TheRPGSite

Over on rpg.net, the accusations are flying that the Golarion setting is racist in its portrayal of non-caucasian humans and their cultures.

Note that I do NOT want this thread to turn into a discussion on racism in society as a whole, politics, etc etc.; all of that is OFF-TOPIC to this discussion.  What is not off-topic is to actually discuss the material in the Golarion setting itself and put forth arguments for whether or not the depictions therein are racist.  Let's look at that evidence, and not get swept away into bigger discussions that are off-topic to the forum.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;563551Over on rpg.net, the accusations are flying that the Golarion setting is racist in its portrayal of non-caucasian humans and their cultures.

Note that I do NOT want this thread to turn into a discussion on racism in society as a whole, politics, etc etc.; all of that is OFF-TOPIC to this discussion.  What is not off-topic is to actually discuss the material in the Golarion setting itself and put forth arguments for whether or not the depictions therein are racist.  Let's look at that evidence, and not get swept away into bigger discussions that are off-topic to the forum.

RPGPundit

I subjected myself to 11 pages of that thread, not actually knowing the source material.

I gathered that a) people were offended that "Africa" only had five "cultures" when "Europe" only had five "cultures, b) people were offended at "black savages", c) people were offended at "black people in white face", d) people were offended at POSITIVE stereotypes and e) some people in our hobby need to get a hobby.

Can't be done.

It's already dubious whether this thread is really about Golarion or Rpgnet.

Dust off and EMP the RPGnet servers from orbit.

It's the only way to be sure.

No, Golarion is not racist. It does use archetypes and stereotypes to fuel its fantasy, which pretty much any and all fantasies do, but it is not racist in the conventional sense of the term.

I think people are trying really hard to find something to bitch about.

It's no more racist than anything else, except maybe those racist games.

I haven't read the books and so can't render a real verdict. On the rpg.net thread: I'm sure looking at the people posting though (Ettin, LogicNinja, Topher, Kai Tave, whatever RedMage's latest sock is called) that its less about racism and more about smearing Pathfinder.

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;563593I haven't read the books and so can't render a real verdict. On the rpg.net thread: I'm sure looking at the people posting though (Ettin, LogicNinja, Topher, Kai Tave, whatever RedMage's latest sock is called) that its less about racism and more about smearing Pathfinder.

I read some of it yesterday, and there was one good and interesting post by someone who actually appeared to know their Anthropology fairly well and had some interesting criticisms to make, but other than that we pretty much have the usual infantile discussion of the depictions of race in texts in terms of guilt or innocence.

Because really there are interesting discussions that could be had about the depiction of race and cultures, both real and imaginary in games and the kind of structural reasons they take certain forms, if people would just remember that rpgs are a drop in the ocean of a wider cultural context and leave off with all the constant fucking moralising.

You can tell it's election season in America!

Golarion is far more nationalist than racist. Lots of old empires that hate each other.

I know only as much about Golarion as was quoted and alluded to in the BIG PURPLE thread, but here's what I was able to gather.

One of the goals of Golarion is to create a fantasy roleplaying game-world which strongly invokes certain tropes, a number of them pretty common in sword'n'sorcery source-lit. Many of those tropes were established when mores about gender, culture, and ethnicity were different than they are today. In some cases, it appears that these tropes were adopted for Golarion uncritically and without context.

Here's an example of why this rubs some gamers the wrong way, from my own (not-Golarion) campaign. One of the potential encounters in Flashing Blades is with gypsies (and I will continue to use gypsies in the following, rather than Romany, to reflect this usage in the book). The stereotype of gypsies is one of vagrants, thieves, and charlatans. It would be one thing, then, to adopt this stereotype whole-cloth, as if thses are qualities of 'gypsiness.'

On the other hand, I can say that many of the superstitions and prejudices surrounding gypsies arise from differences between their cultural practices and those of the people among whom they live, and that gypsy society reflects the relationship between poverty and crime. Gypsies pursue what few means are open to them to make a living, and some turn to crime; in this they are no different from the poor of the societies among whome they live, but because of the prejudices which surround them, the incidence of crime by gypsies is magnified by the fears of the surrounding population. From this comes the stereotype of gypsies as vagrants, thieves, and charlatans.

Now, while the latter description is perhaps more nuanced - and in my opinion opens up far more interesting roleplaying conflicts and opportunities - it's also much more cumbersome than the traditional stereotype. I understand why authors for a gaming publication, looking to emulate their source-lit, wouldn't take this route, instead accepting the problematic stereotype and expecting gamers to be mature enough to understand the reasons why.

Panty-waisted hand-wringing over imagined shit in a goddam fantasy game?  A game where magic, gods, dragons and all manner of...I don't know - not real things exist?

Have they truly got nothing more to talk about?  Aren't there many other things to be outraged about that have some sort of relevance to life?

Jesus Christ.

The world would be a much better place if everytime someone bitched about racism based on irrelevant crap like roleplaying games, they were punched in the groin by Mike Tyson.

Crap like this makes people not give a shit about racism, especially the very real stuff that does happen in the world.

What I don't get about that thread is... why pick on Golarion? It's not like it's the only fantasy/RPG/D&D setting where this topic applies. Seems like a Paizo hate session to me.

Quote from: ningauble;563612What I don't get about that thread is... why pick on Golarion? It's not like it's the only fantasy/RPG/D&D setting where this topic applies. Seems like a Paizo hate session to me.

As near as I can tell, 4e fans at rpg.net have a hard-on where Paizo and Pathfinder are concerned.

Quote from: danbuter;563611Crap like this makes people not give a shit about racism, especially the very real stuff that does happen in the world.

It's frequency versus magnitude.

High-magnitude, low-frequency racism is easy to identify and condemn.

Low-magnitude, high-frequency racism is easier to overlook from a position of privilege.

If it is, I'm sure it's equally racist towards the not-Western-Europe cultures as well. Which is to say, I don't think so.

Oh look, a thread where a bunch of white people get to decide what is and isn't racist.

How novel.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;563618As near as I can tell, 4e fans at rpg.net have a hard-on where Paizo and Pathfinder are concerned.

It is a specific subset of users, which IMO have in fact not much to do with the 4e fans, but which many 4e fans on the web generally follow blindly, who are in fact the problem. And this is not a problem limited to RPGnet.

Quote from: ningauble;563612What I don't get about that thread is... why pick on Golarion? It's not like it's the only fantasy/RPG/D&D setting where this topic applies. Seems like a Paizo hate session to me.

The thought has occurred to me.

Fortunately, they would never sink so low. They are just out to do good and chew bubblegum, and they are all out of good. (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v198/Melan/emot-clint.gif)

That thread is less about Golarion being rascist and more about Ettin being the OP. He's the only RPGnetter to make my IL.

Quote from: Benoist;563569No, Golarion is not racist. It does use archetypes and stereotypes to fuel its fantasy, which pretty much any and all fantasies do, but it is not racist in the conventional sense of the term.

To play devil's advocate here: prove it.

And I would think the proof would be in two points:
First, is there less variety in the black or asian cultures of Golarion compared to the caucasian cultures?
Second, if they're all based on stereotypes of some kind (which is probably a fair assumption for a fantasy setting full of cultures modeled on real world historical cultures), the question would then be whether the stereotypes of the quasi-european cultures are in some way less stereotypical than those of the quasi-african or quasi-asian cultures.

RPGPundit

These debates always reminds me of that "Feminist FAQ" (written by a feminist woman):

Q. Do feminist women go with everybody because they are "liberated", or they go with nobody because "it is mine and I manage it"?

A. Grow up.

Quote from: Skywalker;563634That thread is less about Golarion being rascist and more about Ettin being the OP. He's the only RPGnetter to make my IL.

So much this.

Why do they have to write as much about African or Oriental style cultures?

They're probably white.

Of course it's racist.  It's centered on Humans, Dwarves and Elves, and if you see any "greenskins" they're only allowed to be Half-Orcs, which is what happens when The Man keeps going after our women.  Always keeping the green people down.

JG

Taking 'racism' to mean the Nazi ideology of racial supremacy and hostility to 'lesser' races: no, Golarion is not racist. I don't see any indication of that at all.

On the rpgnet standard of 'everything is racist' then yes, Golarion is racist. Because: problematic. If you say "Golarion is problematic" then per rpgnet standard, you have irrefutably demonstrated the truth of your position. So: racist.

What killed that thread for me right in the OP was the bit about how including tea ceremony in an obviously Japanese culture was racist.

Because, hmmmm.




However, I haven't read that book and it's hard to get a true impression at what it truly looks like because the haters were claiming all kinds of shit and the fans were contesting it and probably both quoting things out of context to prove agendas (and it's a lot easier to prove something bad that way than the absence thereof), and then Firefly is racist because it has no Chinese for 200 posts and WHARRGARBL.

But it seems to safe to bet that there are probably a few problematic bits here and there? The gypsy bit has potential for all sorts of problems. However what I gathered about the faux Africa was that it was decently portrayed.

Just looked at the RPGnet thread - OP is one of the chief SA goons. It's just trolling for a tangency-esque circle jerk, hoping that a non-member of the consensus will pop his head up to be whacked down. Though that's gotta be getting less frequent, as the ideological cleansing is almost complete, surely?

Quote from: Killfuck Soulshitter;563654Just looked at the RPGnet thread - OP is one of the chief SA goons. It's just trolling for a tangency-esque circle jerk, hoping that a non-member of the consensus will pop his head up to be whacked down. Though that's gotta be getting less frequent, as the ideological cleansing is almost complete, surely?

Doesn't Paizo have a reputation for trying to include diversity?  If so then that's the next stage, tighten the ideological circle to ever greater degrees of holier than thou moral purity.

(Edit: and it is moralistic, more than it is political).

Quote from: Dog Quixote;563655Doesn't Paizo have a reputation for trying to include diversity?  If so then that's the next stage, tighten the ideological circle to ever greater degrees of holier than thou moral purity.

Also, the perps here are bigtime 4vengers who hate Paizo, and they're feeling their oats after last month's Desborough/Mongoose frenzy made them feel they have the power to actually harm a game company.

I think that thread is more a ritualistic reaffirmation of the group's core beliefs than anything else. It's like the 10 minutes of hate. Everyone expresses how deeply un-racist they are through their loathing of an innocent game company and anybody who defends it. And they all sleep better that night knowing they are not racists like horrible Paizo.

I don't Golarion well enough to comment. But I did read the thread and my only observation is people seem to be equating ignorance of history with racial stereotyping...i don't think those are the same thing. I think if someone makes a game based on an incomplete understanding of, of simplified, history, that doesn't make them racist or problematic.

I had a browse of that thread on rpg.net. Seeing as it 88 pages long and it's generally frowned upon to comment in a thread there unless you've read EVERY post I've decided not to post.

However seeing as I have played and run games in Golarion I do know a little about it (Well mostly Varisia, but I've read the world overview).

Anyway, Golarion is just a mish mash of lots of different cultures. This is to allow a GM and their players to play whatever flavour and style of campaign they like.  
Does it work as a great big picture?  
Well probably not realistically, but who cares, it's fantasy right?

Who says that the Mwangi (psuedo African culture) are the Noble savage? Maybe they view other cultures as savages, Maybe they don't.
Maybe they adopt some aspects of other cultures into their own (as happens in our world).
The overviews are just that, an overview, generalization. If you're actually running a campaign, you can make the details and so on what you like.

I do think the thread was started as a troll tbh, which to the militant left is great bait to get them started.

Quote from: Dog Quixote;563597I read some of it yesterday, and there was one good and interesting post by someone who actually appeared to know their Anthropology fairly well and had some interesting criticisms to make

See I wish people like that would keep their expertise to themselves, it legitimises the rest of the drivel.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;563669I don't Golarion well enough to comment. But I did read the thread and my only observation is people seem to be equating ignorance of history with racial stereotyping...i don't think those are the same thing. I think if someone makes a game based on an incomplete understanding of, of simplified, history, that doesn't make them racist or problematic.

Are you really this stupid?

Yes, if you make comments, even out of ignorance, that are racist then they are still racist. If all you ever read was Stormfront, would you be a racist shithead for espousing those ideals? After all, you're doing it out of ignorance so obviously it can't be racist!


Golarion has some pretty insanely lazy racist caricatures, from the stereotyped literally-depicted-as-spear-thrower black tribesman in a grass skirt and warpaint to the reformed tribesmen who totally love their oppressive colonial overlords so much that they imitate their speech and way of life (but they still wear grass skirts and paint because hurr durr) to the Roma-analogue that are typecasted as roaming thieves/conmen/evil magic-workers.

If you can't be bothered to do anything but lift caricatures of culture wholesale you're basically a lazy shit, completely outside of the fact that you're also probably not that great of a person because you're consciously or unconsciously reinforcing negative stereotypes of real, actual people just so you don't have to strain a brain cell to make up a new culture in your fantasy[/b] game.

Oh also please keep ranting about how Ettin, LogicNinja, RedMage, et all are crying for the blood of Paizo when all they've said is, "Hey, these are some problematic elements, that's kind of messed up." RPGSite hyperbole never fails to amuse.

Quote from: Darwinism;563678Are you really this stupid?

Yes, if you make comments, even out of ignorance, that are racist then they are still racist. If all you ever read was Stormfront, would you be a racist shithead for espousing those ideals? After all, you're doing it out of ignorance so obviously it can't be racist!

I think there is a big difference between racial stereotyping and using an historical analogue that is based on an incomplete understanding of the source. As a few posters have pointed out, the western europe of D&D is overly simplified and based on a somewhat incomplete picture of medieval history. That doesn't mean it is a racial stereotype of white people or europeans.

You are free to disagree with this if you like. But I am not interested in trading insults.  

QuoteOh also please keep ranting about how Ettin, LogicNinja, RedMage, et all are crying for the blood of Paizo when all they've said is, "Hey, these are some problematic elements, that's kind of messed up." RPGSite hyperbole never fails to amuse.

i never said anything about these posters. All I did was say people appear to be equating racial stereotyping with being ignorant of history. For example, believing that the mongols didn't build any cities, appears to be a case of historical ignorance and not racial stereotyping (I know little to nothing about the mongols personally, so can't really comment on the accuracy or innacuracy of the claim).

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;563682i never said anything about these posters.

I think all Rpgsite posters look the same to him.

What sort of weak-willed idiot would base their worldview on damn RPG? Fuck all of the hand-wringing about how a fictional-fantasy culture is a fictional-fantastic stereotype of an actual culture, here's a far more important question?

Do these cultures, and their characters serve to make this game fun or interesting?

I just don't buy into the premise that, say, making the only black people in your fantasy world stone age warriors armed with spears - to use an example that would probably be considered particularly egregious - is in any way a bad thing.

It's no different from medieval theologians pricking up their ears at the wrong declension of filioque, smelling an opportunity for a burning, when actually Jesus is pretty unharmed by Latin grammar, just as the Japanese are unharmed by my creation of a fantasy analogue of their culture sans nuance.

Quote from: Darwinism;563678Are you really this stupid?

Yes, if you make comments, even out of ignorance, that are racist then they are still racist. If all you ever read was Stormfront, would you be a racist shithead for espousing those ideals? After all, you're doing it out of ignorance so obviously it can't be racist!


Golarion has some pretty insanely lazy racist caricatures, from the stereotyped literally-depicted-as-spear-thrower black tribesman in a grass skirt and warpaint to the reformed tribesmen who totally love their oppressive colonial overlords so much that they imitate their speech and way of life (but they still wear grass skirts and paint because hurr durr) to the Roma-analogue that are typecasted as roaming thieves/conmen/evil magic-workers.

If you can't be bothered to do anything but lift caricatures of culture wholesale you're basically a lazy shit, completely outside of the fact that you're also probably not that great of a person because you're consciously or unconsciously reinforcing negative stereotypes of real, actual people just so you don't have to strain a brain cell to make up a new culture in your fantasy[/b] game.

All this is true... but Ettin et al are not arguing this matter in good faith. They're not looking for a "less racist" setting or to try and improve Golarion. They simply want to discredit publishers who aren't fans of D&D4, and accusations of racism, rape culture, etc. work great as attacks, because they are almost impossible to actually defend yourself against when the mob gets going.

The history of Mwangi seems to be quite different than in the real world IMO.
They seem to be a remnants of a powerful ancient civilization that collapsed when an event called "Earthfall" happened.
As they stand in the current world timeline, the Mwangi people avoid the ancient structures and just get on with things.

Many other civilizations collapsed as well, such as in Varisia. In fact various powers had risen and collapsed over the years in Varisia and really there's only a few decent sized cities in Varisia anyway.
So calling the Mwangi "Savages" is really just a point of view.
So what if they favour spears and dress lightly,  Spears were favoured as weapons in the the medieval period and earlier in Europe as well as they are cheap and very effective.

Maybe the Mwangi people wear less clothes as it's hotter where they live.
Further up north, people wear more as it's cooler.

Fantasy stories and RPGs often draw from real world cultures and use/change them to fit into their gameworlds.

Quote from: Darwinism;563678Are you really this stupid?

Yes, if you make comments, even out of ignorance, that are racist then they are still racist. If all you ever read was Stormfront, would you be a racist shithead for espousing those ideals? After all, you're doing it out of ignorance so obviously it can't be racist!


Golarion has some pretty insanely lazy racist caricatures, from the stereotyped literally-depicted-as-spear-thrower black tribesman in a grass skirt and warpaint to the reformed tribesmen who totally love their oppressive colonial overlords so much that they imitate their speech and way of life (but they still wear grass skirts and paint because hurr durr) to the Roma-analogue that are typecasted as roaming thieves/conmen/evil magic-workers.

If you can't be bothered to do anything but lift caricatures of culture wholesale you're basically a lazy shit, completely outside of the fact that you're also probably not that great of a person because you're consciously or unconsciously reinforcing negative stereotypes of real, actual people just so you don't have to strain a brain cell to make up a new culture in your fantasy[/b] game.

Oh also please keep ranting about how Ettin, LogicNinja, RedMage, et all are crying for the blood of Paizo when all they've said is, "Hey, these are some problematic elements, that's kind of messed up." RPGSite hyperbole never fails to amuse.

This kind of nasty post would be better kept to rpgnet. Therpgsite has higher standards than this. :(

Quote from: Ladybird;563689All this is true... but Ettin et al are not arguing this matter in good faith. They're not looking for a "less racist" setting or to try and improve Golarion. They simply want to discredit publishers who aren't fans of D&D4, and accusations of racism, rape culture, etc. work great as attacks, because they are almost impossible to actually defend yourself against when the mob gets going.

Oh but what are you saying? Remember, [strike]some of his best friends are[/strike]he actually likes Golarion ;)

Quote from: danskmacabre;563690Maybe the Mwangi people wear less clothes as it's hotter where they live.
Further up north, people wear more as it's cooler.

The weather is racist.

Quote from: S'mon;563699The weather is racist.

Is that why the clouds are white?

Quote from: JamesV;563701Is that why the clouds are white?

Are you saying that white is normative?

Perhaps the Mwangi got it right anyway, maybe they turned away from higher technology, large kingdoms etc etc due to some instinctive or perceived fear of going back to the old ways...
Who says that somehow having a higher technology makes you a better culture, morally superior to others?

There seems to be a big assumption that because the more European style cultures (higher technology etc) are somehow superior to the Mwangi tribal way of life and portraying the Mwangi in this way somehow denigrates them.
I think people are looking at things from their own (European/American etc) POV too much.

Quote from: S'mon;563699The weather is racist.

Yeah, I hate that!  :mad:


;)

Quote from: danskmacabre;563706Perhaps the Mwangi got it right anyway, maybe they turned away from higher technology, large kingdoms etc etc due to some instinctive or perceived fear of going back to the old ways...
Who says that somehow having a higher technology makes you a better culture, morally superior to others?

There seems to be a big assumption that because the more European style cultures (higher technology etc) are somehow superior to the Mwangi tribal way of life and portraying the Mwangi in this way somehow denigrates them.
I think people are looking at things from their own (European/American etc) POV too much.

I think that someone is treating the Mwangi as a Noble Savage, and that is sooo racist. :nono:

Just saying, that if you consider the forum this line of discussion came from, there is no way you could defend the choices Pathfinder made without getting a finger pointed your way.

In reality, the way you think of Mwangi culture could be used to make the Mwangi interesting PCs/NPCs, and that's what matters.

Hey here's an rpg.net poster talking about Golarion at a 'con.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgTuarwFm6s

Quote from: JamesV;563701Is that why the clouds are white?

Some clouds are grey, or even black, you FUCKING RACIST.

Quote from: JamesV;563708I think that someone is treating the Mwangi as a Noble Savage, and that is sooo racist. :nono:

Heh, but that's just a POV, maybe they see everyone else as savages and making the same mistake as their ancestors.
Not saying they do, but I think people make a lot of assumptions based on what sort of cultures they come from as people.

QuoteJust saying, that if you consider the forum this line of discussion came from, there is no way you could defend the choices Pathfinder made without getting a finger pointed your way.

Yes I could be accused of lots of things, but some would agree with me and tbh, that's fine with me. People can disagree with me if they like, as long as they politely disagree with me.

QuoteIn reality, the way you think of Mwangi culture could be used to make the Mwangi interesting PCs/NPCs, and that's what matters.

Indeed yes, but like I said, some people see people using spears and not wearing much clothes with dark skin and start jumping to conclusions..
It doesn't HAVE to be all black and white...  ;)

Quote from: Ladybird;563689All this is true... but Ettin et al are not arguing this matter in good faith. They're not looking for a "less racist" setting or to try and improve Golarion. They simply want to discredit publishers who aren't fans of D&D4, and accusations of racism, rape culture, etc. work great as attacks, because they are almost impossible to actually defend yourself against when the mob gets going.

Well once again Darwinism's question of "Are you really that stupid?" because you know 4th edition has the same stupid problems to the point where if you actually bothered to read that thread people actually pointed them out.

QuoteI don't Golarion well enough to comment. But I did read the thread and my only observation is people seem to be equating ignorance of history with racial stereotyping...i don't think those are the same thing. I think if someone makes a game based on an incomplete understanding of, of simplified, history, that doesn't make them racist or problematic.

Its Africa.  How the hell do you not know about Africa?  Honestly I would have expected one to do Africa in an entirely different way than Golarion did because its got some of the most iconic symbols in the entire world.

You know, I can make a really detailed argument that the movie Predator is full of homoerotic subtext, and at the end of the day all I've done is look really hard for something that probably isn't there. If you turn your head and squint and crank up the righteous indignation meter up to eleven, I'm sure you can find things about Golarion that make you scream, "THAT"S RACIST!!" like the kid from Wonder Showzen, but guess what? You've probably spent a lot of time looking for something that really isn't there.

