Quote from: jhkim;822863In general, Aldis is portrayed as a kingdom whose heart is in the right place - so no need for a general revolution. However, there is plenty of corruption, crime, and conspiracy - as well as other differences.

So it's kind of like playing Star Trek inside the Federation but with talking animals and magic instead of starships and transporters?

Quote from: Bren;822869So it's kind of like playing Star Trek inside the Federation but with talking animals and magic instead of starships and transporters?

Deep Space 9 era, yeah, pretty much.

Quote from: gattsuru;822874Deep Space 9 era, yeah, pretty much.

I wonder if that is a less contentious way of talking about the setting.

Quote from: gattsuru;822874Deep Space 9 era, yeah, pretty much.

QUARK: I want you try something for me.  Take a sip of this.
GARAK: What is it?
Q: A human drink.  It's called root beer.
G: I don't know.
Q: Come on. Aren't you just a little bit curious?
[GARAK takes a drink and recoils.  QUARK looks at him.]
GARAK: It's vile!
QUARK: I know.  It's so.. bubbly and cloying.  And happy.  
G:...Just like the Federation.
Q: But you know what's really frightening?  If you drink enough of it- you start to like it.
G: It's insidious.
Q: JUST like the Federation.

Quote from: James Gillen;822890QUARK: I want you try something for me.  Take a sip of this.
GARAK: What is it?
Q: A human drink.  It's called root beer.
G: I don't know.
Q: Come on. Aren't you just a little bit curious?
[GARAK takes a drink and recoils.  QUARK looks at him.]
GARAK: It's vile!
QUARK: I know.  It's so.. bubbly and cloying.  And happy.  
G:...Just like the Federation.
Q: But you know what's really frightening?  If you drink enough of it- you start to like it.
G: It's insidious.
Q: JUST like the Federation.

Well, now I want to start a campaign, only I make one of my characters the "Chosen One" of the Jarzon religion, even though he doesn't care about it.  "No, no, you've got the bird birthmark on your left shoulder, you're the chosen one alright.  Unless... you're a false chosen one?"  *eyes get that tinge of madness, starts pulling at their sword* "We burn those at the stake!"

"Oh, no, no, I'm the chosen one alright, you betcha."  *nervously shuffles off*

Quote from: gattsuru;822874Deep Space 9 era, yeah, pretty much.

   Perhaps part of the problem is that Aldis wound up being misunderstood as too much like the early-TNG era Federation?

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;822897Perhaps part of the problem is that Aldis wound up being misunderstood as too much like the early-TNG era Federation?

No, the earlier problem was that it was a setting that Players didn't want. I could see the Leader choosing magic deer show up, one of my Players would shoot it and then scream, "Divine venison for all!"

Now, I'm turned off because I want to get away from politics when I game. Green Ronin is trying to sell me on Blue Rose by appealing to the Social Justice Warriors? Not only no, but fuck no.

Quote from: RPGPundit;822791Storygamish? No.

Political? Absolutely.  But we've gone over this before.    It says if you are a libertarian, individualist, or christian (or any ideology that's not Collectivist) you are OBJECTIVELY not-good, and objectively wrong. You are 'twilight' or 'shadow'.  That is an inherently POLITICAL statement.  

Also, you have seen the new link, right? You can't now pretend that the statement in the announcement isn't explicitly political, right?

This.

This is the same reason that the first edition of Blue Planet (the other political "blue" game) turned me off.

Every game setting is going to have a certain point of view; however, if that setting explicitly states that my real-world point of view is inherently, objectively wrong? Sorry, not interested.

That said, I don't begrudge anyone liking such games, so long as they don't consider me a bad person for not liking them. Let the market decide, sez I.

I don't think I've ever come across a setting that made me "Nope!" harder.  Something about the world envisioned turns me off so much I'd rather play a game of Candyland than this shit.

Quote from: jhkim;822863Aldis is most closely associated with Mercedes Lackey rather than other writers like, say, Tamora Pierce. I would have preferred something closer to Tortall, but I think there's no doubt that Mercedes Lackey is within the bounds of romantic fantasy. The core of good in Aldis is much like how Valdemar is kept positive by the presence of the Companions. (Those are innately good psychic horse-like animals who bond with certain humans, for those who don't know Mercedes Lackey.)

