoughts about this.

--- End quote ---

I'm not familiar with the specific game - but in general, I don't think every RPG needs to allow every type of character. In some games, it's simply inappropriate to make a merciless lone wolf assassin, for example. TSR's Marvel Superheroes, for example, was pretty clear with its karma system that anti-heroes like the Punisher or Deadpool weren't PC material. On the other hand, some games are intentionally about playing malicious bastards, and it doesn't work to play a goody-two-shoes. Some games there are random-roll personality traits from among a limited set, and you don't get your choice of whatever you like. Some mini-games have only premade characters, and no option to create your own.

I don't think it's unethical for a given game design to only allow a limited range of characters. If you don't like the range of characters offered, you're free to change the game or buy a different game.

--- End quote ---

Maybe I wasn't clear.  The examples you gave were all of games where the character choices were dictated by the game setting.  This is a case where the choices are dictated by modern politics, not the game setting.  It is, in fact, against the setting.  The setting is 1776, and the personality and behavior rules are based on 2021 diversity values.  In 1776 it was standard for immigrants who couldn't afford passage on a ship to pre-sell their labor in indentured servant contracts, but the game specifically forbids this.  This isn't a case of forbidding lone wolf comic book heroes because they don't play well with a party-based game. 

This is saying the real 1776 was a racist and sexist place with indentured servants and Puritan colonies but the designers don't like that so they made rules that you aren't  allowed to play a character who is sexist, racist, or homophobic and shouldn't play mostly Christian characters.  It's the opposite of what you talked about - it's not removing elements that don't work for the game setting, it's removing any elements of the authentically historical 18th century from the game and forcing players to play modern social justice warrior characters with nonbinary pronouns in an American Revolution themed game.  Completely different situation than the ones you gave as examples or the example I gave of Pendragon where including moral codes of conduct are appropriate as chivalry is part of the setting.

--- End quote ---
Yet, despite the demand for enforced diversity, the designers insist that all characters must speak English!

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version