I've read both the Inner Sea guides, and never once have any members of the five different Mwangi races been described at "spear chuckers in grass skirts." One of the most powerful and technologically advanced of the ancient empires, Shory, was Mwangi. One of the most powerful mages of all time was a Mwangi named Old-Mage Jatembe, and he's credited as helping save civilization from total destruction after the Earthfall. One of the oldest and most prestigious mage schools, Magaambya, is in the Expanse. The city of Osibu is a paradise on earth that is one of the few bastions of happiness in the entirety of Golarion. Call me funny but I'm just not seeing it here.

What I am seeing though is an attack from a faux social crusaders that contribute nothing to the gaming community other then stirring up puffed up moral outrage to mask attacks against whatever person or company they happen to dislike. It's cheap rhetoric and the usage of strawmen big enough that Christopher Lee should be dancing in front of it used in place of actual discussion and reason. And the sad thing is that none of this is done for any sort of progressive reason. It's an ego massage session from a group of people that want to be seen as the nerd Richard Neville.

Quote from: technoextreme;563719Well once again Darwinism's question of "Are you really that stupid?" because you know 4th edition has the same stupid problems to the point where if you actually bothered to read that thread people actually pointed them out.

Its Africa.  How the hell do you not know about Africa?  Honestly I would have expected one to do Africa in an entirely different way than Golarion did because its got some of the most iconic symbols in the entire world.

I see you removed the part where you claimed Golarion omits the "most obvious part of Africa".  I was going to ask you what that was.

I think that thread just shows people have way too much time on their hands and quite possibly need to find a job to keep them occupied.

Wait a second.  I admit I am not familar with Golarion, but if I put out an rpg that talks about an African culture, and have someone from that culture depicted like this:

(http://www.badassoftheweek.com/shakazulu2.jpg)

That makes me a racist?


Wow.  I can't help note the irony in that so many rpg gamers have become Tipper Gore, and Dee Snider's speech to congress would also fit perfectly without modification on rpg boards as well.

Quote from: CRKrueger;563722I see you removed the part where you claimed Golarion omits the "most obvious part of Africa".  I was going to ask you what that was.

How the hell do you not know this?  

QuoteWait a second. I admit I am not familar with Golarion, but if I put out an rpg that talks about an African culture, and have someone from that culture depicted like this:

It depends.  If its the only depection then yes its actually quite lazy but if its not then I don't really have a problem.  The fundamental problem is that when you squash an entire countries culture down into one or two it unintentional racism.

Quote from: technoextreme;563725If you can't figure it out then you are an idiot.

If you were raised in the 80's you'd probably say "Apartheid".  If you were raised in the 70's or 90's (courtesy of King Tut's treasure on tour and The Mummy movies) you'd say "Egypt".  If you were raised in the 50's or earlier, you'd probably say something like "Colonialism" or "Lost Tribe of Israel".

Be explicit and don't assume everyone knows what you're talking about.

Quote from: technoextreme;563725It depends.  If its the only depection then yes its actually quite lazy but if its not then I don't really have a problem.  The fundamental problem is that when you squash an entire countries culture down into one or two it unintentional racism.

That's Shaka Zulu!  If one of the many cultures in the game was inspired from African lore and I use that picture, that is no more racist than using King Arther to represent a European knight.  And you call that "quite lazy" and others call it "racist"?

That's truly WTF man.

If you are the one accusing someone else of racism, you do not have to justify yourself. He does. Period.  

(At least, this is how it works in the real world, and is used constantly in American politics).

Quote from: Killfuck Soulshitter;563657Also, the perps here are bigtime 4vengers who hate Paizo, and they're feeling their oats after last month's Desborough/Mongoose frenzy made them feel they have the power to actually harm a game company.

True.  Organization gives some power to the individual, however, it gives much more to the organizers.

Quote from: technoextreme;563719Its Africa.  How the hell do you not know about Africa?  Honestly I would have expected one to do Africa in an entirely different way than Golarion did because its got some of the most iconic symbols in the entire world.

i wasn't refering to africa. Someone mentioned mongols and I had that in mind when it when I mentioned equating ignorance of history with raciak stereotyping.

Quote from: technoextreme;563725How the hell do you not know this?

So you're not going to tell me what the "most obvious" part of a continent is?

Quote from: Sacrosanct;563724Wait a second.  I admit I am not familar with Golarion, but if I put out an rpg that talks about an African culture, and have someone from that culture depicted like this:

(http://www.badassoftheweek.com/shakazulu2.jpg)

That makes me a racist?


Wow.  I can't help note the irony in that so many rpg gamers have become Tipper Gore, and Dee Snider's speech to congress would also fit perfectly without modification on rpg boards as well.

Looks like a Zulu warrior to me. Is traditional garb somehow now considered racist?

Quote from: Bill;563735Looks like a Zulu warrior to me. Is traditional garb somehow now considered racist?

Apparently.  That, or modeling your rpg cultures around real world historical accuracy is now lazy.

What's lazy is someone accusing you of something without doing any research to know what the context of the work they are criticizing is from.

I would add that "Africa" is a continent which has lots of VERY different cultures and countries in it anyway.
People from an African country don't really say "I'm African" they identify with the country in Africa they come from, such as Ghana, Gambia  whatever.
I've had this conversation with people from countries in Africa before and all of them found it odd to be identified as "African".
 
So saying the Mwangi is stereotypical of Africa is a pretty racist thing to say anyway, it's a bit like saying populating an area of Golarion with a Celtic style culture is representative of all European cultures.

I don't see any real problem with trying to introduce some depth to a setting, as opposed to cardboard cut-out stereotypes.

But Golarion certainly isn't worse than most other settings in this regard, and in any case it's pretty clear that the folks over at rpg.net aren't interested in any sort of good faith discussion of how to improve setting design.

Vaguely on topic, an acquaintance of mine who is an Anthropologist sometimes, in his more exasperated moments, defines Anthropology as "the science of accusing each other of racism."

Quote from: Sacrosanct;563738Apparently.  That, or modeling your rpg cultures around real world historical accuracy is now lazy.

What's lazy is someone accusing you of something without doing any research to know what the context of the work they are criticizing is from.

Uh oh!

I borrowed Japanese/British/Indian elements for an Elven nation in my homebrew setting!

Honor/Naval and Trade Power/Caste System.

I hope that's ok.

For the purposes of full transparency, this is why I'm taking this a bit personal.  I'm currently working on a game where the characters are intelligent synthetic beings.  The "races" (they are called clans) are inspired from their human ancestors, more specifically during a time when that ancestor's culture was renown.  Here are images of all the race/class combinations:

(http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g141/rajzwaibel/clanthememontage.jpg)

Note the bottom left and middle right, about 4 figures in each one.  That is the Inyoni clan.  It might be hard to see in the smaller pictures, but they are drawn from  central-southern African tribal inspiration (Inyoni is the Zulu word for bird).

So that makes the game lazy or racist?  Those types of accusations piss me off, to be honest.  Traits in the book for the clans highlight the greatness of each culture, and for someone  who is looking to be offended goes and flips through the book and decides to start an internet crusade about how I am racist makes me more than just a little upset.

Quote from: Dimitrios;563741I don't see any real problem with trying to introduce some depth to a setting, as opposed to cardboard cut-out stereotypes.."

there is certainly nothing wrong with more fleshed out and varied settings. That it was I tend to prefer myself. But many fantasy games boil down kingdoms, races, etc to a handful of traits, and if you are drawing from realworld cultures, i don't know that it is automatically racist to do so. Again, don't know Golarion so I can't really comment there. I mean if someone was drawing on early America they might create soething like: a rigid and strict puritanical culture, gun slinging cowboys or deistic revolutionaries. Doing so isn't neccesarily a commentary on modern day Americans, christians or white people.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;563743For the purposes of full transparency, this is why I'm taking this a bit personal.  I'm currently working on a game where the characters are intelligent synthetic beings.  The "races" (they are called clans) are inspired from their human ancestors, more specifically during a time when that ancestor's culture was renown.  Here are images of all the race/class combinations:

(http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g141/rajzwaibel/clanthememontage.jpg)

Note the bottom left and middle right, about 4 figures in each one.  That is the Inyoni clan.  It might be hard to see in the smaller pictures, but they are drawn from  central-southern African tribal inspiration (Inyoni is the Zulu word for bird).

So that makes the game lazy or racist?  Those types of accusations piss me off, to be honest.  Traits in the book for the clans highlight the greatness of each culture, and for someone  who is looking to be offended goes and flips through the book and decides to start an internet crusade about how I am racist makes me more than just a little upset.

Wonderful concept art!

Quote from: danskmacabre;563740So saying the Mwangi is stereotypical of Africa is a pretty racist thing to say anyway, it's a bit like saying populating an area of Golarion with a Celtic style culture is representative of all European cultures.

It may be incorrect, but I don't think it makes a person racist necessarily.  It could, sure, but not by default.  I mean, when people talk about mid-late 1800s United States, you're going to get imagery of cowboys and outlaws.  The truth is that most of the American white population were neither, and not even close to that.  As in your example, you're excluding a huge swath of geographical territory in those generalizations.  Just like many Europeans forget about the east coast in the US during the 1800s when talking about culture, many Americans forget about Northern Africa in the 1800s unless they are specifically talking about Egypt.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;563751It may be incorrect, but I don't think it makes a person racist necessarily.  It could, sure, but not by default.  I mean, when people talk about mid-late 1800s United States, you're going to get imagery of cowboys and outlaws.  The truth is that most of the American white population were neither, and not even close to that.  As in your example, you're excluding a huge swath of geographical territory in those generalizations.  Just like many Europeans forget about the east coast in the US during the 1800s when talking about culture, many Americans forget about Northern Africa in the 1800s unless they are specifically talking about Egypt.

I agree, I was kind of trying to be ironic against some of the "It's Racism!!"  statements.
Well put reply tho.  :)

Quote from: Sacrosanct;563751It may be incorrect, but I don't think it makes a person racist necessarily.  It Just like many Europeans forget about the east coast in the US during the 1800s when talking about culture, many Americans forget about Northern Africa in the 1800s unless they are specifically talking about Egypt.

I am very interested in medieval Ethiopia/Abyssinia, fantasy versions often appear in my games, and I might well buy a sourcebook on such.  It's a genuine black African civilisation that featured large in medieval European thought, due to its association with the Prester John myth - the Christian kingdom in the east that would save Europe from the Muslims. It seems to be completely off the radar for games designers, though.

Quote from: S'mon;563757I am very interested in medieval Ethiopia/Abyssinia, fantasy versions often appear in my games, and I might well buy a sourcebook on such.  It featured large in medieval European thought, due to its association with the Prester John myth - the Christian kingdom in the east that would save Europe from the Muslims. It seems to be completely off the radar for games designers, though.

I don't remember which issue it was, but back in the 80s there was a dragon magazine that detailed out several of the more popular cultures in Africa in fantasy/D&D terms, including weapons and armor designs.

Quote from: Ladybird;563689All this is true... but Ettin et al are not arguing this matter in good faith. They're not looking for a "less racist" setting or to try and improve Golarion. They simply want to discredit publishers who aren't fans of D&D4, and accusations of racism, rape culture, etc. work great as attacks, because they are almost impossible to actually defend yourself against when the mob gets going.

Wait, what? Even if you're right (and the RPG.net thread provides nothing to make me believe it) about the motives being disingenuous, why should that make the point invalid? Golarion has some racist stereotypes. It's hardly the only one, too. In a lot of old school games, you've got orcs that are 'always chaotic evil'. In Forgotten Realms, you have the drow, which are literally black-skinned evil elves that live underground in a repressive-but-ridiculous matriarchy. Sexism and racism--not overt, but extant in perpetually repeated genre conventions--is a pervasive problem in the games industry.

Besides, there are already non racist settings, like Eberron, Points of Light, Dark Sun, and Planescape--maybe Ettin isn't looking for one because he plays in one that already exists?

Quote from: Sacrosanct;563728That's Shaka Zulu!  If one of the many cultures in the game was inspired from African lore and I use that picture, that is no more racist than using King Arther to represent a European knight.  And you call that "quite lazy" and others call it "racist"?

In African culture there was no straight analog to a European knight which is why it comes off as pretty dam racist if its the only culture that you steal from.  If your not a student of ancient culture before you talk you should read a book and try and learn from it.

Quotethere is certainly nothing wrong with more fleshed out and varied settings. That it was I tend to prefer myself. But many fantasy games boil down kingdoms, races, etc to a handful of traits, and if you are drawing from realworld cultures, i don't know that it is automatically racist to do so. Again, don't know Golarion so I can't really comment there. I mean if someone was drawing on early America they might create soething like: a rigid and strict puritanical culture, gun slinging cowboys or deistic revolutionaries. Doing so isn't neccesarily a commentary on modern day Americans, christians or white people.

I actually don't remember how the United States is portrayed in Golarion.  I know France is in there too.

Quote from: TomatoMalone;563762In a lot of old school games, you've got orcs that are 'always chaotic evil'. In Forgotten Realms, you have the drow, which are literally black-skinned evil elves that live underground in a repressive-but-ridiculous matriarchy. Sexism and racism--not overt, but extant in perpetually repeated genre conventions--is a pervasive problem in the games industry.

Again, looking for racism where there is none.  Orcs were evil (either chaotic or lawful, depending on which version) not to be racist, but because they were evil in LotR and made a good bad guy for the good guy PCs to fight.  it would kind of screw with the game if orcs and goblins were good alignment.  And if you say that LotR's orcs were racist because they were dark skinned, I have to nix that as well, because orcs in LotR were meant to represent industrialization and the pollution that came along with it (hence the "darkness", because everything was covered in soot and grime).

For Drow, they were inspired by the "small, dark, evil fairies" trow, or the Dökkálfar (blacker than pitch) in folklore.  Again, no racism there, but inspired on real mythology.

Quote from: technoextreme;563763In African culture there was no straight analog to a European knight which is why it comes off as pretty dam racist if its the only culture that you steal from.  If your not a student of ancient culture before you talk you should read a book.

Shaka Zulu is probably the most well known warrior in non-Egyptian African legend.  Using him as a representation of a culture is no different than using King Arthur to represent a European culture.  There is nothing racist about it unless you think using King Arthur is also racist.  

And perhaps you should take your own advice.

Quote from: RPGPundit;563637First, is there less variety in the black or asian cultures of Golarion compared to the caucasian cultures?

Golarion does something which is not all that different from Oriental Adventures - it mixes together Chinese and Japanese stuff. To me, that's worse that jumbling together Vikings and Medieval Italians.

Golarion is Pathfinder's Forgotten Realms - they jumble together every possible trope, so you can get your dose of drow, pirates, zombies, gypsies, etc, and they can put out any kind of adventure.

I think the only thing Paizo is guilty of is delivering a generic world with too many familiar tropes.

Quote from: technoextreme;563763.  If your not a student of ancient culture before you talk you should read a book and try and learn from it.

.

Why? I was a student of history in college, and know a lot about the middle east for example but if my friend wants to run an Arabian Nights campaign, I don't expect him to have my level of in depth knowledge. People are just trying to have fun. Some folks will do detailed research others are going to wing it and inject their own ideas.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;563765Shaka Zulu is probably the most well known warrior in non-Egyptian African legend.  Using him as a representation of a culture is no different than using King Arthur to represent a European culture.  There is nothing racist about it unless you think using King Arthur is also racist.  

While we are at it Golarion fucked up a bunch of European cultures too in the most idiotic of ways using this same idiotic technique.

QuoteWhy? I was a student of history in college, and know a lot about the middle east for example but if my friend wants to run an Arabian Nights campaign, I don't expect him to have my level of in depth knowledge. People are just trying to have fun. Some folks will do detailed research others are going to wing it and inject their own ideas.

If the B-52's could open up a book then you should be able to too.

Quote from: technoextreme;563777Its not in depth knowledge.  Its knowledge that most people should have learned in high school which is got me extremely worried at this point at your average education level.  Come on your friend should know better than the B-52's.

Gee that sounds like a broad brush stereotype of the uneducated you are painting. Personally I know guys with advanced degrees who know nothing about ancient history and guys who didn't graduate highschool who are walking encyclopdias on the subject. My point is people come to the table with different levels of knowledge about subjects and this is okay.

Ps: i am glad you could intuit how deep my level of knowledge about the middle east is from that post.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;563781Gee that sounds like a broad brush stereotype of the uneducated you are painting. Personally I know guys with advanced degrees who know nothing about ancient history and guys who didn't graduate highschool who are walking encyclopdias on the subject. My point is people come to the table with different levels of knowledge about subjects and this is okay.

Ps: i am glad you could intuit how deep my level of knowledge about the middle east is from that post.

I'm surprised Techno didn't specify which books you ought to open.  If discussions on Medieval technology and warfare are any guideline, there's plenty of arguments to go around as to which school of thought you believe in.

Quote from: technoextreme;563777If the B-52's could open up a book then you should be able to too.

Every GM is different. I like research so opening a book is no problem for me. But I won't insist every GM and player has to do the same. Its a gane, not a graduate seminar. I can have just as much fun in a deeply researched ancient greece campaign as with one based soley on movies like Clash of the Titans.

Quote from: technoextreme;563777While we are at it Golarion fucked up a bunch of European cultures too in the most idiotic of ways using this same idiotic technique.

I'm not talking specifically about Golarion.  The post you originally quoted of mine was talking in general terms.  And if I build an in-game culture inspired by the Zulu culture, using real aspects of that culture, and you call it racist or at the very least lazy?

That tells me that you are looking to be offended.  And now you're defending your unreasonable opinion by trying to act elitist?

Whatever.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;563764Again, looking for racism where there is none.  Orcs were evil (either chaotic or lawful, depending on which version) not to be racist, but because they were evil in LotR and made a good bad guy for the good guy PCs to fight.  it would kind of screw with the game if orcs and goblins were good alignment.  And if you say that LotR's orcs were racist because they were dark skinned, I have to nix that as well, because orcs in LotR were meant to represent industrialization and the pollution that came along with it (hence the "darkness", because everything was covered in soot and grime).

Look at what you made me do, you made me register here to tell you how wrong you are.

Look at this from Tolkien's Letter 210 (http://www.lotrplaza.com/forum/lore/letter210.asp):

Quote19. Why does Z put beaks and feathers on Orcs!? (Orcs is not a form of Auks.) The Orcs are definitely stated to be corruptions of the 'human' form seen in Elves and Men. They are (or were) squat, broad, flatnosed, sallow-skinned, with wide mouths and slant eyes: in fact degraded and repulsive versions of the (to Europeans) least lovely Mongol-types.

They're meant to be degenerated stereotypes of mongols. But since you're probably going to go "NUH! THINGS I LIKE CANNOT CONTAIN RACISM!", let's keep going to the second point I was going to make:

The key problem with the Varisian and Mwangi ethnicities is not that they translate the feel of Roma and Subsaharan Africa societies to a heady Pathfinderized medium.

It's that they're direct lifts from historical racist stereotypes. It's as if they had the Garundi loving fried chicken and watermelons. But you clearly are either:

A) Invested enough in settings with racist elements that you prefer to ignore them because of a mistaken belief that you cannot like stuff that has problems. (Protip: this is the charitable interpretation)

B) Incredibly stupid, and thus can't differentiate from inspiration and copying of racist caricatures.

C) A racist who believes that the racist stereotypes actually represent the societies.


Third, and finally, I'm going to enjoy the freedom and lack of civility that this site is so proud of to tell you to go fuck yourself.

EDIT: I've got to agree with you guys, though, this is mighty liberating.

Quote from: Gradivus;563792Look at what you made me do, you made me register here to tell you how wrong you are.

Look at this from Tolkien's Letter 210 (http://www.lotrplaza.com/forum/lore/letter210.asp):

I was going by a documentary on the subject and wasn't aware of those letters.  Either way, having orcs as evil in D&D doesn't make D&D racist.  

QuoteThe key problem with the Varisian and Mwangi ethnicities is not that they translate the feel of Roma and Subsaharan Africa societies to a heady Pathfinderized medium.

It's that they're direct lifts from historical racist stereotypes. It's as if they had the Garundi loving fried chicken and watermelons. But you clearly are either:

A) Invested enough in settings with racist elements that you prefer to ignore them because of a mistaken belief that you cannot like stuff that has problems. (Protip: this is the charitable interpretation)

B) Incredibly stupid, and thus can't differentiate from inspiration and copying of racist caricatures.

C) A racist who believes that the racist stereotypes actually represent the societies.


Third, and finally, I'm going to enjoy the freedom and lack of civility that this site is so proud of to tell you to go fuck yourself.

Maybe before acting like a 4 year old, you should go back and reread my first post.  Again, I specifically said I don't know anything about Golarion specifically, but was talking in generalities.  So all of what you just said?  Not relevant at all, but rather it comes off as you making up an excuse to call other people racists with no basis behind it.  No wonder you fit in at TBP so well.

But hey, with your level of maturity and reading comprehension, I'm sure you'll go a long ways here.

Welcome to TheRPGSite! :)

QuoteI'm not talking specifically about Golarion. The post you originally quoted of mine was talking in general terms. And if I build an in-game culture inspired by the Zulu culture, using real aspects of that culture, and you call it racist or at the very least lazy?

You said it yourself you ripped off a culture which everyone is familiar with meaning that you have to utilize no effort in writing it.  Its fundamentally lazy in every sense of the word.

QuoteAnd now you're defending your unreasonable opinion by trying to act elitist?

Actually I'm defending my opinion by citing a pop rock band.

Quote from: technoextreme;563796You said it yourself you ripped off a culture which everyone is familiar with meaning that you have to utilize no effort in writing it.  Its fundamentally lazy in every sense of the word.

No wonder you're confused.  This is a really bad strawman.  I said Shaka Zulu was one of the most well known warriors from non-Egyptian Africa.  I had also said that I used actual historical accuracy to model the culture after.  See how those are two completely different sentences?  I didn't rip off a version that most people were familiar with.  I took a character most people were familiar with and then did more research to model accuracy.

But hey, feel free to keep making up strawmen to satisfy your righteous indignation.

QuoteActually I'm defending my opinion by citing a pop rock band.   I'm guessing humor gets lost on you too.

So you didn't say, " If your (sic) not a student of ancient culture before you talk (sic) you should read a book and try and learn from it."?

Gosh, it sure looks like you did.  That's what I was referencing.

Yeah, but what's the most obvious part of Africa?

Quote from: CRKrueger;563800Yeah, but what's the most obvious part of Africa?

The ground, I imagine.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;563794I was going by a documentary on the subject and wasn't aware of those letters.  Either way, having orcs as evil in D&D doesn't make D&D racist.  


Maybe before acting like a 4 year old, you should go back and reread my first post.  Again, I specifically said I don't know anything about Golarion specifically, but was talking in generalities.  So all of what you just said?  Not relevant at all, but rather it comes off as you making up an excuse to call other people racists with no basis behind it.  No wonder you fit in at TBP so well.