Still, nearly all of the adventure hooks are about fighting corruption and evil within Aldis, not making war on Kern. The "Threats to Aldis" section from pages 38 to 41 detail corrupt merchant guilds, fallen nobles, bandits, criminals (including the powerful syndicate The Silence), Shadow cults, and more. The vast majority of the adventure seeds from p176-177 are about internal threats.

In general, Aldis is portrayed as a kingdom whose heart is in the right place - so no need for a general revolution. However, there is plenty of corruption, crime, and conspiracy - as well as other differences.

Ah, well, I confess I haven't looked at the setting in years, and was only posting based on my recalled overall impression.

Like I said, I'm willing to give it a second look, especially if it has material I can cannibalize for one of my OSR games.

This discussion has raised my interest in this game (up from zero)... I like the idea of a 'fantasy star trek' setting where many social ills have been done away with... but at what price? I'm sure (as I am with Star Trek) I'd be tempted to have some games focus on the outsiders who see the do-gooders as delusional tyrants... and work to expose their hypocrisy.

Quote from: jhkim;822802As for the alignment rules, I disagree and I've already written a FAQ on the subject. cf. http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/bluerose/goldenhart.html

Aside from the point that you change the literal text descriptions of the alignments in BR (which someone else already covered), there's no question that there is a VALUE JUDGMENT going on in the very name of the alignments.
Saying "Light", "twilight" and "shadow" is suggesting fundamental flaws in individuals who do not support Collectivism.

Quote from: jeff37923;822903No, the earlier problem was that it was a setting that Players didn't want. I could see the Leader choosing magic deer show up, one of my Players would shoot it and then scream, "Divine venison for all!"

   I was just speculating a bit on why the setting was so negatively received. My own disinterest in the setting is largely the same as Dan Davenport's, albeit probably from a different perspective. "Traditional Christian (with serial numbers filed off) = misguided or willing servant of Darkness" is not something I want to support. I was willing to bracket or rework Aldis' sexual libertinism, but what I saw of Jarzon was a bridge too far.

  Although I did toy with the idea of reworking the setting to make Jarzon the generally good folks and Aldis the well-intentioned but decadent and complacent foil ...

QuoteNow, I'm turned off because I want to get away from politics when I game. Green Ronin is trying to sell me on Blue Rose by appealing to the Social Justice Warriors? Not only no, but fuck no.

   The counterpoint that the boosters are using seems to be "everything is political, so why are you criticizing Blue Rose?", ignoring the equivocal uses of the term 'political'. But it appears that Green Ronin has decided to openly take a side in contemporary debates and use this product, at least, to push their side. If you disagree with their point of view, or just don't want to involve contemporary controversies in your gaming, then that's going to be a point against the product.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;823039I was just speculating a bit on why the setting was so negatively received. My own disinterest in the setting is largely the same as Dan Davenport's, albeit probably from a different perspective. "Traditional Christian (with serial numbers filed off) = misguided or willing servant of Darkness" is not something I want to support. I was willing to bracket or rework Aldis' sexual libertinism, but what I saw of Jarzon was a bridge too far.

Actually, we agree completely.

I'm not sure exactly what I'd call myself in religious terms these days, although I was definitely a traditional Christian at one time. Regardless, I have no interest in playing a game that treats such people as objectively wrong/evil.

And I definitely agree with Pundit's point about collectivism.

Again, I do not care that this game exists. Frankly? I think it does a good job of what it sets out to do, so in that sense, it's a good game.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;822897Perhaps part of the problem is that Aldis wound up being misunderstood as too much like the early-TNG era Federation?

Kinda, but with more preachy episodes where Picard teaches everyone a Very Special Lesson about .  Aldis is less of a problem than Jarzon, though, which comes across as episode after episode trying to get the audience to take the Ferengi seriously by having them like money and stand snarling on rocks.

The first part is a little tedious, but the extent that Blue Rose tries to draw anyone who has the incorrect beliefs as not merely wrong but fundamentally and internally evil gets kinda old.  Part of this is just bad writing -- the corebook really doesn't handle the line between Corruption and Shadow alignment very clearly, even though there are significant mechanical differences and were probably supposed to be larger ones -- but as a practical matter it makes it a little teeth-grating to use the setting-as-written.

On the other hand, you can do some really interesting things by denying the Shadow-As-Evil and Light-As-Good objective morality play, so it's not all bad.