But hey, with your level of maturity and reading comprehension, I'm sure you'll go a long ways here.

Oh, the second part of the post was not directed to you specifically, it was a very general fuck you to the people bewildered that having actual historical racist stereotypes of the populations that were subjected to slavery, just to give an example, could be considered racist.

I do still think that directly translating Zulus to a fantasy setting is lazy, by the way.

Quote from: TomatoMalone;563762Sexism and racism--not overt, but extant in perpetually repeated genre conventions--is a pervasive problem in the games industry.

Cultural Marxist trolling by brainwashed pod-people is a pervasive problem on gaming bulletin boards.

Quote from: CRKrueger;563800Yeah, but what's the most obvious part of Africa?

Darfur or Somalia.

Quote from: danbuter;563806Darfur or Somalia.

Somalia does stick out on the Horn. I vote it 'most obvious'. :cool:

Quote from: danbuter;563806Darfur or Somalia.

I was going to say Egypt or the Sahara, but the Rift Valley is a good choice too.

Quote from: S'mon;563804Cultural Marxist trolling by brainwashed pod-people is a pervasive problem on gaming bulletin boards.

What the fuck is Cultural Marxism?

Also, pervasive problem? Are you actually comparing the repetition of racist stereotypes to some hippies crashing a gaming board? That's fucked up.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;563799No wonder you're confused.  This is a really bad strawman.  I said Shaka Zulu was one of the most well known warriors from non-Egyptian Africa.  I had also said that I used actual historical accuracy to model the culture after.  See how those are two completely different sentences?  I didn't rip off a version that most people were familiar with.  I took a character most people were familiar with and then did more research to model accuracy.

Yeah you did.  That whole area got culturally smashed twenty thousand ways to Sunday and yet you claim that its not lazy to write  one single culture for an entire continent.  In fact the more that you keep on yammering on the more I realize how idiotic it is to segregate cultures based upon continents.

QuoteSo you didn't say, " If your (sic) not a student of ancient culture before you talk (sic) you should read a book and try and learn from it."?

Gosh, it sure looks like you did. That's what I was referencing.

Its a refrain from a song about that area.

QuoteYeah, but what's the most obvious part of Africa?

Egypt.

Quote from: technoextreme;563818Yeah you did.  That whole area got culturally smashed twenty thousand ways to Sunday and yet you claim that its not lazy to write  one single culture for an entire continent.

How many times do I have to say I'm not talking about an entire continent?  4?  12?  I have said repeatedly that that particular culture was an inspiration for a culture in my game world.  Not that it represents all of Africa.  I did say he is the most widely known non-Egyptian warrior in Africa, and that's true.  But that's like saying Charlemagne is one of the most well known kings of Europe.  Neither is implying that the entire African culture is Zulu, or that the entire European culture mirrored Charlemagne's court.  And it's not lazy to take a culture as inspiration and build your own around it into your game world.  That's how all fantasy cultures are that remotely resemble a real world one.

Are you seriously saying that this:

"I really dig the Zulu culture, and Shaka Zulu was a great warrior and leader.  Let's create a culture in our game world that is a lot like that."

is lazy because I'm not including every culture to ever be in Africa?

Get real

QuoteIn fact the more that you keep on yammering on the more I realize how idiotic it is to segregate cultures based upon continents.

And the more you keep yammering on just shows that you don't know what I'm are talking about, but are continuing to make up arguments in your head I am not making.

Want some advice?  How about replying to what I've actually said next time instead of inferring your own biases into strawmen arguments.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;563822And it's not lazy to take a culture as inspiration and build your own around it into your game world.  That's how all fantasy cultures are that remotely resemble a real world one.

Taking a whole entire culture and plopping it into your setting is generally considered lazy.  There is a huge difference between how Eberron is written where nothing is a straight 1:1 analog of anything in the real world and stuff like the Vistani which are gypsy ripoffs.

Quote from: technoextreme;563830Taking a whole entire culture and plopping it into your setting is generally considered lazy.  There is a huge difference between how Eberron is written where nothing is a straight 1:1 analog of anything in the real world and stuff like the Vistani which are gypsy ripoffs.

How is it lazy if he is doing the work to research the culture? I think both approached are fine. On the one hand taking an approach that isn't 1:1 can be unique and interesting but taking recognizeable cultures can be handy in a roleplaying game because it gives the players something they can grasp almost immediatley. Most GMs in my experience do a bit of both.

I had an awesome response to this, but the computer ate it.

In a nutshell, Golarion has been around since 2007, if it had anything in it that was significantly racist then it would have shown up before now. Golarion has many imaginary cultures in it which many are based upon tropes of iconic human cultures, but basing something on a trope is different from basing something on reality. For an example, compare the Varisians (http://www.pathfinderwiki.com/wiki/Varisian) of Golarion to the Romani  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romani_people)of Real Life (you find that they have little in common with real life).

Is it racist? In the broadest and most inclusive sense of the definition it is. Then again, you would only be using that particular all-inclusive definition if you were trying to stir up some shit and grasping at straws. The original question came from a notorious shit-stirrer on tBP named Ettin. Now his goal is not to invite discussion, but start some drama on an internet forum. This is because starting drama on forums is how BNGs make themselves feel alive while cowering in their parent's basement instead of going out and actually playing RPGs.

If you care to recall, Frank Trollman claimed that D&D was inherently racist based upon a single miniature of an orc done in pseudo-Zulu dress. This is similar to that instance.

You can find racism everywhere if you look for it and wish to be offended by almost all that you see in the world around you. Even then, it would be a stretch to claim that a setting like Golarion from a reputable company like Paizo is "kinda racist", especially when true examples of racism in gaming exist with such products as Racial Holy War to compare it to.

Quote from: technoextreme;563830Taking a whole entire culture and plopping it into your setting is generally considered lazy.

By who?

And who cares if it's considered lazy by some unspecified group of people? If that's what you want in your game then good on you. Less time futzing about and creating/learning about an artificial fantasy culture, more time just playing the damn game.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;563831How is it lazy if he is doing the work to research the culture? I think both approached are fine. On the one hand taking an approach that isn't 1:1 can be unique and interesting but taking recognizeable cultures can be handy in a roleplaying game because it gives the players something they can grasp almost immediatley. Most GMs in my experience do a bit of both.

Hey, I admit one of my favorite kingdoms I made for a homebrew setting was based on France. Or Franks if you want to get technical.  

It is generally good to have a reference point; Everyone has at least a glimmering knowledge of Rome, for example.

You might find that a world that is 100 percent origional seems alien, or unnappealing. Not that it is really possible to be 100 percent origional regardless.

Quote from: technoextreme;563830Taking a whole entire culture and plopping it into your setting is generally considered lazy.  There is a huge difference between how Eberron is written where nothing is a straight 1:1 analog of anything in the real world and stuff like the Vistani which are gypsy ripoffs.

If all you want to do is create a setting, go for it.  Make your setting as detailed and unique as possible.  Unless you don't have a regular 40 hour/week job with outside commitments, however, you'll find that creating a setting like that will consume all of your game time.

I once played in a campaign where a guy did exactly that.  He spent an entire summer researching and creating this super detailed and unique setting, and he placed his campaign on top of it.  Do you know how many times it got played?  Two sessions, tops.  The game imploded because a lot of us realized what he really wanted to do was write a novel, not create a game setting.  He held all of the info about the setting, wouldn't let us look at more than a few scraps that he presumed our characters knew, and then got mad when we weren't "doing it right."

I thought the contention was that Golarion was racist, when in fact it's just lazy?  Whew, I'm sure Paizo would be happy to hear that.

Campaign settings – fantasy settings, really, except sometimes those that are explicitly ideological projects – are always going to be a little racist because stereotypes save time for both the author and the reader, and nobody has the time. And also, role-playing games are there so people can harmlessly indulge in atavistic impulses, like pretend-chopping people up with pretend swords, or pretend-chopping up The Other with pretend swords.

"Evil orcs are racist" is usually neither here nor there because when people make their orcs into sensitive shamans or whatever they typically just hand off the job of The Evil Other to weirder shit on two legs, and then you're at "evil mind flayers are racist", etc. etc.

If you're more interested in policing games for political content than you are in the game, you should quit playing the game and get involved in politics.

Also:

QuoteIf all you want to do is create a setting, go for it. Make your setting as detailed and unique as possible. Unless you don't have a regular 40 hour/week job with outside commitments, however, you'll find that creating a setting like that will consume all of your game time.

I once played in a campaign where a guy did exactly that. He spent an entire summer researching and creating this super detailed and unique setting, and he placed his campaign on top of it. Do you know how many times it got played? Two sessions, tops.

Yeah.

Not only do people not want to make uniquely creative fantasy worlds, players don't want to learn about uniquely creative fantasy worlds. Because they aren't that interesting!

Quote from: technoextreme;563818Egypt.

So Paizo is "racist" for populating their Africa analog with lazy cultural knock-offs representing black tribes instead of populating it with a lazy knock-off of a culture of Coptic and Semitic peoples ruled sometimes by Greeks, the "obvious" part of Africa?

:hmm:
...and Paizo is the racist, huh?

Yes, calling France "Frogland" in Dark Albion is terribly offensive.  RPGPundit should be ashamed.

He should also be ashamed for dancing to Ettin's tune.

Well, I intended to answer the Pundit, but since this thread is already far into crazy land, complete with accusations of JRR Tolkien being a racist motherfucker, that I'm just going to let this shit drown itself into irrelevance. This bullshit disgusts me so much, I think I'd melt a fuse trying to answer it, so I won't.

Quote from: Rum Cove;563857Yes, calling France "Frogland" in Dark Albion is terribly offensive.  RPGPundit should be ashamed.

That however I'm going to answer to. Assuming some people would take that shit seriously (I'm not talking about you, Rum, but some asshole who might read this and think to himself "YEAH, DAMN RIGHT!"), let me put it that way.

I'm French. Not Quebec-French. I'm French-French, from the motherfucking Homeland of the French. The Froglands.

I have NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER with what RPG Pundit did with France in his Dark Albion setting. ACTUALLY, it completely makes sense from a crazy fantasy version of the prejudices the British had against the French, and vice versa, ESPECIALLY when we are talking about the time frame where a little something occured that's called the motherfucking ONE HUNDRED YEAR WAR.

It's a parody. It's a carricature. And I think it's a damn cool carricature because you also have this idea that the Frogmen took over the country and stuff, that there are collaborators who help them control the lands, which means... there also could be a Resistance out there... you see where this is going? Well, I'm feeling it and want to run with it so much in fact that I'm going to spin this into its own thing.

I'm going to flesh out the Froglands for Dark Albion. Me. A Frenchman.

OMG The Prejudice this asshole has against the French...

Wait a minute. He just said he's a Frenchman. Hating on his own people the bastard!!

Give me a fucking break.

Haven't read everything here yet (my eyes ache from rolling...I thought the 'site was better than this), but: no.

Golarion is no more racist than Eurocentric settings that distill the variety of Celtic or Northern European cultures into a limited, stereotyped set of archetypes (like the Pict or Viking).

Quote from: CRKrueger;563800Yeah, but what's the most obvious part of Africa?

Songhai ftw!

Quote from: Benoist;563866I'm going to flesh out the Froglands for Dark Albion. Me. A Frenchman..

Pfft!  It just means you have an identity crisis and you hate your own "people".  That's the worst kind of racist...

Quote from: KenHR;563867.Golarion is no more racist than Eurocentric settings that distill the variety of Celtic or Northern European cultures into a limited, stereotyped set of archetypes (like the Pict or Viking).

You cannot be this fucking obtuse. The Viking and the Pict, inaccurate though all their depictions may be, are stereotypes made by other white people. They have never been used to marginalize or oppress minorities. They have never been used to dismiss the entirety of white people as a bunch of savages/thieves/honorable tea-swilling samurai. Stop talking out of your ass and think before you post.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;563880Pfft!  It just means you have an identity crisis and you hate your own "people".  That's the worst kind of racist...

I'm sure there are some completely retarded fuckers who'll think along those lines.

I honestly have nothing to answer to these people. I'd rather have them say that to my face and have the opportunity to punch theirs.

Quote from: TomatoMalone;563883You cannot be this fucking obtuse. The Viking and the Pict, inaccurate though all their depictions may be, are stereotypes made by other white people. They have never been used to marginalize or oppress minorities. They have never been used to dismiss the entirety of white people as a bunch of savages/thieves/honorable tea-swilling samurai. Stop talking out of your ass and think before you post.

I don't know about vikings or scottish picts but The idea of irish as savage barbarians was certainly a stereotype employed here in Boston when they first started coming here in large numbers. Saw it all the time when I had to go through old newspapers and city records for my history internship.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;563889I don't know about vikings or scottish picts but The idea of irish as savage barbarians was certainly a stereotype employed here in Boston when they first started coming here in large numbers. Saw it all the time when I had to go through old newspapers and city records for my history internship.

Something my grandfather (born in 1897) still had to deal with (and told me about).

People really do over react to these things! So there are stereotypes in Golarion and in many other settings - big deal! Does that make them racist? I don't think so, uninformed perhaps or perhaps a tool to used to get some element across to the reader. So some elements relates to misconceptions of romer. But are they gypsies in disguise and therefore racist? I don't think so but that is my opinion. I have meet romer who are thiefs but I have also meet several that is not.

What people from the privileged white suburbia forget is that many of the cultures they so defend is full of discriminatory elements themselves. I have experienced it first hand in asia where people have mistaken me for being british or american and gotten treated pretty badly than if I were for example chinese even in environments where you would expect people to treat you with respect such as hospitals.  

And no I don't consider myself bigotted or ignorant or racist. I don't believe that one culture is superior to all the rest. I do acknowledge however that the human species are inherently ignorant of other cultures than their own. And ignorance does fuel racism.

Personally I don't think the world will change due to removing certain potential elements of racism in a game supplement. But as always vote with your feet!

Sorry for the rant but I get so tired on the knights in shining armour around certain forums that probably should actually try to live in the real world instead of hanging around forums with the intention of creating yet another tempest over nothing.

Quote from: KenHR;563867Haven't read everything here yet (my eyes ache from rolling...I thought the 'site was better than this), but: no.

Golarion is no more racist than Eurocentric settings that distill the variety of Celtic or Northern European cultures into a limited, stereotyped set of archetypes (like the Pict or Viking).

NOW you did it....

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;563889I don't know about vikings or scottish picts but The idea of irish as savage barbarians was certainly a stereotype employed here in Boston when they first started coming here in large numbers. Saw it all the time when I had to go through old newspapers and city records for my history internship.

Don't forget drunks.

I don't know if it was intended or not, but his comment reads like stereotypes are only bad when it's white people making them about non-white people.

And, well, that's sort of odd.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;563889I don't know about vikings or scottish picts but The idea of irish as savage barbarians was certainly a stereotype employed here in Boston when they first started coming here in large numbers. Saw it all the time when I had to go through old newspapers and city records for my history internship.

Yep, just ask the German Catholics when they started showing up in the Midwest.

Quote from: estar;563890Something my grandfather (born in 1897) still had to deal with (and told me about).

They were very cruel to the irish. I was very surprised to read about. Blatantly racist headlines anytime Irish were involved in a violent arrest.

Quote from: TomatoMalone;563883You cannot be this fucking obtuse. The Viking and the Pict, inaccurate though all their depictions may be, are stereotypes made by other white people. They have never been used to marginalize or oppress minorities. They have never been used to dismiss the entirety of white people as a bunch of savages/thieves/honorable tea-swilling samurai. Stop talking out of your ass and think before you post.

Listen, asshole, you have no idea who I am, nor do you have any idea of my ethnicity or history of dealing with racism (and it's off-topic for purposes of this thread anyway).  I have one hell of a whole lot more knowledge on the topic, first-hand and through academic research, than I know you do by the ignorant fucking response you made to my post.

And anyway, the following posts have pointed up how much YOU'RE talking out your ass.

Go fuck yourself.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;563889I don't know about vikings or scottish picts but The idea of irish as savage barbarians was certainly a stereotype employed here in Boston when they first started coming here in large numbers. Saw it all the time when I had to go through old newspapers and city records for my history internship.

Quote from: estar;563890Something my grandfather (born in 1897) still had to deal with (and told me about).

Quote from: Sacrosanct;563893Don't forget drunks.

I don't know if it was intended or not, but his comment reads like stereotypes are only bad when it's white people making them about non-white people.

And, well, that's sort of odd.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;563895They were very cruel to the irish. I was very surprised to read about. Blatantly racist headlines anytime Irish were involved in a violent arrest.

Quote from: nitril;563891People really do over react to these things! So there are stereotypes in Golarion and in many other settings - big deal! Does that make them racist? I don't think so, uninformed perhaps or perhaps a tool to used to get some element across to the reader. So some elements relates to misconceptions of romer. But are they gypsies in disguise and therefore racist? I don't think so but that is my opinion. I have meet romer who are thiefs but I have also meet several that is not.

What people from the privileged white suburbia forget is that many of the cultures they so defend is full of discriminatory elements themselves. I have experienced it first hand in asia where people have mistaken me for being british or american and gotten treated pretty badly than if I were for example chinese even in environments where you would expect people to treat you with respect such as hospitals.  

And no I don't consider myself bigotted or ignorant or racist. I don't believe that one culture is superior to all the rest. I do acknowledge however that the human species are inherently ignorant of other cultures than their own. And ignorance does fuel racism.

Personally I don't think the world will change due to removing certain potential elements of racism in a game supplement. But as always vote with your feet!

Sorry for the rant but I get so tired on the knights in shining armour around certain forums that probably should actually try to live in the real world instead of hanging around forums with the intention of creating yet another tempest over nothing.

True enough, and sorry Pundit if I'm drifting this thread further off topic, but my mother, a Korean, is the nicest, most accepting person in the world who will make friends with anyone.  Unless they're Chinese or Japanese.  Then what comes out of her mouth is shocking.  Considering the history there, I can understand on some level, but wow.

But no, the sociology 101 kids would have it that racism is an invention of white Western culture...and, well, I'll stop here and bow out of the thread because I'm doing exactly what the site owner doesn't want.

Quote from: Benoist;563866That however I'm going to answer to. Assuming some people would take that shit seriously (I'm not talking about you, Rum, but some asshole who might read this and think to himself "YEAH, DAMN RIGHT!"), let me put it that way.

I'm French. Not Quebec-French. I'm French-French, from the motherfucking Homeland of the French. The Froglands.

I have NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER with what RPG Pundit did with France in his Dark Albion setting. ACTUALLY, it completely makes sense from a crazy fantasy version of the prejudices the British had against the French, and vice versa, ESPECIALLY when we are talking about the time frame where a little something occured that's called the motherfucking ONE HUNDRED YEAR WAR.

It's a parody. It's a carricature. And I think it's a damn cool carricature because you also have this idea that the Frogmen took over the country and stuff, that there are collaborators who help them control the lands, which means... there also could be a Resistance out there... you see where this is going? Well, I'm feeling it and want to run with it so much in fact that I'm going to spin this into its own thing.

I'm going to flesh out the Froglands for Dark Albion. Me. A Frenchman.

OMG The Prejudice this asshole has against the French...

Wait a minute. He just said he's a Frenchman. Hating on his own people the bastard!!

Give me a fucking break.

The fact that your hatred is self-hatred doesn't mean you're not a racist.  :D

Quote from: KenHR;563900But no, the sociology 101 kids would have it that racism is an invention of white Western culture...and, well, I'll stop here and bow out of the thread because I'm doing exactly what the site owner doesn't want.

Well duh. If you're not a white male, you can't be "ist".  WTF did you go to school?

:popcorn:

Quote from: KenHR;563900True enough, and sorry Pundit if I'm drifting this thread further off topic, but my mother, a Korean, is the nicest, most accepting person in the world who will make friends with anyone.  Unless they're Chinese or Japanese.  Then what comes out of her mouth is shocking.  Considering the history there, I can understand on some level, but wow.

When I lived in Korea, I too noticed how much hatred a lot of Koreans had especially towards the Japanese.  Knowing the history, I can't exactly blame them.

But in the context of racism, living in Korea gave me a huge lesson in perspective.  See, I'm a white guy.  When I grew up in the US, I knew racism existed and was bad and all that.  But it wasn't until I lived in Korea before I realized just what white privilege was.  You know, the things you take for granted but don't realize.  In Korea, I was discriminated against a lot because not only was I an American, but I was a soldier as well.  Not violent discrimination, but smaller things, like the stares of contempt, being charged twice as much as anyone else, being pushed to the back of the train lines, etc.  That gave me some more perspective.  Re: white privilege, I now understood what it felt like to be the only person of your race in a room full of people.

As I told my white friends, "Next time you go to class (they were in college), imagine everyone else there is black, and you're the only white person.  How do you think that would make you feel?"

My non-white friends all shook their heads like, "Now he understands."

That all being said, I really liked my time in Korea, and spent 4 years there :)

But these threads?  This is the impression I get from TBP crowd:

If it can be racist, then it must be racist.  Maybe if people stopped looking to be offended at everything, they could actually enjoy a game.  Accusing someone of being racist is pretty serious.  Accusing a company of being racist is even worse because now your fucking with someone's livelyhood.  So before doing so, you better damn well have solid evidence and not just personal bias because you get offended at something minor.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;563895They were very cruel to the irish. I was very surprised to read about. Blatantly racist headlines anytime Irish were involved in a violent arrest.

No shortage of anti Irish racism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EastEnders_episodes_in_Ireland) these days either. There's really only two places it persists though, those would be the UK and some limited parts of Australia. I put it down to them having smaller penises.

Hmm this thread has moved waay beyond what I'm comfortable discussing so I'll bow out for now with the final words of IMO Golarion is no more racist than any other Fantasy world which some parts are loosely based on our own  world's races/cultures etc..
Which to me means it simply isn't racist, it's just drawing information from familiar concepts we can work with.

Anyway good night all :)

I was going to post a trolling comment saying 'I can't judge if Golarion was racist because I only read the parts of the setting about white people': but then I recalled Golarion is the setting where the only white people in the setting are either Viking rapists that only stopped raping because they were put down by their Evil (as in actually worshiping demons and evil Gods) Imperialistic Oppressor cousins that enslave all the non-whites in the setting for the lulz.

All of the other bastardized, non-evil European cultures in the game were given to some ersatz non-white real life analogue because the core campaign setting was too much of a progressives wet dream to have any positive portrayals of white people apparently.

Quote from: Rum Cove;563857Yes, calling France "Frogland" in Dark Albion is terribly offensive.  RPGPundit should be ashamed.

Spoken like a true non-Englishman!

I'm just glad to see that Darwinism is OK. He abruptly disappeared after WoTC announced that 4E was getting the arse and I was really concerned for his safety and mental health.

Keep posting Darwinism, we understand your loss and pain so feel free to drop a line when you feel isolated and alone.

This thread has taught me so much including that you can't be racist against whites, who'd a thunk it?

PPS. The claims of anti Irish sentiment in Australia came as a surprise. In my experience there seems to be exaggerated claims of Irish kinship if anything.

Quote from: Fiasco;563939PPS. The claims of anti Irish sentiment in Australia came as a surprise. In my experience there seems to be exaggerated claims of Irish kinship if anything.

Only in some parts of it. This genius (http://www.independent.ie/national-news/australian-embassy-blasts-racist-advert-asking-no-irish-to-apply-for-bricklaying-job-3047010.html) was actually a unionist from northern Ireland (part of the UK), and a more vicious gang of hatemongers you'll be hard pressed to find anywhere. Beyond that though in a few districts anti Irish sentiment is alive and well (http://www.independent.ie/national-news/australian-police-ask-gaa-clubs-to-assist-over-drunken-irish-in-perth-3103963.html), and I would raise very serious questions as to the veracity of reports targeting any one ethnic group in particular, never mind Irish people in notoriously anti Irish areas. It goes back a long way, Ned Kelly, that Aussie folk hero, was greatly opposed to the virulent anti Irish sentiment in Australia at the time, which has persisted to this day.

Indeed you can be racist against white people.

Quote from: TomatoMalone;563883You cannot be this fucking obtuse. The Viking and the Pict, inaccurate though all their depictions may be, are stereotypes made by other white people. They have never been used to marginalize or oppress minorities. They have never been used to dismiss the entirety of white people as a bunch of savages/thieves/honorable tea-swilling samurai. Stop talking out of your ass and think before you post.

Maybe not the entirety of white people (to my knowledge, I would not be the least bit surprised if there was racist caricatures of white people along those lines produced by non-white people), but otherwise YES REPEATEDLY THROUGHOUT HISTORY.

Such as the slaving imperialist colonialist ROMAN EMPIRE.

Quote from: Benoist;563885I'm sure there are some completely retarded fuckers who'll think along those lines.

I honestly have nothing to answer to these people. I'd rather have them say that to my face and have the opportunity to punch theirs.

And now some drama queen on TBP gets to claim "...even physical threats of violence on me!"

So, a person is creating a fantasy world populated with various ethnicities.  They have a few choices:

1) They include non-white cultures via analogues of real-world cultures, warts and all, that will inevitably draw upon real world stereotypes.  They get called racist for promoting negative stereotypes of non-whites.

2) They include non-white cultures via analogues of real-world cultures, scrubbed of their negatives, so that they are noble and admirable.  They get called racist for promoting unrealistic positive stereotypes of non-whites.

3) They include non-white cultures with entirely made-up cultures that inevitably include some elements of the culture normally associated with some other race.  They get called racist for robbing people of their authentic culture and presenting a blackface version of European culture.

4) They don't include non-white cultures at all.  They get called racist to leaving out non-white people.

Is there really any way to win this game without someone determined to find racism in the setting being able to claim that it's there?

Quote from: Planet Algol;563948And now some drama queen on TBP gets to claim "...even physical threats of violence on me!"

Oh my God. Tell me that isn't true. Did someone really claim that?

Quote from: John Morrow;563959Is there really any way to win this game without someone determined to find racism in the setting being able to claim that it's there?

No. (I know that was a rhetorical question.)

1.) Real racists exist.

2.) Accusing people of racism is easy, even when none exists.

Oddly enough, this thread suddenly became relevant to my interests last night at about 3:00 AM. Like Sacrosanct, I'm working on my own little campaign setting, based on Shadowrun, and just got a cool idea for Africa.

Personally I loathe and despise bigotry, and I'd rather base my worlds on reliable information and plausible cultural and economic principles. But no matter how much I base my Africa on factual information and plausible extrapolation, I can't make it immune from charges of racism.

The same problem holds for revisions of Shadowrun's "Alliance for Allah", when addressing the economics and demographics of the NAN, and so forth. No matter what I do, some asshole can always call me a racist.

So I can either sit it out, and keep my campaign materials for myself, or just post the thing and ignore the assholes.

Fine. Easily offended assholes, fuck you.

[Though + bonus points to John for Savatage. That album isn't my favorite, but I dig Edge of Thorns.]

Quote from: Benoist;563969Oh my God. Tell me that isn't true. Did someone really claim that?

No, I'm, just calling it before it happens due to be driven to do so by my subconscious invisible privilege backpack.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;563907But in the context of racism, living in Korea gave me a huge lesson in perspective.  See, I'm a white guy.  When I grew up in the US, I knew racism existed and was bad and all that.  But it wasn't until I lived in Korea before I realized just what white privilege was.  You know, the things you take for granted but don't realize.  In Korea, I was discriminated against a lot because not only was I an American, but I was a soldier as well.  Not violent discrimination, but smaller things, like the stares of contempt, being charged twice as much as anyone else, being pushed to the back of the train lines, etc.  That gave me some more perspective.  Re: white privilege, I now understood what it felt like to be the only person of your race in a room full of people.

I gained the same type of perspective from living for years on First Nations reservations. When the tables are turned on you, that you are the minority, and you become the target of discrimination, that makes you think and see people and situations differently.

I think this is in part what pisses me off so much when you start calling for the mob's judgment over accusations of racism and just trivialize the whole thing to the point anything and everything under the Sun gets considered racism. Don't get me wrong, there is such a thing as mundane, everyday racism, but just throwing stones at everything that moves, like Golarion and fantasy settings like it, just makes conversations about real issues and real racism harder, because it builds up suspicion and resentment between people.

Pundit was right about the Activist Swine. These are fucking assholes, because they have no clue how much damage they're actually causing and if they did, they wouldn't give a shit anyway. They're just after the internet creds.

Well Ben, it looks like I win a no-prize.

Quote from: Planet Algol;563948And now some drama queen on TBP gets to claim "...even physical threats of violence on me!"

I'm sure they have been saying up until now "they're all complaining about "what about the poor rich white majority, wah!"

Despite the fact that's not what anyone here is actually saying.

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;563970[Though + bonus points to John for Savatage. That album isn't my favorite, but I dig Edge of Thorns.]

+2 to this. I hadn't really been paying attention, but for years I swore I was the only person on the planet who not only had an album, but If I Go Away is one of my favorite ballads.

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;563970[Though + bonus points to John for Savatage. That album isn't my favorite, but I dig Edge of Thorns.]

I liked running Warhammer FRP to the Hall of the Mountain King album, which in my opinion is pretty much (except for the first track) perfect for it.  They've got lots of good stuff mixed across their albums that's also good for games like Warhammer FRP, like The Storm (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5QgvkVFd1Fw), Sirens (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOKbqfzD6rc), and By the Grace of the Witch (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmSo03IKpsY).  I also highly recommend the Christmas concerts from their alter-ego the Trans-Siberian Orchestra (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CCSeugClR8).  

Sirens also had a good evocative fantasy cover:

(http://www.metalkingdom.net/album/cover/d27/719_savatage_sirens.jpg)

I don't know enough about Golarion to comment on this, but that doesn't seem to stop anyone else - so I'll toss in my two cents.  

Quote from: John Morrow;563959So, a person is creating a fantasy world populated with various ethnicities.  They have a few choices:

1) They include non-white cultures via analogues of real-world cultures, warts and all, that will inevitably draw upon real world stereotypes.  They get called racist for promoting negative stereotypes of non-whites.

2) They include non-white cultures via analogues of real-world cultures, scrubbed of their negatives, so that they are noble and admirable.  They get called racist for promoting unrealistic positive stereotypes of non-whites.

3) They include non-white cultures with entirely made-up cultures that inevitably include some elements of the culture normally associated with some other race.  They get called racist for robbing people of their authentic culture and presenting a blackface version of European culture.

4) They don't include non-white cultures at all.  They get called racist to leaving out non-white people.

Is there really any way to win this game without someone determined to find racism in the setting being able to claim that it's there?

On the one hand, nothing is going to please everyone.  You're certainly bound to get complaints from someone.  However, that doesn't mean that everything is a wash and that no fiction or RPG or movie is really racist.  I think there is a huge difference between:

1a) Using analogs of real-world cultures that embrace the stereotypes used by old, racist stories.  

1b) Using analogs of real-world cultures where you deliberately diverge from false old stereotypes and use stereotypes different than these for contrast.  


For example, when I ran my Vikings & Skraelings game, I used a lot of stereotypes in my portrayal of the Icelanders as well as the American Indians of the Northeast.  However, I made a number of deliberate choices such that they clashed with many common false stereotypes.  One was that I played up the contrast of the Algonquian tribes and the Iroquoian tribes - with the latter being warlike cannibals while also still more organized, democratic, and egalitarian.  The Algonquians were more peaceful but also more patriarchal.  I also drew on outside-of-culture stereotypes, so that, say, the leader of the proto-Pequot contingent among the Mohicans evoked fascist tropes with his militarist and nationalist stance.  This is using a negative stereotype while at the same time clashing with both the "noble savage" and the "ignorant primitive" stereotypes.  

I'm sure someone can complain about this, but this use of stereotype isn't in the same class as falling into false old stereotypes like the "noble savage in touch with the land" or "manipulative, lying, thieving gypsies."

I admit, as an American, I don't know the whole roma/gypsy thing.  I mean, I know the Roma were persecuted by the Nazis, and I'm pretty positive that they have been discriminated against and persecuted in many more countries, and are still discriminated against.

But I think it's important to realize that most Americans don't know any of that.  Heck, right now, as I speak, there is a TV show on called American Gypsies.  It follows around the Johns family in NY, which is a Roma family.  They call themselves gypsies all the time, and hardly ever refer to themselves as Roma.  This is about the only real world experience most Americans have with that culture.

So I guess my perspective is that don't think someone is automatically a racist when they use the term "gypsy", because what else are they supposed to know, especially if they are American?

Quote from: Sacrosanct;563724Wow.  I can't help note the irony in that so many rpg gamers have become Tipper Gore, and Dee Snider's speech to congress would also fit perfectly without modification on rpg boards as well.

Which is why I can't stand when schmuckanoids who claim to be part of a hobby of imagination try to put political regulations on my imagination.

JG

Quote from: SacrosanctWow. I can't help note the irony in that so many rpg gamers have become Tipper Gore, and Dee Snider's speech to congress would also fit perfectly without modification on rpg boards as well.

Quote from: James Gillen;564031Which is why I can't stand when schmuckanoids who claim to be part of a hobby of imagination try to put political regulations on my imagination.

Is the claim here that if a private citizen posts on a board claiming that some RPG product is racist, then that somehow is "political regulation on your imagination"?  

However wrong-headed or not the claims are about Golarion, a fucking internet thread isn't a political regulation.  It is, in fact, their free speech rights.  Free speech means that people - being stupid - will sometimes say stupid things.  They might trash the game you like, rave about the game you hate, say that a game is racist when it isn't, or say that a game is racist when it is.  None of that is political regulation on you.

Quote from: jhkim;564040Is the claim here that if a private citizen posts on a board claiming that some RPG product is racist, then that somehow is "political regulation on your imagination"?  

However wrong-headed or not the claims are about Golarion, a fucking internet thread isn't a political regulation.  It is, in fact, their free speech rights.  Free speech means that people - being stupid - will sometimes say stupid things.  They might trash the game you like, rave about the game you hate, say that a game is racist when it isn't, or say that a game is racist when it is.  None of that is political regulation on you.

So you are basically laissez-faire about racism?  Some people might be, but most people are not.  In 21st century America I see any accusation of racism against anything as a call for it being ended by any means necessary.

Quote from: Wolf, Richard;564041So you are basically laissez-faire about racism?  Some people might be, but most people are not.  In 21st century America I see any accusation of racism against anything as a call for it being ended by any means necessary.

Please, take your personal "white man guilt" somewhere else . The guy is Korean and knows racism deeper than you'll ever meet in your lifetime if you're lucky. I'm not even going to go into my personal experience.

Point is I can flat list pure racism against me but who cares? I rise above it and get the last laugh EVERY FUCKING DAY that passes.

@Jkim, you gotta stop using that awesome avatar because you're heavily tempting me to go back to Olivia.:)

Quote from: jhkim;564040However wrong-headed or not the claims are about Golarion, a fucking internet thread isn't a political regulation.

It is, however, an attempt to gather support towards the idea of creating such political standards in the design and publication of role playing games, if not whatever ideas are deemed "okay" or "not okay" to play at your game table.

Quote from: Benoist;564047It is, however, an attempt to gather support towards the idea of creating such political standards in the design and publication of role playing games, if not whatever ideas are deemed "okay" or "not okay" to play at your game table.

Exactly.

JG

Quote from: S'mon;563804Cultural Marxist trolling by brainwashed pod-people is a pervasive problem on gaming bulletin boards.

Cultural Marxism?  Did you catch BT's brain disease?

I think the writers who created Golaria are just lazy. The fact that Golaria is pretty  blatantly racist is obvious from the get go but I believe its a product of lazy writing more than anything else. Nothing to get all up in arms about unless you expect more from the people writing your generic fantasy settings.

Quote from: MGuy;564078The fact that Golaria is pretty  blatantly racist is obvious from the get go

Prove it, then.

Prove that Golarion is a racist setting.

My response to a Gradivus post on tbp in the bullshit thread.
My post (http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?637500-So-Golarion-seems-kinda-racist&p=15696293#post15696293)

QuoteOriginally Posted by Gradivus
"I'm sorry, but I just don't see the edition warring going on. Especially since Golarion the setting is pretty edition agnostic, and people do convert and run the Adventure Paths (which are often highly regarded) in 4e, though I have no personal experience with them."


All of Paizo's Pathfinder products are set in Golarion. The products can be converted to other systems, but I wouldn't say it is edition neutral.

In the end, that doesn't matter. Because from now on, some readers of any Pazio/Pathfinder threads here will have this association in the back of their minds.
Was that the goal? I don't know and wouldn't presume to say here, but that is the outcome.

If you want a different look at this thread I would suggest, and I think the OP would agree, to click on the link in his signature.

What a Mod thought of that.

Kai Tave (http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?637500-So-Golarion-seems-kinda-racist&p=15696310#post15696310)

QuoteThen that's nobody's fault but Paizo's. Nobody made them put stereotypical tokenized gypsies and not!African tribesmen in their game. That was a choice they made and if that means some readers of Paizo's stuff have that association in the back of their minds from now on then hey, guess what, choices have consequences. Maybe next time they can do better.

Regardless, I challenge you to go back over this thread and find examples of people going "Oh man, Pathfinder is so racist. Not like [OTHER GAME] though! [OTHER GAME] is a perfect example of racial harmony unlike Pathfinder which is racist and therefore terrible." Highlighting a flaw in a game does not, the last time I checked, constitute edition warring.

Nope, no Edition warring bias there or impossible goalposts. None at all.

Quote from: The Traveller;563941This genius was actually a unionist from northern Ireland (part of the UK), and a more vicious gang of hatemongers you'll be hard pressed to find anywhere.

You're being racist to us Ulstermen? :confused:

Quote from: John Morrow;563959So, a person is creating a fantasy world populated with various ethnicities.  They have a few choices:

1) They include non-white cultures via analogues of real-world cultures, warts and all, that will inevitably draw upon real world stereotypes.  They get called racist for promoting negative stereotypes of non-whites.

2) They include non-white cultures via analogues of real-world cultures, scrubbed of their negatives, so that they are noble and admirable.  They get called racist for promoting unrealistic positive stereotypes of non-whites.

3) They include non-white cultures with entirely made-up cultures that inevitably include some elements of the culture normally associated with some other race.  They get called racist for robbing people of their authentic culture and presenting a blackface version of European culture.

4) They don't include non-white cultures at all.  They get called racist to leaving out non-white people.

Is there really any way to win this game without someone determined to find racism in the setting being able to claim that it's there?

You are correct, and that is a nice typology.

Quote from: jhkim;564040Is the claim here that if a private citizen posts on a board claiming that some RPG product is racist, then that somehow is "political regulation on your imagination"?  

However wrong-headed or not the claims are about Golarion, a fucking internet thread isn't a political regulation.  It is, in fact, their free speech rights.  Free speech means that people - being stupid - will sometimes say stupid things.  

Free speech on rpgnet? LOL.

Discourse on rpgnet is extremely heavily regulated. There are umpteen things you are not allowed to say, that the moderators will happily ban you for. Whereas calling Paizo racist is obviously permitted. It's not a level playing field.

Quote from: Dog Quixote;564068Cultural Marxism?  Did you catch BT's brain disease?

Even if you/they have never read Marcuse and Adorno, you/they still have the horns on your heads and the skulls on your lapels. You/they are the bad guys.

I'm starting to think this forum really needs to call itself rpgnet.txt.

Quote from: Dog Quixote;564102I'm starting to think this forum really needs to call itself rpgnet.txt.

I am starting to think you need to look really hard about the definition of "free speech".

Quote from: Marleycat;564103I am starting to think you need to look really hard about the definition of "free speech".

I prefer to stay away from other people's fetishes.

Quote from: S'mon;564095You're being racist to us Ulstermen? :confused:

Don't (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=21600) take (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/oct/22/race.ukcrime) my word (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/3390249.stm) for it (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2004/jan/10/northernireland.race). Note I didn't single out all Ulstermen either, just the loyalist ones imported from the UK. Argue with the reports if you like.

Quote from: jhkim;564040Is the claim here that if a private citizen posts on a board claiming that some RPG product is racist, then that somehow is "political regulation on your imagination"?  

However wrong-headed or not the claims are about Golarion, a fucking internet thread isn't a political regulation.  It is, in fact, their free speech rights.  Free speech means that people - being stupid - will sometimes say stupid things.  They might trash the game you like, rave about the game you hate, say that a game is racist when it isn't, or say that a game is racist when it is.  None of that is political regulation on you.

I agree they have a right to voice their opinion, and others are free to disagree. I do think it is a serious issue and a serious accusation though. My concern when I see things like this is that a small but vocal group might lead to designers self censoring themselves in a way that leads to lower quality or less satisfying products for the rest of us. Again they have every right in the world to criticize a game for any reason, but that doesn't mean all such criticisms are useful or valid.

I can't speak for other designers but no one wants to be labeled a racist. I do think threads like this make a lot of peope second guess themselves...not because they feel rpgnet is correct on these issues but because they know violating the standards laid forth on that forum easily results in these kinds of threads. I have made a concious choice to ignore rpgnet because I got into this to have fun(not worry about what random folks on the internet think)  but that is bad for business in my opinion. The last thing I want to do is worry about whether rpgnet is going to attack me for incorporating lots of Thai elements into my ogre culture for Sertorius or whether drawing on the Middle East for dwarves will have that effect. I personally love analogs in games.

I don't think the rpg.net forums have much of an impact on the Roleplaying scene really.
I remember going to the Dragonmeet con last year in London and I chatted with some of the games designers and publishers there asking about their presence on forums, specifically rpg.net.  Most of them said they didn't want to post there as it's a nightmare place for trolling and reactionary comments etc..

I'm betting only a small % of the Roleplaying community even bother browsing gaming forums anyway, especially as the age bracket is pretty high. I expect they're not wasting their time doing that and actually focusing on gaming.

It's only been in the last few years I've bothered to post much on Tabletop Roleplaying forums, although I've posted a lot for Computer gaming and other subjects..

tldr;
Who cares what the rpg.net forum people think. No-one really cares what they think anyway.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;564135My concern when I see things like this is that a small but vocal group might lead to designers self censoring themselves in a way that leads to lower quality or less satisfying products for the rest of us.

I can't speak for other designers but no one wants to be labeled a racist.

Exactly what happened to me. Thank you.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;564026So I guess my perspective is that don't think someone is automatically a racist when they use the term "gypsy", because what else are they supposed to know, especially if they are American?

It's not just that. It's not even clear that 'gypsy' is a pejorative term; some consider it to be, others don't.

There are similarities with 'Indian' as applied to Native Americans. There are many Native American organizations that use the terms Indian themselves. It was not originally a pejorative term, at some point gained some kind of negative connotation (at least when used by certain people), but was never exclusively negative, and was adopted by many of the peoples themselves to which it is supposed to be insulting. The meanings of words can change over time.

Saying 'gypsy is a racist term' is far too simplistic IMO.

Quote from: danskmacabre;564137I don't think the rpg.net forums have much of an impact on the Roleplaying scene really.
I remember going to the Dragonmeet con last year in London and I chatted with some of the games designers and publishers there asking about their presence on forums, specifically rpg.net.  Most of them said they didn't want to post there as it's a nightmare place for trolling and reactionary comments etc..

I'm betting only a small % of the Roleplaying community even bother browsing gaming forums anyway, especially as the age bracket is pretty high. I expect they're not wasting their rime doing that and actually focusing on gaming.

It's only been in the last few years I've bothered to post much on Tabletop Roleplaying forums, although I've posted a lot for Computer gaming and other subjects..

tldr;
Who cares what the rpg.net forum people think. No-one really cares what they think anyway.

While I think its true many designers don't post, I do think rpg forums have a huge impact on sales and website traffic (the later I have seen first hand on our website). It is also true that most gamers are not on forums, or at least not regularly. But in my experience the people who are the newsbringers and leaders tend to be. Also as time goes on, the forums seem to be replacing the watercoole role of local game stores. This is just my own opinion, but I feel rpgnet has a pretty big impact on things because it is an established site with lots of posters and very active threads. My guess is Paizo is watching that Golarion thread because it is a PR issue.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;564143While I think its true many designers don't post, I do think rpg forums have a huge impact on sales and website traffic (the later I have seen first hand on our website). It is also true that most gamers are not on forums, or at least not regularly. But in my experience the people who are the newsbringers and leaders tend to be. Also as time goes on, the forums seem to be replacing the watercoole role of local game stores. This is just my own opinion, but I feel rpgnet has a pretty big impact on things because it is an established site with lots of posters and very active threads. My guess is Paizo is watching that Golarion thread because it is a PR issue.

Yes, but to borrow a term from Animal Farm, some forums are more equal than others.  The quickest way for a website or a forum to become irrelevant is if it gains a reputation for trolling, spamming, arbitrary administration, and nerd raging.

Quote from: The Traveller;564114Don't (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=21600) take (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/oct/22/race.ukcrime) my word (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/3390249.stm) for it (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2004/jan/10/northernireland.race). Note I didn't single out all Ulstermen either, just the loyalist ones imported from the UK. Argue with the reports if you like.

You are being racist to us Ulstermen. OK, gotcha. We're used to it.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;564143My guess is Paizo is watching that Golarion thread because it is a PR issue.

Oh, certainly. Erik Mona is a frequent poster on rpgnet, on threads where they're not tarring & feathering his company over imagined wrongdoings.

I think that thread is so obviously specious that it is unlikely to affect Paizo sales, but I do think that a company's Internet reputation can help or hurt it. Eg I've heard many times that Kevin Simbieda is a litigious jerk, so I avoid buying Palladium products. Hearing a lot of good things about Paizo product encouraged me to check it out and buy some of their stuff. OTOH I've bought a fair amount of 4e D&D even after hearing it was bad - and it was bad.

I'm not sure politics of RPG products affects sales much; I did avoid Deadlands as I didn't like the setting's political set up, esp the removal of slavery from the Confederacy side of the Civil War to make them more 'nice', and the general absence of sexism & racism in the pseudo-historical setting. But that's probably fairly unusual I think.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;564143While I think its true many designers don't post, I do think rpg forums have a huge impact on sales and website traffic (the later I have seen first hand on our website). It is also true that most gamers are not on forums, or at least not regularly. But in my experience the people who are the newsbringers and leaders tend to be. Also as time goes on, the forums seem to be replacing the watercoole role of local game stores. This is just my own opinion, but I feel rpgnet has a pretty big impact on things because it is an established site with lots of posters and very active threads. My guess is Paizo is watching that Golarion thread because it is a PR issue.

From my POV and experience I probably started frequenting RPG.net about a year or so ago.
But I increasingly note how such an unhealthy place it is to discuss things.
Not ALWAYS tho I have got useful info from there from time to time. But you have to do a LOT of filtering out the crappy comments.

Discussing online stuff with people I game with all of them really couldn't care less what conclusions are drawn there and generally snigger at the whole nerdrage thing there.

The various witchhunts that have taken place there have not negatively influenced my buying habits at all. Possibly the other way around, if a product is getting slated there, I'm more tempted to actually take a look at it to see what the fuss is all about and draw my OWN conclusions.

As a result of these negative experiences, I less frequently read the posts there or post fo that matter.

Quote from: flyerfan1991;564156Yes, but to borrow a term from Animal Farm, some forums are more equal than others.  The quickest way for a website or a forum to become irrelevant is if it gains a reputation for trolling, spamming, arbitrary administration, and nerd raging.

I think they have become a smaller and more focused community for sure in recent years, but still important. The golarion thread has something like 42,000 views. I know there are all kinds of ways to calculate that but still compared with many of their other threads that is a lot.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;564167I think they have become a smaller and more focused community for sure in recent years, but still important. The golarion thread has something like 42,000 views. I know there are all kinds of ways to calculate that but still compared with many of their other threads that is a lot.

Many of which will be bots.

Quote from: jhkim;564040Is the claim here that if a private citizen posts on a board claiming that some RPG product is racist, then that somehow is "political regulation on your imagination"?  

However wrong-headed or not the claims are about Golarion, a fucking internet thread isn't a political regulation.  It is, in fact, their free speech rights.  Free speech means that people - being stupid - will sometimes say stupid things.  They might trash the game you like, rave about the game you hate, say that a game is racist when it isn't, or say that a game is racist when it is.  None of that is political regulation on you.

It becomes a problem when groups of people start trying to create boycotts and/or petitions to shut down or change a company.  For the record, I'm not talking about any particular instance, but in general.

There is plenty of valid racism and sexism out there.  That stuff deserves the attention it gets.  But you have to admit that there is a percentage of people who will look to find offense in just about anything, and will do whatever they can (including lying and warping the truth) to convince other people it's bad and it needs to be shut down.  Hence the Tipper Gore reference.  In his speech Dee said that rock lyrics tend to be general and vague, and if someone listens to them expecting to find horrible violence, they'll find it, even though that's not what the song was about.

Quote from: danskmacabre;564166From my POV and experience I probably started frequenting RPG.net about a year or so ago.
But I increasingly note how such an unhealthy place it is to discuss things.
Not ALWAYS tho I have got useful info from there from time to time. But you have to do a LOT of filtering out the crappy comments.

Discussing online stuff with people I game with all of them really couldn't care less what conclusions are drawn there and generally snigger at the whole nerdrage thing there.

The various witchhunts that have taken place there have not negatively influenced my buying habits at all. Possibly the other way around, if a product is getting slated there, I'm more tempted to actually take a look at it to see what the fuss is all about and draw my OWN conclusions.

As a result of these negative experiences, I less frequently read the posts there or post fo that matter.

And hopefully the majority of gamers are reasonable to think for themselves like this. But what I would worry about if I were Paizo is the the conclusions from that thread spilling elsewhere to the point that many online just assume and repeat Golarion is racist based on it. I'd also worry about how it might impact my relationship with other companies. paizo may well be willing to take a hit on their reputation at rpgnet, but are their distributors and sellers? I don't know what other companies they work with but in my own case, while I can speak for Bedrock, we have other companies we partner with and stuff like this can impact those relationships.

Quote from: danskmacabre;564169Many of which will be bots.

Sure. i am not saying those are 42,000 unique views. But compared to other threads on that subforum it is an enormous number. No idea how many individual people it indicates. But probably a lot more than threads with 1,000 views or 6,000 views.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;564172And hopefully the majority of gamers are reasonable to think for themselves like this. But what I would worry about if I were Paizo is the the conclusions from that thread spilling elsewhere to the point that many online just assume and repeat Golarion is racist based on it. I'd also worry about how it might impact my relationship with other companies. paizo may well be willing to take a hit on their reputation at rpgnet, but are their distributors and sellers? I don't know what other companies they work with but in my own case, while I can speak for Bedrock, we have other companies we partner with and stuff like this can impact those relationships.

Seeing as it sounds like you actually work in the RPG industry as opposed to me not at all (It's just a hobby for me) I wonder if you have a point.
I only speak form my experience in my social circle and cannot (or can't be bothered) validate this view when considering the greater circle of the internet RPG community .

I suppose many of the smaller companies that make RPGs depend more on online opinions and could be affected more by petitions and witchhunts etc..

Still, rpg.net is a nightmare to navigate and threads drop off the dial really quickly, it has 100s of people viewing and posting at the same time.
That and it's not the most stable website in the world, it has frequent crashes and the mods there can have very strong extreme left wing views.
 
It doesn't take that much for a forum/website to drop on popularity if it just becomes unreliable or just not fun anymore as experience has shown with other social sites.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;564167I think they have become a smaller and more focused community for sure in recent years, but still important. The golarion thread has something like 42,000 views. I know there are all kinds of ways to calculate that but still compared with many of their other threads that is a lot.

More like rubberneckers on the highway, if you ask me.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;564170It becomes a problem when groups of people start trying to create boycotts and/or petitions to shut down or change a company.  For the record, I'm not talking about any particular instance, but in general.

There is plenty of valid racism and sexism out there.  That stuff deserves the attention it gets.  But you have to admit that there is a percentage of people who will look to find offense in just about anything, and will do whatever they can (including lying and warping the truth) to convince other people it's bad and it needs to be shut down.  Hence the Tipper Gore reference.  In his speech Dee said that rock lyrics tend to be general and vague, and if someone listens to them expecting to find horrible violence, they'll find it, even though that's not what the song was about.

Yep, Dee's song Under the Blade sounded like it was about SM, when it was really about his experience at a dentist.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;564173Sure. i am not saying those are 42,000 unique views. But compared to other threads on that subforum it is an enormous number. No idea how many individual people it indicates. But probably a lot more than threads with 1,000 views or 6,000 views.

yeah I expect so, but that probably counts every time someone pages to another page on a thread (some of which have 100+ pages)
People replying multiple times.  people just checking on the progress of a thread..
I think the bigger a thread gets, the more multiple hits it will get.

The more that this goes on, the more I'm convinced this is simply a way a certain group of 4e fans are trying to do anything to hurt Paizo and Pathfinder.

This has been out since 2007?  And we know we have a group of people (you know who) who make it their life's work to pick a certain product or company, and then post in several big forums trying to make a big deal about how that product is -ist.  After a month or so, when it starts to die down, they pick another product.  Rinse and repeat.

And those products almost always are competitors to 4e.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;564172And hopefully the majority of gamers are reasonable to think for themselves like this. But what I would worry about if I were Paizo is the the conclusions from that thread spilling elsewhere to the point that many online just assume and repeat Golarion is racist based on it. I'd also worry about how it might impact my relationship with other companies. paizo may well be willing to take a hit on their reputation at rpgnet, but are their distributors and sellers? I don't know what other companies they work with but in my own case, while I can speak for Bedrock, we have other companies we partner with and stuff like this can impact those relationships.

Since the accusation of racism can be brought against just about any RPG out there, the folks with the pitchforks should be careful what they wish for.

Quote from: Benoist;564047It is, however, an attempt to gather support towards the idea of creating such political standards in the design and publication of role playing games, if not whatever ideas are deemed "okay" or "not okay" to play at your game table.

Note that I haven't read the RPGnet thread, and I'm not endorsing anything said there.  I do hate moderation there.  

Still, I'm not sure about the point.  Are you claiming that some RPGnetters really are actually gathering support for political action regarding RPGs?  Or are you saying that if anyone says that an RPG product is racist then they are "creating political standards"?  

I would disagree with the latter.  They might be wrong about Golarion, but some RPG products are racist, and people should say so rather than just letting it pass.  If they're wrong, I'd say argue that they're wrong rather than arguing that it's invalid to call anything racist.  

Quote from: Marleycat;564046Please, take your personal "white man guilt" somewhere else . The guy is Korean and knows racism deeper than you'll ever meet in your lifetime if you're lucky. I'm not even going to go into my personal experience.

Point is I can flat list pure racism against me but who cares? I rise above it and get the last laugh EVERY FUCKING DAY that passes.

@Jkim, you gotta stop using that awesome avatar because you're heavily tempting me to go back to Olivia.:)

Thanks.  (The avatar is from Kim Ji-woon's Leone-inspired film The Good, The Bad, and the Weird.)  I have no idea what other racism posters have encountered, but I think we all agree it's bad.  BTW, I definitely agree with the previous poster that Koreans can be racist.  The anti-Japanese is often political rather than racial - but there anti-black bias is common as well as anti-Semitism.

Quote from: S'mon;564163I'm not sure politics of RPG products affects sales much; I did avoid Deadlands as I didn't like the setting's political set up, esp the removal of slavery from the Confederacy side of the Civil War to make them more 'nice', and the general absence of sexism & racism in the pseudo-historical setting. But that's probably fairly unusual I think.

(Don't forget evil Lincoln in Deadlands!)  I don't think it's the norm, but I can think of other cases.  For example, there was Pundit's (and others') crusade against Blue Rose, which I think had a definite effect on sales.

Quote from: flyerfan1991;564180Since the accusation of racism can be brought against just about any RPG out there, the folks with the pitchforks should be careful what they wish for.

Why should they be careful? A thorough examination of racism in RPGs is something to be welcomed, not something to fear and if it leads to less unimaginative racist drek in the marketplace then all the better. The only mistake Ettin made was on focusing the thread on Golarion specifically, it seems unfair to single out the Varisians as being a negative Roma stereotype when WotC's Vistani are just the same in using the same old racist gypsy tropes.

Quote from: jhkim;564187(Don't forget evil Lincoln in Deadlands!)  I don't think it's the norm, but I can think of other cases.  For example, there was Pundit's (and others') crusade against Blue Rose, which I think had a definite effect on sales.

Blue Rose had a definite effect on sales of Blue Rose.

Quote from: danskmacabre;564175Seeing as it sounds like you actually work in the RPG industry as opposed to me not at all (It's just a hobby for me) I wonder if you have a point.
I only speak form my experience in my social circle and cannot (or can't be bothered) validate this view when considering the greater circle of the internet RPG community .
.

We are a very small game company and I can only speak from my own point of view here. So take what I say with a grain of salt. I have no idea what things are like at a place like Paizo and I am sure that many other small companies have different experiences and perspectives. I do know that for us, forums are an important driver of our web traffic and they seem to infuence our sales.

Quote from: Coblynau;564194Why should they be careful? A thorough examination of racism in RPGs is something to be welcomed, not something to fear and if it leads to less unimaginative racist drek in the marketplace then all the better. The only mistake Ettin made was on focusing the thread on Golarion specifically, it seems unfair to single out the Varisians as being a negative Roma stereotype when WotC's Vistani are just the same in using the same old racist gypsy tropes.

Oh?

How about Tieflings.  Perceived as evil, commonly associated with trade and banking, shunned by all 'right thinking folk'.  

If you want me to Godwin this thread, that'll do quite nicely, because there's a certain group right out of the Middle Ages that fits that sort of stereotype.

Quote from: flyerfan1991;564200Oh?

How about Tieflings.  Perceived as evil, commonly associated with trade and banking, shunned by all 'right thinking folk'.  

If you want me to Godwin this thread, that'll do quite nicely, because there's a certain group right out of the Middle Ages that fits that sort of stereotype.

See, this is a perfect example of "If you're looking to find something offensive, or associate with an offensive stereotype, you're going to find it" - especially in something as all-encompassing, creatively, as D&D.

How many monsters/races/etc. are there?  Hundreds?  Thousands?  Yeah, it's not going to be all that hard to find something that is barely, loosely analogous to a real person/place/situation/group/etc.

I'm quite sure this horseshit was old 20 years ago.

Quote from: flyerfan1991;564200Oh?

How about Tieflings.  Perceived as evil, commonly associated with trade and banking, shunned by all 'right thinking folk'.  

If you want me to Godwin this thread, that'll do quite nicely, because there's a certain group right out of the Middle Ages that fits that sort of stereotype.

That's a little bit more of a stretch; for a start I can't recall Tieflings as ever being described as being good at banking, or really having much in the way of other stereotypically Jewish traits. They're certainly not persecuted for their religion with most Tieflings choosing not to worships the gods going by their writeup. I'd say they're more like that Roma stereotype again, being transients who don't fit in among 'civilised' society, having their own rituals and customs and frequently having to turn to crime to survive.

Quote from: kythri;564203See, this is a perfect example of "If you're looking to find something offensive, or associate with an offensive stereotype, you're going to find it" - especially in something as all-encompassing, creatively, as D&D.

How many monsters/races/etc. are there?  Hundreds?  Thousands?  Yeah, it's not going to be all that hard to find something that is barely, loosely analogous to a real person/place/situation/group/etc.

I'm quite sure this horseshit was old 20 years ago.

That's exactly my point.  Holes can be poked in every RPG out there, and I doubt there's an exception.

Quote from: kythri;564203I'm quite sure this horseshit was old 20 years ago.

Oh God yes.  Only go back 30 years even, and it was the religious right saying how D&D was devil worship because it had spells and demons.  It absolutely astounds me, that after going through that period, we'd have gamers pick the pitchfork.

It's just a game.  I'm not going to be a devil worshiper by playing it any more than I'm going to join the KKK because a book left out Egypt as part of African culture*.


*I haven't actually read the book, but from what I'm reading re: the comments, that seems to be the big deal?

Quote from: Sacrosanct;564207Oh God yes.  Only go back 30 years even, and it was the religious right saying how D&D was devil worship because it had spells and demons.  It absolutely astounds me, that after going through that period, we'd have gamers pick the pitchfork.

It's just a game.  I'm not going to be a devil worshiper by playing it any more than I'm going to join the KKK because a book left out Egypt as part of African culture*.


*I haven't actually read the book, but from what I'm reading re: the comments, that seems to be the big deal?

Do I think that Tieflings are analogues for Jews?  Hell no.  Can similar arguments be made just like those found in the Golarion thread for it?  Yes.

Like I said, the folks with the pitchforks should be careful what they wish for.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;564199We are a very small game company and I can only speak from my own point of view here. So take what I say with a grain of salt. I have no idea what things are like at a place like Paizo and I am sure that many other small companies have different experiences and perspectives. I do know that for us, forums are an important driver of our web traffic and they seem to infuence our sales.

Is your main distribution channel through downloads and sites like rpgnow etc?
If you depend in those sorts of places and methods I can appreciate it might be more impacted by the views expressed on forums (for some people anyway).

For me for example with one of the bigger companies such as Paizo, I heard about Pathfinder by recommendation of friends who were playing around with the Beta.
I then waited until the full release came out and bought it in a Bricks and mortar store and didn't refer to any online opinion at all.

I also like Rolemaster and Runequest system and couldn't give a toss what people think of those systems (offline or online), although I DO like to discuss it online though.
Still, I found out about those system before the Internet even existed.

Quote from: danskmacabre;564210Is your main distribution channel through downloads and sites like rpgnow etc?
If you depend in those sorts of places and methods I can appreciate it might be more impacted by the views expressed on forums (for some people anyway).

We do both PDF and print. So we rely equally on downloads and print sales via distributors. But in terms of getting the word out about our products, the internet is our primary method of reaching customers. We do engage in other outreaches (brochures at game stores, demos, conventions), but definitely the internet is where much of the word of mouth begins for us. That said, it is much harder for me to assess things like the impact of people seeing our books on a shelf and talking to their friends. Because we are small, our shelf presence isn't going to match Paizo or WOTC. So maybe for them, just having the product on a physical shelf outweighs stuff like threads on rpg forums or banner ads. When you walk into a game store and see ten pathfinder books on display I am sure that has an impact.

My biggest concern with this stuff isn't direct book sales (cutomers walking in and buying or ordering books). I can can say, okay we might lose the people who posted on that thread at rpgnet. Rather I would be worried about two things: our long term reputation (if the conlcusions in the thread were simpy repeated elsewhere till they became the assumption) and how companies we have business relationships might react. It would only take one or two stores saying they refuse to carry our products (or put pressure on distributors not to carry them) for us to lose sales indirectly. This is where a very small group of people potentially could put a publisher like us out of business if they were set on it. If one or two distributors decided not to order our books anymore, that could be huge.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;564214We do both PDF and print...................

Yeah I appreciate what you're saying. I suppose that sort of negative attention could be scary for small businesses, especially if you've already seen sales impacted by views on forums etc..

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;564214My biggest concern with this stuff isn't direct book sales (cutomers walking in and buying or ordering books). I can can say, okay we might lose the people who posted on that thread at rpgnet. Rather I would be worried about two things: our long term reputation (if the conlcusions in the thread were simpy repeated elsewhere till they became the assumption) and how companies we have business relationships might react. It would only take one or two stores saying they refuse to carry our products (or put pressure on distributors not to carry them) for us to lose sales indirectly. This is where a very small group of people potentially could put a publisher like us out of business if they were set on it. If one or two distributors decided not to order our books anymore, that could be huge.

This is exactly my position as well.

This and the other thread on the big purple have actually made me want to pick a copy of the inner sea guide up along with any region books covering these so called "racist cultures" not because of the dumb as fuck claims some morons have made over there but more because unlike those people i actually want to find more information on these cultures before i make any judgement, im sure as heck not expecting to find anything i wouldnt find in any other setting book or even historical textbook but knowledge is its own reward they say(and i found a cheap bundle deal on pathfinder books).

Given the frequency some of the usual suspects over there make claims like this you'd expect real admins and mods to be aware of them and act to prevent these ridiculous claims from becoming such big deals, of course the admins and mods over there are part of the problem so...

Quote from: Broken-Serenity;564237Given the frequency some of the usual suspects over there make claims like this you'd expect real admins and mods to be aware of them and act to prevent these ridiculous claims from becoming such big deals, of course the admins and mods over there are part of the problem so...

i didn't read the whole thread, but it looked like the mods were pretty much siding with the OP. The one poster i saw who made some cogent points for the opposing side (if a bit aggressively at times) got thread banned and frankly nothing he said looked any worse than what anyone else was posting.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;564214My biggest concern with this stuff isn't direct book sales (cutomers walking in and buying or ordering books). I can can say, okay we might lose the people who posted on that thread at rpgnet. Rather I would be worried about two things: our long term reputation (if the conlcusions in the thread were simpy repeated elsewhere till they became the assumption) and how companies we have business relationships might react. It would only take one or two stores saying they refuse to carry our products (or put pressure on distributors not to carry them) for us to lose sales indirectly. This is where a very small group of people potentially could put a publisher like us out of business if they were set on it. If one or two distributors decided not to order our books anymore, that could be huge.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;564224This is exactly my position as well.

And mine.

Quote from: danskmacabre;564223Yeah I appreciate what you're saying. I suppose that sort of negative attention could be scary for small businesses, especially if you've already seen sales impacted by views on forums etc..

And like I said, I have made a concious decision to ignore rpgnet because i would rather have fun doing this than worry about how they might impact my business. But that does mean down the road a thread like this on one of our products could torpedo us. Personally don't think we do anything that would warrant such a thread but you never know.

Quote from: Broken-Serenity;564237Given the frequency some of the usual suspects over there make claims like this you'd expect real admins and mods to be aware of them and act to prevent these ridiculous claims from becoming such big deals, of course the admins and mods over there are part of the problem so...

They'll pick the wrong fight one of these days and someone is going to sue the shit out of rpgnet. I would immediately expect numerous unmaskings followed shortly by the mass exit of nonplayer characters from the board and the hobby. Libel, as Brendan is talking about, causing real and tangible financial harm has real and tangible repercussions. You can't mask it as "opinion" either. Well you can try, but judges are not usually idiots.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;564244And like I said, I have made a concious decision to ignore rpgnet because i would rather have fun doing this than worry about how they might impact my business. But that does mean down the road a thread like this on one of our products could torpedo us. Personally don't think we do anything that would warrant such a thread but you never know.

Probably a wise move to avoid rpg.net then, as a view that you might express might put someone's nose out and they might decide to mount a crusade against you I suppose, using whatever that can find as a pretence.

I'm SO glad RPGs are just a hobby for me. It seems like a lot of work for little financial reward. As purely a gamer and not being part of my job I can just enjoy it and don't have to deal it on a professional level.

Quote from: The Traveller;564245They'll pick the wrong fight one of these days and someone is going to sue the shit out of rpgnet. I would immediately expect numerous unmaskings followed shortly by the mass exit of nonplayer characters from the board and the hobby. Libel, as Brendan is talking about, causing real and tangible financial harm has real and tangible repercussions. You can't mask it as "opinion" either. Well you can try, but judges are not usually idiots.

I am no lawyer but I dont know that expressing the opinion that something is a racist stereotype is the same as a lie about the company (for example if someone accused Bedrock Games of colluding with a criminal organization to use an extreme example). I certainly wouldn't want to see posters get sued for voicing an opinion. I just dont want to see a small group have a disproportionate impact ont he hobby by encouraging companies to self censor or some of the more serious things I listed in my previous post.

Quote from: Coblynau;564194Why should they be careful? A thorough examination of racism in RPGs is something to be welcomed, not something to fear and if it leads to less unimaginative racist drek in the marketplace then all the better. The only mistake Ettin made was on focusing the thread on Golarion specifically, it seems unfair to single out the Varisians as being a negative Roma stereotype when WotC's Vistani are just the same in using the same old racist gypsy tropes.

Actually it is more of a mistake to claim racism about Golarion when there are games which are actually blatantly racist like Racial Holy War out there. It diminishes the term when you try and force it to fit something that is not. Better to use the term racist against that which actually is.

Quote from: flyerfan1991;564200Oh?

How about Tieflings.  Perceived as evil, commonly associated with trade and banking, shunned by all 'right thinking folk'.  

If you want me to Godwin this thread, that'll do quite nicely, because there's a certain group right out of the Middle Ages that fits that sort of stereotype.

Did they physically have horns and tails? Were they the actual bastard offspring of humans and demons/devils?

Be careful comparing a fantasy race and a real human culture.

EDIT: Already covered by Flyerfan. I'm late to the party.

Quote from: jeff37923;564250Did they physically have horns and tails? Were they the actual bastard offspring of humans and demons/devils?

Be careful comparing a fantasy race and a real human culture.

EDIT: Already covered by Flyerfan. I'm late to the party.

Nah, you're good.

I'd be worried about internet searches of my product.

To me, this is a smear of Paizo by not-fans who enjoy stirring the shit. However, I know this because I have seen these shitheads do this before and am aware of their modus operendi. To someone who does not know the posters involved, this claim of racism is legit and cause for concern and discussion. That false claim will remain and get picked up by search engines for quite a while and act as negative advertising.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;564248I am no lawyer but I dont know that expressing the opinion that something is a racist stereotype is the same as a lie about the company (for example if someone accused Bedrock Games of colluding with a criminal organization to use an extreme example). I certainly wouldn't want to see posters get sued for voicing an opinion.

It depends on the particular individuals involved and on the degree of harm done. That Ettin person for example has apparently christened himself Witchfinder General, it would be very easy to find a pattern of intentional damage by him and bury him under a mile and a half of lawyers, him and a handful of others. I'd probably go straight for rpgnet as well, that would wake a few people up. This:

Quotea small group have a disproportionate impact on the hobby by encouraging companies to self censor or some of the more serious things I listed in my previous post.

is not acceptable, under the guise of free speech or for any other reason. I forget was it ancient Rome or Greece where a similar brand of quim used to fluff up their own power by publicly decrying important figures, drumming up hysteria and getting the mob angry. Same exact thing here.

Quote from: The Traveller;564260It

is not acceptable, under the guise of free speech or for any other reason. I forget was it ancient Rome or Greece where a similar brand of quim used to fluff up their own power by publicly decrying important figures, drumming up hysteria and getting the mob angry. Same exact thing here.

unfortunately I don't see how you elimate the issue without limiting free speech. I value free speech so while it sucks that companies will cave to vocal groups from time to time, I would rather that happen than be affraid to speak on subjects because I might get fined, sued or arrested. Ultimately companies need to be braver in the face of small groups like this and people who disagree with these groups need to speak up. This is going to swing both ways if you go that direction. The rpgnet may take a few blows, but so would therpgsite. Because at the end of the day, companies could point to any criticism as having a negative impact on sales.

Some of you may recall a few months ago when a lady sued Honda in small claims court.  She did so because you don't need a lawyer (even though she was one), and it was a way to avoid the long drawn out process of a class action lawsuit.  She encouraged everyone else to file small claims rather than be part of the class action that was going around.

I know that as a small time publisher, it's really hard to quantify exactly how much lost income you would have due to false claims of slander, but I'm sure that it would fit within the small claims guidelines (under $10K in most states).

So I suppose that if you collected enough posts by an individual or individuals where the have accused your company of being racist without any proof, and contacted the owners of the site where these threads were located advising that you're starting a legal process against those users and need to get real names for that to happen (subpoena if you have to), I wonder what would happen?

Either they give you the info and you are able to file suit against them, or do you think that if this happens the owners of the sites would institute a policy of coming down hard on those types of accusations, essentially wiping out any traces (posts) of the false accusations?  That seems to stifle free speech, but at the very least you could still take the posters to small claims even if the owners of the site don't do anything, right?

The more I think about what I posted just above, the bigger a mess I think it would be.  It just doesn't feel like it would have any positive aspects because the line if what is racist and what isn't is not firm.  I don't know what would be accomplished other than creating a cesspool of ugh.

Quote from: jhkim;564182I would disagree with the latter.  They might be wrong about Golarion, but some RPG products are racist, and people should say so rather than just letting it pass.  If they're wrong, I'd say argue that they're wrong rather than arguing that it's invalid to call anything racist.  

Unless you're talking about RaHoWa, I would not go there. Sometimes real racists do make RPGs, as RaHoWa demonstrates, but when you start trying to dig up racism in mainstream products you are no better than an rpgnetter.

Quote from: jhkim;564187(Don't forget evil Lincoln in Deadlands!)  I don't think it's the norm, but I can think of other cases.  For example, there was Pundit's (and others') crusade against Blue Rose, which I think had a definite effect on sales.

Possibly, among the tiny number of people who had heard good things about the mechanics, were thinking of buying it on that basis but don't care for feminist fantasy fiction, they could have been deterred by the Pundit's hilarious rants against the Magic Deer. But Blue Rose's big problem was that the people who read the relevant fiction mostly do not play RPGs.

Evil Lincoln - yeah. Heck, I am married to a Southerner and have imbibed some of her anti-Yankee prejudice, but the whitewashing of the South sat really badly with me. Yes, the war was about States' Rights - States' Rights to have legal slavery! If you're going to do a 'League of the South' game, at least be honest and know what you're doing.

Quote from: jeff37923;564255while and act as negative advertising.

It already does..
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=paizo+racism&oq=paizo+racism&gs_l=igoogle.3...41.847.0.1241.6.6.0.0.0.0.207.635.3j2j1.6.0...0.0...1ac.NnyOAvLesxg

I did a search on "paizo racism" and it picked up that specific thread on rpg.net

6th search result down.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;564207*I haven't actually read the book, but from what I'm reading re: the comments, that seems to be the big deal?

Golarion has a big Egyptian-analogue nation, called Keb AIR. It's one of the most prominent bits of the Inner Sea World Guide. *sigh*

The awfulpurple goonsquad wants to fake outrage about Golarion, let them.  If they get to the point of organizing boycotts and crap, Paizo's big enough to not just knuckle under like Mongoose did, especially since the goonsquad is not their customerbase.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;564265Some of you may recall a few months ago when a lady sued Honda in small claims court.  She did so because you don't need a lawyer (even though she was one), and it was a way to avoid the long drawn out process of a class action lawsuit.  She encouraged everyone else to file small claims rather than be part of the class action that was going around.

I know that as a small time publisher, it's really hard to quantify exactly how much lost income you would have due to false claims of slander, but I'm sure that it would fit within the small claims guidelines (under $10K in most states).

So I suppose that if you collected enough posts by an individual or individuals where the have accused your company of being racist without any proof, and contacted the owners of the site where these threads were located advising that you're starting a legal process against those users and need to get real names for that to happen (subpoena if you have to), I wonder what would happen?

Either they give you the info and you are able to file suit against them, or do you think that if this happens the owners of the sites would institute a policy of coming down hard on those types of accusations, essentially wiping out any traces (posts) of the false accusations?  That seems to stifle free speech, but at the very least you could still take the posters to small claims even if the owners of the site don't do anything, right?

In the UK you can't bring a Libel action in small claims court; I expect the USA is the same. Plus the USA has actual free speech protection which makes Libel claims very hard to win.

Generic fantasy is generally "racist" all the time. For every boook that states all sentient creatures of X race have a penchant for being violent, greedy, prideful, etc you are basically boiling down a group of imaginary people in general terms. This is edged by by making them essentially another species (goblins, orcs, elves, etc) so you can get by with that without causing too many issues. The thing you can't do without getting noticed is do the same to humans. That's why humans are the everyman. They are the generalists. Because we, as humans, know that we humans vary wildly even within the same cultural group such that generalizing our behaviour would be insulting. This is why Golaria is racist because not only does it do that thing I just mentioned but it does so with stereotypical analogues of real world stereotypes. My favorite is the Mwangi which are obvious primitive African stereotype. You got your regular joe African who's culture never got past clay houses in the savannah. You got your assimilated Africans who are absorbed into whatever culture they happen to be around. You got your distant Africans who reject their old "primitive" culture in an attempt to be more modern. You got your slaver Africans who worship evil gods and enslave and trade their own kind. All of them have real world, stereotypical analogues with them.

Yes, it's racist. Obviously so. However, some people might wave it away saying that all the cultures are boiled down to stereotypes. I'd say yes, that's a necessity and something that's likely to happen when writing a generic fantasy setting.But then I'd have to ask why use that particular stereotype for the African people? Why not have them be like the Taldians or Cheliaxians? Why are the black people stuck with the african stereotype? Because its lazy writing and those kinds of associations are easy.

Is it a big deal? No. Probably not. Most people won't even think about it twice because most people already make that association. People stereotyping other people is something that happens everyday. Whether or not you do it by race, culture, sexuality, gender, whatever. Because the people who wrote upp Golaria went the lazy route and just copypasted various real world stereotypical cultures then they are bound to have a few people notice and call them out on it. From there people do the "Racism" dance. You get your deniers, the people who don't care, the people who think talking about it makes it more racist, the apologists, the people who are legitimately offended, etc etc. But its all a bunch of hoopla that isn't going to amount to anything really.

Quote from: S'mon;564290In the UK you can't bring a Libel action in small claims court; I expect the USA is the same. Plus the USA has actual free speech protection which makes Libel claims very hard to win.

The U.S. free speech protection is kind of limited.  The Constitution stipulates government abridgement of speech, and while case law has gone and protected people against big corporations, it doesn't protect against false claims and/or indefensible claims.  A standard tactic of big corporations is to sue someone in court, then let that person's money for lawyers dry up and they have to settle or quit the case.

Quote from: S'mon;564290In the UK you can't bring a Libel action in small claims court; I expect the USA is the same. Plus the USA has actual free speech protection which makes Libel claims very hard to win.

Don't we here in the USA have some laws against defamation that don't necessarily invoke libel or slander?

Further, while I typically hate the law being wielded as a sledgehammer in such a matter, one doesn't necessarily need to win in court, as such, but a suit itself is quite often enough to effect change - either enough to scare the defendant into backing down, or those "out of court settlements" we hear about all the time.

I'd say there's more than enough "evidence" in the various threads to hammer at least a couple of folks to the wall, a'la a pattern of behavior that seems intended to do nothing but defame a particular entity or product.

Of course, the requisite "I'm not a lawyer" pertains here.

Quote from: MGuy;564292Generic fantasy is generally "racist" all the time. For every boook that states all sentient creatures of X race have a penchant for being violent, greedy, prideful, etc you are basically boiling down a group of imaginary people in general terms. This is edged by by making them essentially another species (goblins, orcs, elves, etc) so you can get by with that without causing too many issues. The thing you can't do without getting noticed is do the same to humans. That's why humans are the everyman. They are the generalists. Because we, as humans, know that we humans vary wildly even within the same cultural group such that generalizing our behaviour would be insulting. This is why Golaria is racist because not only does it do that thing I just mentioned but it does so with stereotypical analogues of real world stereotypes. My favorite is the Mwangi which are obvious primitive African stereotype. You got your regular joe African who's culture never got past clay houses in the savannah. You got your assimilated Africans who are absorbed into whatever culture they happen to be around. You got your distant Africans who reject their old "primitive" culture in an attempt to be more modern. You got your slaver Africans who worship evil gods and enslave and trade their own kind. All of them have real world, stereotypical analogues with them.

Yes, it's racist. Obviously so. However, some people might wave it away saying that all the cultures are boiled down to stereotypes. I'd say yes, that's a necessity and something that's likely to happen when writing a generic fantasy setting.But then I'd have to ask why use that particular stereotype for the African people? Why not have them be like the Taldians or Cheliaxians? Why are the black people stuck with the african stereotype? Because its lazy writing and those kinds of associations are easy.

Is it a big deal? No. Probably not. Most people won't even think about it twice because most people already make that association. People stereotyping other people is something that happens everyday. Whether or not you do it by race, culture, sexuality, gender, whatever. Because the people who wrote upp Golaria went the lazy route and just copypasted various real world stereotypical cultures then they are bound to have a few people notice and call them out on it. From there people do the "Racism" dance. You get your deniers, the people who don't care, the people who think talking about it makes it more racist, the apologists, the people who are legitimately offended, etc etc. But its all a bunch of hoopla that isn't going to amount to anything really.

Thank you for proving my point about using the most simplistic and inclusive definition of the term 'racist'.

Quote from: danskmacabre;564281It already does..
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=paizo+racism&oq=paizo+racism&gs_l=igoogle.3...41.847.0.1241.6.6.0.0.0.0.207.635.3j2j1.6.0...0.0...1ac.NnyOAvLesxg

I did a search on "paizo racism" and it picked up that specific thread on rpg.net

6th search result down.

I hate it when I'm right like this.

Quote from: flyerfan1991;564295A standard tactic of big corporations is to sue someone in court, then let that person's money for lawyers dry up and they have to settle or quit the case.

It depends on what state you are in though because generally speaking its actually grounds for dismissal before the event ever actually happens.  And on top of that most people generally tend to get pissed off at SLAPP lawsuits.

Quote from: S'mon;564283Golarion has a big Egyptian-analogue nation, called Keb AIR. It's one of the most prominent bits of the Inner Sea World Guide. *sigh*

An Egyptian analog would probably span half the continent of Golarion.

Quote from: danskmacabre;564281It already does..
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=paizo+racism&oq=paizo+racism&gs_l=igoogle.3...41.847.0.1241.6.6.0.0.0.0.207.635.3j2j1.6.0...0.0...1ac.NnyOAvLesxg

I did a search on "paizo racism" and it picked up that specific thread on rpg.net

6th search result down.

Why would a person be searching for "paizo racism" if they're looking for information about Paizo the company, or Pathfinder the RPG, or Golarion the game world?

I googled just "Golarion" and the thread did appear, on the 7th page of results.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;564263unfortunately I don't see how you elimate the issue without limiting free speech.

There is no country on earth where you are free to libel or slander people, no matter how free the speech is, and for a very good reason. Its mad to object to cracking down on libel because it limits free speech.

Quote from: The Traveller;564324There is no country on earth where you are free to libel or slander people, no matter how free the speech is, and for a very good reason. Its mad to object to cracking down on libel because it limits free speech.

I am not objecting to cracking down on libel, I am objecting to people filing libel suits against posters on forums for expressing an opinion. If a poster states a blatant lie, that is one thing. But these are subjective opinions people are expressing. If someone on rpgnet wants to start a thread aobut our game Crime Network advancing racial stereotypes about italian americans, I would think its off the mark but I would never contemplate suing them. That is just going to have a chilling effect on conversations about games elsewhere. Again I am no lawyer and libel law is something I know very little about but it seems to me if people are getting sued for expressing opinions that isn't a good thing for free speech.

Quote from: CRKrueger;564285The awfulpurple goonsquad wants to fake outrage about Golarion, let them.  If they get to the point of organizing boycotts and crap, Paizo's big enough to not just knuckle under like Mongoose did, especially since the goonsquad is not their customerbase.

Did Mongoose "knuckle under" though?  Last time I looked they're still around.

Also, yes, I hope Paizo is laughing at the goons and the Big Throbbing Purple crowd.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;564331Also, yes, I hope Paizo is laughing at the goons and the Big Throbbing Purple crowd.

I am really sorry I have to tell you this, delver, but calling RPGNet "the Big Throbbing Purple" is offensive to the penis community.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;564326Again I am no lawyer and libel law is something I know very little about but it seems to me if people are getting sued for expressing opinions that isn't a good thing for free speech.

This isn't libel.  This isn't even close to being libel.   The fact of the matter is that you'd effectively have to prove that there was bad faith involved or reckless disregard for the truth.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;564331Also, yes, I hope Paizo is laughing at the goons and the Big Throbbing Purple crowd.

Last time I checked a Paizo was having a mental breakdown over on RPG.net

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;564326I am not objecting to cracking down on libel, I am objecting to people filing libel suits against posters on forums for expressing an opinion.

Do you really believe that some of these "opinions", in particular Ettin's, aren't expressed with malice aforethought? Half the people over on rpgnet are too terrorised to speak out, and most of the other half just don't bother getting involved. I'd have no difficulty whatsoever twisting the balls off the few decriers, in the classical sense, before a judge.

Quote from: Melan;564333I am really sorry I have to tell you this, delver, but calling RPGNet "the Big Throbbing Purple" is offensive to the penis community.

"p-nis" is a trigger word you PATRIARCHAL HATEMONGER!

Quote from: technoextreme;564334Last time I checked a Paizo was having a mental breakdown over on RPG.net

aww.  They shouldn't.  It's just SA goons trolling for lulz/leftojustice. :(

Quote from: The Traveller;564336Do you really believe that some of these "opinions", in particular Ettin's, aren't expressed with malice aforethought? Half the people over on rpgnet are too terrorised to speak out, and most of the other half just don't bother getting involved. I'd have no difficulty whatsoever twisting the balls off the few decriers, in the classical sense, before a judge.

 I agree that they are boneheaded opinions. Don't agree that this is the solution. People should be able to express opinions about games without being sued. I would hate to see the game community embroiled in back and forth libel suits. Much better for those who disagree with posters like ettin to do so with intelligent arguments.

Quote from: MGuy;564292Generic fantasy is generally "racist" all the time. For every boook that states all sentient creatures of X race have a penchant for being violent, greedy, prideful, etc you are basically boiling down a group of imaginary people in general terms. This is edged by by making them essentially another species (goblins, orcs, elves, etc) so you can get by with that without causing too many issues. The thing you can't do without getting noticed is do the same to humans. That's why humans are the everyman. They are the generalists. Because we, as humans, know that we humans vary wildly even within the same cultural group such that generalizing our behaviour would be insulting. This is why Golaria is racist because not only does it do that thing I just mentioned but it does so with stereotypical analogues of real world stereotypes. My favorite is the Mwangi which are obvious primitive African stereotype. You got your regular joe African who's culture never got past clay houses in the savannah. You got your assimilated Africans who are absorbed into whatever culture they happen to be around. You got your distant Africans who reject their old "primitive" culture in an attempt to be more modern. You got your slaver Africans who worship evil gods and enslave and trade their own kind. All of them have real world, stereotypical analogues with them.

Yes, it's racist. Obviously so. However, some people might wave it away saying that all the cultures are boiled down to stereotypes. I'd say yes, that's a necessity and something that's likely to happen when writing a generic fantasy setting.But then I'd have to ask why use that particular stereotype for the African people? Why not have them be like the Taldians or Cheliaxians? Why are the black people stuck with the african stereotype? Because its lazy writing and those kinds of associations are easy.

Is it a big deal? No. Probably not. Most people won't even think about it twice because most people already make that association. People stereotyping other people is something that happens everyday. Whether or not you do it by race, culture, sexuality, gender, whatever. Because the people who wrote upp Golaria went the lazy route and just copypasted various real world stereotypical cultures then they are bound to have a few people notice and call them out on it. From there people do the "Racism" dance. You get your deniers, the people who don't care, the people who think talking about it makes it more racist, the apologists, the people who are legitimately offended, etc etc. But its all a bunch of hoopla that isn't going to amount to anything really.

Sorry I don't see it? Why is using parts of africas rich history as basis for your fantasy cultures racist? It seems to me that Golarion have taken parts of the history from that part of the world and built upon that to try to make something interesting. Every country / culture have their differences. Its not like all so called vikings were marauders out to rape and pillage poor irish priests and monks where they? No they had farmers and fishermen and woodsmen and all kinds of variation. Just as the people in africa had their bushmen and traders and so on. Why go away from showing that diversity when it can bring much more depth to a setting. But again as so many others have stated in this thread if you want to find something wrong you can.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;564342aww.  They shouldn't.  It's just SA goons trolling for lulz/leftojustice. :(

You want to know what the sad fact is.  Its not trolling.  In your crazy delusional conspiratorial world its trolling but the reality is that it isn't.

Quote from: technoextreme;564348You want to know what the sad fact is.  Its not trolling.  In your crazy delusional conspiratorial world its trolling but the reality is that it isn't.

Ha yeah, OK, keep chasing that dream.

Quote from: Melan;564333I am really sorry I have to tell you this, delver, but calling RPGNet "the Big Throbbing Purple" is offensive to the penis community.

flaccidpurple is closer to the mark

Quote from: thedungeondelver;564350Ha yeah, OK, keep chasing that dream.

Uhh.... I'm pretty sure I've actually called it racist quite a few times myself there.  In fact I've actually said the same thing in regards to Wizards of the Coast.

Quote from: jeff37923;564314Thank you for proving my point about using the most simplistic and inclusive definition of the term 'racist'.

Not to mention the most simplistic and inclusive definition of the term "stereotyping".  

Creating a fantasy culture that mimics a real world culture isn't stereotyping or racist if it that culture actually existed.  Many cultures embraced murder, sacrifice, cannibalism, rape, murder, all kinds of atrocities.  Accurately placing one of those cultures into a fantasy game doesn't make it racist because you find it uncomfortable.

If you're claiming the Golarian cultures white, black, red, brown, yellow, green or purple aren't representative of an actual culture, then prove it and show your work.

If the Tea Ceremony culture was black and the Tribal Slaver culture was yellow would that make everything ok?  I suspect so, which means the whole thing is horseshit.

But you have to wonder when the thread starter himself do not participate more than 3-4 posts after the op and then mostly to utter his amazement over the length of the thread and then go on about his threats to his person...

I would have thought that someone who starts a thread should be more active and invested in it instead of letting it run wild and just observe the outcome. For me that screams hidden agenda and even more so when it happens ever so often.

Quote from: nitril;564357But you have to wonder when the thread starter himself do not participate more than 3-4 posts after the op and then mostly to utter his amazement over the length of the thread and then go on about his threats to his person...

It's a Classic trolling tactic.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;564346I would hate to see the game community embroiled in back and forth libel suits.

A hell of a lot more forth than back, I reckon. Its not possible to present intelligent and well reasoned arguments on rpgnet, since the mods are part of the terrorised co-opted.

Quote from: nitril;564357But you have to wonder when the thread starter himself do not participate more than 3-4 posts after the op and then mostly to utter his amazement over the length of the thread and then go on about his threats to his person...

I would have thought that someone who starts a thread should be more active and invested in it instead of letting it run wild and just observe the outcome. For me that screams hidden agenda and even more so when it happens ever so often.

Bingo.

Quote from: Benoist;564358It's a Classic trolling tactic.

True! Fucking idiotic thing to do!

Quote from: nitril;564357But you have to wonder when the thread starter himself do not participate more than 3-4 posts after the op and then mostly to utter his amazement over the length of the thread and then go on about his threats to his person...

Well probably because he has a life and with the way that thread insanely ballooned it really isn't that entirely unexpected.

QuoteA hell of a lot more forth than back, I reckon.

You do realize that depending on the state you can successfully counter-sue for damages because the lawsuit is nothing more than an attempt at censorship right???

Quote from: The Traveller;564361A hell of a lot more forth than back, I reckon. Its not possible to present intelligent and well reasoned arguments on rpgnet, since the mods are part of the terrorised co-opted.


Bingo.

I agree. That site looks pretty difficult for open discussion. But we are free to express our opinions here and in other venues. I still would not support libel suits.

Quote from: technoextreme;564364Well probably because he has a life.
?

Making other people miserable and starting up shitstorms?

Nuanced, sophisticated, and original RPG settings based on sound anthropology have been tried. Harn, Talislanta, and Tekumel come to mind.

They've all been commercial failures, because most RPG players don't want to game in those sorts of worlds. They're regarded as either too mundane, too narrow, or too weird.

Golarian is a kitchen sink setting. If it hews close to stereotypes, that's because Paizo wants to make broadly popular products. If Golarion was as realistic as Harn, it would have real trouble hosting a variety of adventures. If it were as original as Talislanta, it would alienate many customers. If it were as strange as Tekumel, it wouldn't be commercially viable at all.

Quote from: technoextreme;564364You do realize that depending on the state you can successfully counter-sue for damages because the lawsuit is nothing more than an attempt at censorship right???

Well well, who do we have here?

There is no state where you can counter sue for censorship because censorship is only something that can be done by a duly appointed public censor's office.

Interestingly, there is also no state where you cannot sue for damaging and malicious rumour mongering (aka libel).

If I were you I'd give that particular fact a good hard think before you run into someone without Brendan's peculiar ethical mores.

Quote from: jhkimThey might be wrong about Golarion, but some RPG products are racist, and people should say so rather than just letting it pass. If they're wrong, I'd say argue that they're wrong rather than arguing that it's invalid to call anything racist.

Quote from: S'mon;564276Unless you're talking about RaHoWa, I would not go there. Sometimes real racists do make RPGs, as RaHoWa demonstrates, but when you start trying to dig up racism in mainstream products you are no better than an rpgnetter.

Sure, RaHoWa and white supremacists are bad, but I think less virulent racism is also important.  

For example, a company recruiter might be a little quicker to put a resume with the name "Lakisha" in the rejection bin than one with the name "Emily".  Those names are typical of a study published in 2009 by the National Bureau of Economic Research, which found that the exact same resumes with white-sounding names had a 50% higher callback rate than if they had distinctively African-American names - across a broad range of companies.  

This isn't virulent racism anything like RaHoWa.  The recruiter might not even realize she is doing it, but that bias is really damn important to Lakisha's life.  Things that contribute to these biases are at least worth discussing.

Quote from: nitril;564367Making other people miserable and starting up shitstorms?

Honestly that is the fault of the idiots who get miserable over such questions.  

QuoteGolarian is a kitchen sink setting. If it hews close to stereotypes, that's because Paizo wants to make broadly popular products. If Golarion was as realistic as Harn, or as strange as Talislanta, it would have real trouble hosting a variety of adventures.

I said this earlier on in the thread but you can have a kitchen sink setting without invoking stereotypes.  There is a huge difference in quality between Eberron and Golarion which are both kitchen sink settings.

Quote from: The Traveller;564370Well well, who do we have here?

There is no state where you can counter sue for censorship because censorship is only something that can be done by a duly appointed public censor's office.

Interestingly, there is also no state where you cannot sue for damaging and malicious rumour mongering (aka libel).

If I were you I'd give that particular fact a good hard think before you run into someone without Brendan's peculiar ethical mores.

Yes it is.  You're describing a form of censorship which is called the SLAPP lawsuit. Its actually a type of lawsuit meant to censor people through legal strongarm tactics that really have no merit. So much so that its actually on the laws in 28 out of the 50 states in the United States and there is a federal law which also prevents that type of censorship.

Quote from: technoextreme;564372Yes it is.  Your moronically describing a form of censorship.  So much so that its actually on the laws in 28 out of the 50 states in the United States and there is a federal law which also prevents that type of censorship.

Hahaha! Ahhh jeez I haven't laughed that hard in years, kudos. You think you can say what you like because CENSORSHIP? Oh baby are you going to get fucked by the lawyers.

Edit: oho, editing now are we. SLAPP legislation has no meaning when libel can be proven with malice aforethought. I believe this can be shown in the case of Ettin and a couple of others.

Quote from: technoextreme;564364Well probably because he has a life

Given the particular target he chose to pin his hopes for a crusade on, I seriously doubt it.

Quote from: technoextreme;564372Honestly that is the fault of the idiots who get miserable over such questions. [\QUOTE]

You do have a point there, but don't you think he gets a kick out of it?

Well they closed the thead over there and from the way mengstu was talking it seems that at least a few of the mods and admins have grown tired of the shitstorm it caused(basically hinted that a sequal thread shouldnt be started unless more people want banning), so i guess ettin got his amusement and can now go gloat about how many people he suckered into getting banned with his latest thread whilst looking for his next target.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;564342aww.  They shouldn't.  It's just SA goons trolling for lulz/leftojustice. :(

Checked your PMs lately?

Quote from: jhkim;564371This isn't virulent racism anything like RaHoWa.  The recruiter might not even realize she is doing it, but that bias is really damn important to Lakisha's life.  Things that contribute to these biases are at least worth discussing.

It's true, things that do contribute to these biases are worth discussing.  However, if you hold a picture in your mind of the perfect corporate employee and then compare that with the image that Emily, Mariko and Latisha bring to mind, those are biases sure, and unfair biases, but are they completely irrational biases?  People don't generate biases in a vacuum, but of course that's an infinitely larger off-topic conversation.  That same recruiter is also likely to place Emily above Buffy, Tori, or Christine spelled "Krissteen" and that's got nothing to do with race, even though that person is making assumptions about the other person's ability, lifestyle, and culture based solely on name.

I think however, that claiming "lazy" or broad-based world-building using easily understood historical analogues and tropes is evidence of casual, low-level yet systemic racism is a bit of a stretch and requires a little more rigorous examination.

Unless you can make a case that the caucasian cultural analogues in Golarion are less lazy, more historically accurate, or less stereotypical then the non-caucasian ones, then there is no weight to the argument.  But I'm one of those knuckle-dragging barbarians that think that having different standards of racism based on race is itself racism, so what do I know.:D

Quote from: Marleycat;564046Please, take your personal "white man guilt" somewhere else . The guy is Korean and knows racism deeper than you'll ever meet in your lifetime if you're lucky. I'm not even going to go into my personal experience.

Point is I can flat list pure racism against me but who cares? I rise above it and get the last laugh EVERY FUCKING DAY that passes.

@Jkim, you gotta stop using that awesome avatar because you're heavily tempting me to go back to Olivia.:)

I think the phrase you are looking for is:

Check your privilege!

Quote from: jhkim;564371For example, a company recruiter might be a little quicker to put a resume with the name "Lakisha" in the rejection bin than one with the name "Emily".  Those names are typical of a study published in 2009 by the National Bureau of Economic Research, which found that the exact same resumes with white-sounding names had a 50% higher callback rate than if they had distinctively African-American names - across a broad range of companies.  

This would still be true if you normalised for race - if eg there was a photo of the same black woman with each application - because the name indicates more than just race, it indicates social class origin too.

Quote from: S'mon;564388This would still be true if you normalised for race - if eg there was a photo of the same black woman with each application - because the name indicates more than just race, it indicates social class origin too.

Also, if you are talking about corporations, HR might also kick back a white girl named Siobhan.  Mass-market HR is about the norm.  Certain places and roles need the free-thinkers, the creative types, the "uniques", others desire the person who is going to fit in as one of the crowd.  Again, that's another conversation having little to do with race.

Quote from: nitril;564379You do have a point there, but don't you think he gets a kick out of it?

No because it just gets really painful to actually watch it happen on a regular basis.

It's painful to watch a deliberate shitstorm you create become a deliberate shitstorm?

SA's just finding out how much fun purple can be as a mindless tool.

Quote from: CRKrueger;564393SA's just finding out how much fun purple can be as a mindless tool.

That's the whole purpose of the grognards.txt thread in SA though, right?

I mean, the majority of posts there are pulled from other forums that they laugh at, so starting a thread on a major forum to start a shitstorm is exactly what they want because it gives them more quotes to post on SA.

So yeah, it seems like threads like that are totally created because they get their kicks out of it.  You'd think someone at TBP on the admin staff is aware of SA and can put 2 and 2 together.

Quote from: jhkim;564371Sure, RaHoWa and white supremacists are bad, but I think less virulent racism is also important.  

For example, a company recruiter might be a little quicker to put a resume with the name "Lakisha" in the rejection bin than one with the name "Emily".  Those names are typical of a study published in 2009 by the National Bureau of Economic Research, which found that the exact same resumes with white-sounding names had a 50% higher callback rate than if they had distinctively African-American names - across a broad range of companies.  

This isn't virulent racism anything like RaHoWa.  The recruiter might not even realize she is doing it, but that bias is really damn important to Lakisha's life.  Things that contribute to these biases are at least worth discussing.

I agree work place discrimination based on race (or names indicating race or social class) are bad. I tend to be left leaning on most of these issues. So I am on board if people want to complain and talk about race and HR decisions. But that is very different from a crtiques of a kitchen sink setting with some cultural analogs in it. There is a certain point where it even becomes counter productive to look for these issues. I think it just reaches the point where people are not allowed to explore anything except races and cultures that they belong without being subject to accusations of racism.

Quote from: S'mon;564283Golarion has a big Egyptian-analogue nation, called Keb AIR. It's one of the most prominent bits of the Inner Sea World Guide. *sigh*

Please point out this "Keb Air" on this map (http://www.mapsofgolarion.com/) or this wikia (http://pathfinder.wikia.com/wiki/Golarion). The Egyptian-analogue is called Osirion (http://pathfinder.wikia.com/wiki/Osirion). Maybe you meant Geb (http://pathfinder.wikia.com/wiki/Geb)?
BTW, I have both the (old) Campaign Setting book and the (newer) Inner Sea World Guide within reach.
Thanks.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;564394That's the whole purpose of the grognards.txt thread in SA though, right?

I mean, the majority of posts there are pulled from other forums that they laugh at, so starting a thread on a major forum to start a shitstorm is exactly what they want because it gives them more quotes to post on SA.

Yeah, this board is much more generous: Pundit started a thread himself full of stuff for the goons to quote. Ettin didn't have to come over here and do it himself.

Yeah, that was probably his intent. Ettin annoys the shit out of me, and is why I quit rpgNET. If you really want to get mad check out his blog some time.

On topic, though, racism is an issue that I think RPGs could tackle, but it would be best if it wasn't with analagous cultures. That will just make it harder to do sanely and without getting into arguments over real world affairs.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;564394That's the whole purpose of the grognards.txt thread in SA though, right?

I mean, the majority of posts there are pulled from other forums that they laugh at, so starting a thread on a major forum to start a shitstorm is exactly what they want because it gives them more quotes to post on SA.

So yeah, it seems like threads like that are totally created because they get their kicks out of it.  You'd think someone at TBP on the admin staff is aware of SA and can put 2 and 2 together.

If someone at purple was smart enough, they wouldn't be purple.  Also since SA shares the same political agendas as Tangency means TRO is a just a chewtoy for the goons at this point.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;564394That's the whole purpose of the grognards.txt thread in SA though, right?

I mean, the majority of posts there are pulled from other forums that they laugh at, so starting a thread on a major forum to start a shitstorm is exactly what they want because it gives them more quotes to post on SA.

So yeah, it seems like threads like that are totally created because they get their kicks out of it.  You'd think someone at TBP on the admin staff is aware of SA and can put 2 and 2 together.

Ettin isn't a good person. He's actually a 4channer, and is basically just trolling both SA and RPGnet. There's a 4chan related IRC called suptg that plans this shit. I was, sadly, a part of it, but then they started turning it into some weird social justice thing instead of just doing it for fun.

Quote from: Stackmaster J;564467Ettin isn't a good person. He's actually a 4channer, and is basically just trolling both SA and RPGnet. There's a 4chan related IRC called suptg that plans this shit. I was, sadly, a part of it, but then they started turning it into some weird social justice thing instead of just doing it for fun.

Links?

PS - Welcome to the RPG Site, dude.

Sent them in a PM. Thanks! From what I've seen conversation will be a lot easier here without the fear of being banned. I didn't even post much because of that fear.

Quote from: Stackmaster J;564472Sent them in a PM. Thanks! From what I've seen conversation will be a lot easier here without the fear of being banned. I didn't even post much because of that fear.

Call me a stupid fucker.  Go ahead.

See if you're banned.  



:)

   

Quote from: TomatoMalone;564442Yeah, this board is much more generous: Pundit started a thread himself full of stuff for the goons to quote. Ettin didn't have to come over here and do it himself.

God dam it.  I'm not Ettin.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;564394That's the whole purpose of the grognards.txt thread in SA though, right?

I mean, the majority of posts there are pulled from other forums that they laugh at, so starting a thread on a major forum to start a shitstorm is exactly what they want because it gives them more quotes to post on SA.

So yeah, it seems like threads like that are totally created because they get their kicks out of it.  You'd think someone at TBP on the admin staff is aware of SA and can put 2 and 2 together.

Except there is more than thread in that forum and quite honestly I've had the same discussion in other threads without people melting down into an gibbering mess.

Quote from: Stackmaster J;564472Sent them in a PM. Thanks! From what I've seen conversation will be a lot easier here without the fear of being banned. I didn't even post much because of that fear.

You don't have to fear being banned from this forum for calling other people braindead cunts.

Also, the link you sent me via PM made my firewall cry, so I didn't even connect to that chatroom you linked to.

Quote from: Benoist;564469PS - Welcome to the RPG Site, dude.

Likewise.   And nice avatar.  I have some serious nostalgia for that movie.

Quote from: technoextreme;564334The fact of the matter is that you'd effectively have to prove that there was bad faith involved or reckless disregard for the truth.

It's already been established that we are talking about RPGnet.

Quote from: jhkim;564016On the one hand, nothing is going to please everyone.  You're certainly bound to get complaints from someone.  However, that doesn't mean that everything is a wash and that no fiction or RPG or movie is really racist.

I'm not claiming that, though I do think that casually tossing around "racism" charges diminishes the ability to raise more legitimate racism concerns.  What I was pointing out is that even if someone were to make a best effort to avoid being called a racist, there is really no approach they could choose that would fully inoculate them from being called a racist, anyway.

Quote from: jhkim;564016I think there is a huge difference between:

1a) Using analogs of real-world cultures that embrace the stereotypes used by old, racist stories.  

1b) Using analogs of real-world cultures where you deliberately diverge from false old stereotypes and use stereotypes different than these for contrast.

While I think there is a difference, I think the latter can wind up being just problematic as the former.  Attributing cannibalism (to use part of your example) to a culture that did not actually practice cannibalism could easily be interpreted as a libelous slander.  Sure, it may clash with both the "noble savage" and the "ignorant primitive" stereotypes but it saddles them with "bloodthirsty monster" who practices something which is an almost universal taboo.  There is a reason why we see white businessmen and white supremacists, again and again, as the villains in action movies these days, because the movie studios face the same problem when portraying villains and it's boxed them into a corner with only a few valid choices.

Quote from: jhkim;564016I'm sure someone can complain about this, but this use of stereotype isn't in the same class as falling into false old stereotypes like the "noble savage in touch with the land" or "manipulative, lying, thieving gypsies."

Is it really better to see an ethnicity that you think has been falsely maligned as cannibals rather than noble savages?  

What's the actual problem?  That a stereotype used echoes a real world stereotype used for malicious purposes?  That the stereotype is false?  That the stereotype is negative?  That it's a stereotype at all?  Depending on who you talk to, any, all, or none of those things might be a problem.

Quote from: Stackmaster J;564467Ettin isn't a good person. He's actually a 4channer, and is basically just trolling both SA and RPGnet. There's a 4chan related IRC called suptg that plans this shit. I was, sadly, a part of it, but then they started turning it into some weird social justice thing instead of just doing it for fun.

I can't disagree about Getting. He comes off as false and very two faced to me.

Quote from: Stackmaster J;564467Ettin isn't a good person. He's actually a 4channer, and is basically just trolling both SA and RPGnet. There's a 4chan related IRC called suptg that plans this shit. I was, sadly, a part of it, but then they started turning it into some weird social justice thing instead of just doing it for fun.

I can't disagree about Ettin. He comes off as false and very two faced to me.

Quote from: Bastetson;564441Please point out this "Keb Air" on this map (http://www.mapsofgolarion.com/) or this wikia (http://pathfinder.wikia.com/wiki/Golarion).

I believe in this case AIR means "as I recall."

Quote from: SneakyPete;563720I've read both the Inner Sea guides, and never once have any members of the five different Mwangi races been described at "spear chuckers in grass skirts." One of the most powerful and technologically advanced of the ancient empires, Shory, was Mwangi. One of the most powerful mages of all time was a Mwangi named Old-Mage Jatembe, and he's credited as helping save civilization from total destruction after the Earthfall. One of the oldest and most prestigious mage schools, Magaambya, is in the Expanse. The city of Osibu is a paradise on earth that is one of the few bastions of happiness in the entirety of Golarion. Call me funny but I'm just not seeing it here.

What the fuck is this "informed answer" bullshit? This has no place on the internet! This is the domain of knee-jerk hyper-reactionary freakouts and finger-pointing! Get it right!

;)

-=Grim=-

Quote from: jhkimI think there is a huge difference between:

1a) Using analogs of real-world cultures that embrace the stereotypes used by old, racist stories.

1b) Using analogs of real-world cultures where you deliberately diverge from false old stereotypes and use stereotypes different than these for contrast.

Quote from: John Morrow;564489While I think there is a difference, I think the latter can wind up being just problematic as the former.  Attributing cannibalism (to use part of your example) to a culture that did not actually practice cannibalism could easily be interpreted as a libelous slander.  Sure, it may clash with both the "noble savage" and the "ignorant primitive" stereotypes but it saddles them with "bloodthirsty monster" who practices something which is an almost universal taboo.

Quote from: John Morrow;564489What's the actual problem?  That a stereotype used echoes a real world stereotype used for malicious purposes?  That the stereotype is false?  That the stereotype is negative?  That it's a stereotype at all?  Depending on who you talk to, any, all, or none of those things might be a problem.

This is dismissal based on supposed controversy, which I don't accept.  You're implying that because some people somewhere make different claims, that therefore there is nothing to the problem of racist stereotypes.  

That's bullshit, in my opinion.  Challenging preconceptions - especially false preconceptions - is flat-out good, and better than adopting old stereotypes from times of entrenched racism.  

For example, you have apparently assumed that the Iroquois did not practice cannibalism.  That's your preconception, and based on that you suggested that it was libel for me to say so.  In fact, the mass of historical evidence is that they did in fact practice cannibalism.  There are many reliable first-hand accounts.  Even the name "Mohawk" comes from the Narraganset word for man-eater.  While it is an ugly trait, I consider it good to include it and add to people's knowledge.  The general result is not tossing out everything you knew about the Iroquois and adopting a new "monster" stereotype.  It makes you think and question what you assume to incorporate the new information.  

The problem with old historical race stereotypes is that they become ingrained and expected, especially if people take to them as a harmless shortcut to make a movie, book, or RPG product more "accessible".

Quote from: technoextreme;564477God dam it.  I'm not Ettin.

What the hell? I didn't suggest that you were.

What I meant was: if Ettin's whole goal with the Golarion thread was to start a quote mill for the grogs.txt, then he didn't do nearly as good a job as Pundit did starting the thread here.

Quote from: jhkim;564526This is dismissal based on supposed controversy, which I don't accept.  You're implying that because some people somewhere make different claims, that therefore there is nothing to the problem of racist stereotypes.

What, exactly, is the problem, then?  

My point is that I see several different answers to that question whenever these issues are discussed, not only in role-playing games but in other media and even in non-fiction.  Even when the problem is that the stereotype is false, there is often an argument to be made that the stereotype has basis in fact.  I'm not denying there is a problem.  I'm saying that the boundaries and root of the problem are not clear or consistent.  

Quote from: jhkim;564526That's bullshit, in my opinion.  Challenging preconceptions - especially false preconceptions - is flat-out good, and better than adopting old stereotypes from times of entrenched racism.

While I agree that challenging false racist preconceptions is good, I don't think challenging legitimate or harmless preconceptions is necessarily a desirable thing for a role-playing game setting, particularly one aimed at a large general audience.  One of S. John Ross' Five Elements of a Commercially Viable RPG Setting (http://www222.pair.com/sjohn/blueroom/five-elements.htm) is Cliché:

"The value of cliché – the use of stock imagery and other familiar elements – is accessibility and mutual understanding. If the Game Master tells you the new campaign is to be set in the "Duchy of Crows" and concerns an evil priest gathering the Hill Ogres to his cause, that may sound a bit threadbare, but it also provides a reliable common ground. Everyone can jump right in and focus on what the game is really about: the PCs and their adventures. If, by contrast, the GM tells you the new campaign takes place in the Shining Tertiary Plane of Tsalvanithra, a science-fantasy blend of Mayan mythology, Depression-era satire, 16th-century French politics and Japanese courtly manners, you're in for some research before you dare put a mark on the character sheet. The most popular games rely on stock images as a language for skipping to the good parts (and for sharing in a celebration of things gamers enjoy celebrating). Games that make a point of shunning cliché tend to be more niche."

Quote from: jhkim;564526For example, you have apparently assumed that the Iroquois did not practice cannibalism.  That's your preconception, and based on that you suggested that it was libel for me to say so.  In fact, the mass of historical evidence is that they did in fact practice cannibalism.  There are many reliable first-hand accounts.  Even the name "Mohawk" comes from the Narraganset word for man-eater.  While it is an ugly trait, I consider it good to include it and add to people's knowledge.  The general result is not tossing out everything you knew about the Iroquois and adopting a new "monster" stereotype.  It makes you think and question what you assume to incorporate the new information.

To be honest, I didn't bother to look up whether the Iroquois practiced cannibalism or not because if they did, they were covered by my point about portraying cultures warts and all.  If they didn't, then it raised an additional possibility that I hadn't considered, which was attributing a negative cultural trait to a race or ethnicity that didn't actually have that trait in an effort to mix things up or make them more interesting.  And I also know that there are people who doubt all (or nearly all) charges of cannibalism for reasons relevant to this discussion.

In his book The Man-Eating Myth (http://www.amazon.com/The-Man-Eating-Myth-Anthropology-Anthropophagy/dp/0195027930/) William Arens argued that the assumption that various cultures practiced cannibalism rarely came from firsthand accounts and could often be explained by a desire to denigrate another culture, exactly the sort of inaccurate racist stereotype that you are condemning.  For example, the Narraganset may have called the Iroquois "Mohawk" as a means to denigrate their enemies and emphasize their otherness, much as the Arawaks warned Columbus to steer clear of their enemies, the Caribs, because they ate human flesh.  In fact, Arens even argued that the Iroquois didn't practice cannibalism during historical times.  

In the case of the Iroquois, we both might agree that the evidence supports the position that they did practice cannibalism, but the real issue is, I think, why Arens was challenging the idea that various historical cultures practiced cannibalism, which is that it makes the cultures that practiced it look very bad.  It's a very effective negative stereotype used to encourage loathing of a culture.  In this article about the controversy over cannibalism among the Anasazi (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/06/0601_wireanasazi.html), the author starts out:

"Archaeologists call it 'the C-word.'"

"It's a word so dirty, so divisive, that a recent scientific symposium about it was evasively titled 'Multidisciplinary Approaches to Social Violence in the Prehispanic American Southwest.' But it was really about the C-word: cannibalism."

Cannibalism is hardly the only case of that.  Lawrence Keeley's book War Before Civilization: The Myth of the Peaceful Savage (http://www.amazon.com/War-Before-Civilization-Peaceful-Savage/dp/0195119126/) was written to address the lengths to which archaeologists and anthropologists would go through to deny prehistoric violence and warfare.  On a an even more general level, there is a concern over the "Othering" effect of attributing alien, troubling, or negative traits to other cultures, regardless of whether they are true or not.  The net result is that there are people who will react strongly and negatively to such negative traits being applied to a people, whether you (or any reasonable person) might conclude the evidence proves the application is warranted.  This really happens, not only in the realm of the critique of fantasy settings in role-playing games or literature but in anthropology, archaeology, and history.  

Quote from: jhkim;564526The problem with old historical race stereotypes is that they become ingrained and expected, especially if people take to them as a harmless shortcut to make a movie, book, or RPG product more "accessible".

I'll ask less rhetorically this time...

So what's wrong with old historical race stereotypes? (This question is intended to identify the problem or problems, not claim that there is no problem.)

I don't think that being ingrained and expected is a problem.  As the quote from S. John Ross argues above, I think that's often a feature, not a bug.  But is that really your primary problem?

Is the problem that they are false?  Then is it OK to use them if one can show they are totally true?  Mostly true?

Is the problem that they were historically used to encourage bigotry, hatred, or genocide?  Then is it wrong to use them even if they were true or had some truth to them?

The reason I'm asking is that the right thing to do is very different, depending on how that question is answered.  In fact, they can be diametrically opposed.

You may consider this a hypothetical argument but I don't, because I've seen these issues raised about role-playing settings, the portrayal of monstrous humanoids in role-playing games (see this 1863 reply thread (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=20868)), and concerning fictional works such as movies, television shows, and novels.  I've also seen it come up in anthropology, archaeology, and history.

(I know I'm going to regret this, but...)

Quote from: John Morrow;564541For example, the Narraganset may have called the Iroquois "Mohawk" as a means to denigrate their enemies and emphasize their otherness,

It's a good example. And on point, as accusations of racism do the same thing. And, while real racists should be called out on it, promiscuously applying the label is an underhanded and repulsive tactic, meant to smear, demean, and silence those so labeled.

It's meant to mark them as outcasts, as unclean, as the Other. To dehumanize them. To mark them and their opinions as utterly repugnant, beyond the pale of civil discourse.

Ultimately, to try and push them out of civil discourse. To silence them.

It is the tactic of a bully and a thug. That it is verbal and social, not physical or a matter of law, makes no difference.

It is thuggery, the rhetorical equivalent of a mugging. And Activist Swine (to borrow another's term) are clearly engaging in it, with results.

Quote from: nitril;564347Sorry I don't see it? Why is using parts of africas rich history as basis for your fantasy cultures racist? It seems to me that Golarion have taken parts of the history from that part of the world and built upon that to try to make something interesting. Every country / culture have their differences. Its not like all so called vikings were marauders out to rape and pillage poor irish priests and monks where they? No they had farmers and fishermen and woodsmen and all kinds of variation. Just as the people in africa had their bushmen and traders and so on. Why go away from showing that diversity when it can bring much more depth to a setting. But again as so many others have stated in this thread if you want to find something wrong you can.

The thing is, I don't really "care" about the obvious racism. Pigeon holding "the darkies" to being primitive is something that falls beneath the "insult" radar for most people (that associate them with it and that aren't thinking of the implications) and its not something you have to "look" for. Now it wouldn't be so "racist" had they positied what changes would be made to the culture based on the world they live in considering that specific gods or other higher beings actually exist, you don't have empire building foreigners stomping out their culture, and they have access to something that would catapult their society out of the grass hut era (IE magic), o if they had high lighted some of the African culture that wasn't just being primitive (Egypt existed!).They did not because they were LAZY. No effort was taken to build anything unique or highlight the rich African culture. They chose to highlight how primitive it was. Sure you can dress it up as nicely as you want but it'll only fool the people who don't care. Effort to "build" anything wasn't taken. Holding the dark people and the native american people to grass huts as part of their cultural description is pretty damn racist. Its more racist when their description of primitive hunter/gatherers has to go against Taldians who pride themselves on lon reaching cultural influence and high standards of education, Tian who have a very long very rich history and culture and value family, and Ulfren are hardened northern men who value honor.
I mean the Mwangi DO have a culture its just primitive and unrefined. There are sprinkles in the text about how there might have been evidence of Mwangi having a more advanced culture but its all in ruins. So Dark skinned people have grass huts and possible cannabalists while lighter toned people have culture and influence just as our stereotypes tell us.

I don't think it was done intentionally or with a malicious heart. Its just being lazy and thus not that big a deal. Oh and the spear wielding tribal tattoed man as the representative picture right above the well dressed white dude below him is just icing on the cake.

Quote from: Benoist;563866That however I'm going to answer to. Assuming some people would take that shit seriously (I'm not talking about you, Rum, but some asshole who might read this and think to himself "YEAH, DAMN RIGHT!"), let me put it that way.

I'm French. Not Quebec-French. I'm French-French, from the motherfucking Homeland of the French. The Froglands.

I have NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER with what RPG Pundit did with France in his Dark Albion setting. ACTUALLY, it completely makes sense from a crazy fantasy version of the prejudices the British had against the French, and vice versa, ESPECIALLY when we are talking about the time frame where a little something occured that's called the motherfucking ONE HUNDRED YEAR WAR.

It's a parody. It's a carricature. And I think it's a damn cool carricature because you also have this idea that the Frogmen took over the country and stuff, that there are collaborators who help them control the lands, which means... there also could be a Resistance out there... you see where this is going? Well, I'm feeling it and want to run with it so much in fact that I'm going to spin this into its own thing.

There's also the Burgundians, who are a human territory ruled over by a guy everyone considers a total bastard, but who despises the Frogs even more than the Anglemen (and lately has been much better at actually kicking their asses).

RPGPundit

I'll remind everyone again the parameters of the discussion permitted on this thread: It is for talking about whether Golarion is racist, and what proofs there are as to whether it is or not, and the recent accusations made against it.

It is NOT for talking about the wider issue of racism outside of the gaming-related subject.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;564572There's also the Burgundians, who are a human territory ruled over by a guy everyone considers a total bastard, but who despises the Frogs even more than the Anglemen (and lately has been much better at actually kicking their asses).

RPGPundit

Yup, totally not forgetting these guys.

And what are your thoughts about Dark Albion being racist against the French? :D

Quote from: Benoist;564580Yup, totally not forgetting these guys.

And what are your thoughts about Dark Albion being racist against the French? :D

Fuck the French.

Or, to be more diplomatic, a Frenchman can feel free, if he doesn't like Albion, to make his own dark fantasy setting where fantasy-England is full of some kind of uncouth monsters who cook terrible food and are still somehow much better empire-builders than they are.

RPGPundit

For the record, we're 30 pages in, and I know that theRPGsite is probably not the most concentrated place to find Golarion-experts, but I have yet to see a single serious post presenting either decent textual examples that support the idea of Golarion being racist, or refute the same claim.

RPGPundit

Quote from: danskmacabre;564175Seeing as it sounds like you actually work in the RPG industry as opposed to me not at all (It's just a hobby for me) I wonder if you have a point.
I only speak form my experience in my social circle and cannot (or can't be bothered) validate this view when considering the greater circle of the internet RPG community .

I suppose many of the smaller companies that make RPGs depend more on online opinions and could be affected more by petitions and witchhunts etc..

Still, rpg.net is a nightmare to navigate and threads drop off the dial really quickly, it has 100s of people viewing and posting at the same time.
That and it's not the most stable website in the world, it has frequent crashes and the mods there can have very strong extreme left wing views.
 
It doesn't take that much for a forum/website to drop on popularity if it just becomes unreliable or just not fun anymore as experience has shown with other social sites.

One can only hope.

JG

Quote from: Haffrung;564368Nuanced, sophisticated, and original RPG settings based on sound anthropology have been tried. Harn, Talislanta, and Tekumel come to mind.

They've all been commercial failures, because most RPG players don't want to game in those sorts of worlds. They're regarded as either too mundane, too narrow, or too weird.

Golarian is a kitchen sink setting. If it hews close to stereotypes, that's because Paizo wants to make broadly popular products. If Golarion was as realistic as Harn, it would have real trouble hosting a variety of adventures. If it were as original as Talislanta, it would alienate many customers. If it were as strange as Tekumel, it wouldn't be commercially viable at all.

Holy Cow, some common sense.

JG

Quote from: Sacrosanct;564394So yeah, it seems like threads like that are totally created because they get their kicks out of it.  You'd think someone at TBP on the admin staff is aware of SA and can put 2 and 2 together.

You're assuming that any of the mods can put 2 and 2 together (either they're too dumb or math has been banned as too Western-chauvinist) AND that even they want to bother dipping into the SA cesspool.

JG

Quote from: RPGPundit;564588Fuck the French.

Or, to be more diplomatic, a Frenchman can feel free, if he doesn't like Albion, to make his own dark fantasy setting where fantasy-England is full of some kind of uncouth monsters who cook terrible food and are still somehow much better empire-builders than they are.

RPGPundit

If you go to the UK these days it's pretty clear that they conquered all those countries just so that their nationals would emigrate over and start decent restaurants.

JG

Quote from: Bastetson;564441Please point out this "Keb Air" on this map (http://www.mapsofgolarion.com/) or this wikia (http://pathfinder.wikia.com/wiki/Golarion). The Egyptian-analogue is called Osirion (http://pathfinder.wikia.com/wiki/Osirion). Maybe you meant Geb (http://pathfinder.wikia.com/wiki/Geb)?
BTW, I have both the (old) Campaign Setting book and the (newer) Inner Sea World Guide within reach.
Thanks.

I expect I was confusing Geb with Osirion. Either way they clearly did not "leave out Egypt".

Quote from: Stackmaster J;564456On topic, though, racism is an issue that I think RPGs could tackle, but it would be best if it wasn't with analagous cultures. That will just make it harder to do sanely and without getting into arguments over real world affairs.

I agree - when I took a look at racism in my Southlands campaign with the Altanian vs Nerathi conflict, while I used various real-world tropes for both, neither group is closely analogous to a real-world group.  The Nerathi antagonists were white, but not based on any particular rw white ethny.

Quote from: RPGPundit;564589For the record, we're 30 pages in, and I know that theRPGsite is probably not the most concentrated place to find Golarion-experts, but I have yet to see a single serious post presenting either decent textual examples that support the idea of Golarion being racist, or refute the same claim.

RPGPundit

What would constitute evidence that Golarion is not racist? Evidence can be adduced to refute specific accusations, but it is not possible to refute an allegation of racism as a free-floating miasma that includes positive depictions, negative depictions, and non-depictions, of any culture or race.

Quote from: MGuy;564561The thing is, I don't really "care" about the obvious racism. Pigeon holding "the darkies" to being primitive is something that falls beneath the "insult" radar for most people (that associate them with it and that aren't thinking of the implications) and its not something you have to "look" for. Now it wouldn't be so "racist" had they positied what changes would be made to the culture based on the world they live in considering that specific gods or other higher beings actually exist, you don't have empire building foreigners stomping out their culture, and they have access to something that would catapult their society out of the grass hut era (IE magic), o if they had high lighted some of the African culture that wasn't just being primitive (Egypt existed!).They did not because they were LAZY. No effort was taken to build anything unique or highlight the rich African culture. They chose to highlight how primitive it was. Sure you can dress it up as nicely as you want but it'll only fool the people who don't care. Effort to "build" anything wasn't taken. Holding the dark people and the native american people to grass huts as part of their cultural description is pretty damn racist. Its more racist when their description of primitive hunter/gatherers has to go against Taldians who pride themselves on lon reaching cultural influence and high standards of education, Tian who have a very long very rich history and culture and value family, and Ulfren are hardened northern men who value honor.
I mean the Mwangi DO have a culture its just primitive and unrefined. There are sprinkles in the text about how there might have been evidence of Mwangi having a more advanced culture but its all in ruins. So Dark skinned people have grass huts and possible cannabalists while lighter toned people have culture and influence just as our stereotypes tell us.

I don't think it was done intentionally or with a malicious heart. Its just being lazy and thus not that big a deal. Oh and the spear wielding tribal tattoed man as the representative picture right above the well dressed white dude below him is just icing on the cake.

Except for the fact you are ignoring tons of shit to come up with this conclusion. Osirion (Egypt analogue) EXISTS in the setting, and I can't figure out why people keep saying it doesn't.

Nantambu is a great peaceful Mwangi city and center of learning which contains Magaambya, the oldest magical academy in all Golarion.

The Mwangi are not all "spearchuckers", there are several different cultures even within the Mwangi, among them the Bonuwat, who are sailors and fishermen, and the Mauxi who are part of the nation of Thuvia, some of which are part of the upper ruling caste.

Everyone making accusations at Paizo (and hell I'm not even a fan of Pathfinder, I just know a lot about it because my brother runs a campaign in the setting, I find it a bit too much still like 3.5 to me (I'm a FC fan, personally)), seems to be ignoring everything and focusing entirely on the Zenj and removing all context.

Quote from: Emperor Norton;564631Except for the fact you are ignoring tons of shit to come up with this conclusion. Osirion (Egypt analogue) EXISTS in the setting, and I can't figure out why people keep saying it doesn't.

Nantambu is a great peaceful Mwangi city and center of learning which contains Magaambya, the oldest magical academy in all Golarion.

The Mwangi are not all "spearchuckers", there are several different cultures even within the Mwangi, among them the Bonuwat, who are sailors and fishermen, and the Mauxi who are part of the nation of Thuvia, some of which are part of the upper ruling caste.

Everyone making accusations at Paizo (and hell I'm not even a fan of Pathfinder, I just know a lot about it because my brother runs a campaign in the setting, I find it a bit too much still like 3.5 to me (I'm a FC fan, personally)), seems to be ignoring everything and focusing entirely on the Zenj and removing all context.

That's what's in the setting book. You can be mad at "me" all you want for pointing it out right there in the text but when you look at the picture in the book right above the description its shirtless tribal black dude with a spear right above the entry of the clean cut well dressed white dude. All the larking about having to go around to find something deeper, while interesting, isn't hat the culture's description is in the setting book. Again, personally, I don't really care but that don't mean it ain't there.

Quote from: GrimJesta;564522What the fuck is this "informed answer" bullshit? This has no place on the internet! This is the domain of knee-jerk hyper-reactionary freakouts and finger-pointing! Get it right!

;)

-=Grim=-

Sorry. I'm new here. I was hoping the rest of my post would have filled in that quota. ;)

Are people mad that Golarion's egyptians aren't black?

Quote from: MGuy;564678That's what's in the setting book. You can be mad at "me" all you want for pointing it out right there in the text but when you look at the picture in the book right above the description its shirtless tribal black dude with a spear right above the entry of the clean cut well dressed white dude. All the larking about having to go around to find something deeper, while interesting, isn't hat the culture's description is in the setting book. Again, personally, I don't really care but that don't mean it ain't there.

Did you seriously think that I quoted your entire post because I wanted to respond to just the last sentence in your post? Because you seem to think the only damned thing I was talking about was the picture in the book.

You said there was no Egypt analogue in Golarion, you were wrong, there is one.

As an extension of that you said they didn't put in anything other than primitive spearchucker grass hut "africans". You were WRONG. I listed several other portions of the Mwangi in the setting, including the possibly most PEACEFUL, EDUCATED, and CIVILIZED society in the entire setting (Nantambu).

Jesus christ man, just get over the fact that you were god damned wrong and suck it up.

Does anyone have any pictures for comparison by chance?

QuoteEveryone making accusations at Paizo (and hell I'm not even a fan of Pathfinder, I just know a lot about it because my brother runs a campaign in the setting, I find it a bit too much still like 3.5 to me (I'm a FC fan, personally)), seems to be ignoring everything and focusing entirely on the Zenj and removing all context.

Isn't that the whole point of the internet? Make a bunch of unfounded bullshit up and make sure it's completely out of context just to be sure and then act like it's TOTAL fact.

Then sit back with a giant smile and small giggle with a bag of popcorn.

Quote from: Marleycat;564690Isn't that the whole point of the internet? Make a bunch of unfounded bullshit up and make sure it's completely out of context just to be sure and then act like it's TOTAL fact.

Then sit back with a giant smile and small giggle with a bag of popcorn.

To be entirely honest, I've been popcorning the thread here and the one at TBP (that term by the way just makes me think of purple worms, something about being swallowed by one in an old 2e campaign back in the day engenders a natural hatred of them in me).

I just don't see a reason to stir shit up myself to get popcorn threads. They seem to happen on their own. Like you said. Its the internet :P

Quote from: MGuy;564561The thing is, I don't really "care" about the obvious racism.

Except that it is neither racist nor obvious, you are just clueless.

Quote from: Emperor Norton;564687Did you seriously think that I quoted your entire post because I wanted to respond to just the last sentence in your post? Because you seem to think the only damned thing I was talking about was the picture in the book.

You said there was no Egypt analogue in Golarion, you were wrong, there is one.

As an extension of that you said they didn't put in anything other than primitive spearchucker grass hut "africans". You were WRONG. I listed several other portions of the Mwangi in the setting, including the possibly most PEACEFUL, EDUCATED, and CIVILIZED society in the entire setting (Nantambu).

Jesus christ man, just get over the fact that you were god damned wrong and suck it up.

Read the Mwangi entry in the setting book. The Mwangi entry highlights the hut living svannah people, the boat people, the people who actively distance themselves from the rest, and the slave trading demon worshipers. That's what the book highlights when you look up Mwangi. If you don't believe me I could post what the Mwangi entry actually says for your pleasure. However the official major groups of the Mwangi are:
Zenj - Primitive
Bonuwat - Sailors
Mauxi - Disassociate themselves with the other Mwangi
Bekyar - Demon worshiping slavers.

Edit: Golariapedia says:http://pathfinder.wikia.com/wiki/Mwangi (http://pathfinder.wikia.com/wiki/Mwangi)
Mwangi(http://wiki.fallengodscampaign.org/images/9/9a/Race_mwangi.jpg)
Chelaxian(http://images.wikia.com/pathfinder/images/a/a2/Chelaxian_ethnicity.jpg)

Quote from: MGuy;564716Read the Mwangi entry in the setting book. The Mwangi entry highlights the hut living svannah people, the boat people, the people who actively distance themselves from the rest, and the slave trading demon worshipers. That's what the book highlights when you look up Mwangi. If you don't believe me I could post what the Mwangi entry actually says for your pleasure. However the official major groups of the Mwangi are:
Zenj - Primitive
Bonuwat - Sailors
Mauxi - Disassociate themselves with the other Mwangi
Bekyar - Demon worshiping slavers.

Edit: Golariapedia says:http://pathfinder.wikia.com/wiki/Mwangi (http://pathfinder.wikia.com/wiki/Mwangi)

So explain why this is racist.

Quote from: jeff37923;564719So explain why this is racist.

Because he wants it to be? Seriously I just don't get it.

Quote from: jeff37923;564719So explain why this is racist.

You don't see anything wrong with the entirety of a people's culture (the main factions at least) being boiled down to being primitive hut people? I mean sure if you ignore the fact that they are the main groups and that there are almost no calls to anything other than being primitive in their primary entry, and you have to SEARCH for evidence to the contrary, then of course it isn't very racist to you. As I said earlier its an association people already make (you being apparently one of those people). I mean you don't see a commoner of let's say the Chelaxian or Tian race being used as their primary cultural description or depiction. You don't have the entirety of the Ulf-whatever's culture telling you about how backwards they are compared to other races. So of course if you ignore THAT, the reinforcing of stereotypes, and the depictions it doesn't seem very racist at all. It just seems typical. Which it is.

Quote from: Marleycat;564724Because he wants it to be? Seriously I just don't get it.

I don't get it either. It doesn't map.

Oh, images! I can do that!

(http://www.rocketllama.com/blog-it/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Pathfinder7_Paladin-209x300.jpg)

(http://www.plasticrypt.com/bestiary/images/thumb/7/7a/Pathfinder4_Cleric02.jpg/300px-Pathfinder4_Cleric02.jpg)

I just want to say "Chillaxian".

That is an awesome name for any game society.

Quote from: jeff37923;564730I don't get it either. It doesn't map.

Oh, images! I can do that!

(http://www.rocketllama.com/blog-it/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Pathfinder7_Paladin-209x300.jpg)

(http://www.plasticrypt.com/bestiary/images/thumb/7/7a/Pathfinder4_Cleric02.jpg/300px-Pathfinder4_Cleric02.jpg)

Too bad they didn't use those in the entry for the Mwangi. Also I don't think the paladin is from any of the MWangi regions. I don't remember anything about the cleric.

Quote from: MGuy;564728You don't see anything wrong with the entirety of a people's culture (the main factions at least) being boiled down to being primitive hut people? I mean sure if you ignore the fact that they are the main groups and that there are almost no calls to anything other than being primitive in their primary entry, and you have to SEARCH for evidence to the contrary, then of course it isn't very racist to you. As I said earlier its an association people already make (you being apparently one of those people). I mean you don't see a commoner of let's say the Chelaxian or Tian race being used as their primary cultural description or depiction. You don't have the entirety of the Ulf-whatever's culture telling you about how backwards they are compared to other races. So of course if you ignore THAT, the reinforcing of stereotypes, and the depictions it doesn't seem very racist at all. It just seems typical. Which it is.

Go look at the two images of iconic characters I just posted and tell me of the negative "primitive hut people" culture they represent. One of them is even from Osirion which was claimed not to exist earlier in this thread.

Quote from: MGuy;564732Too bad they didn't use those in the entry for the Mwangi.

So those two women should be Mwangi why? Because they're dark?

RACIST!

See how that stupid shit works.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;564731I just want to say "Chillaxian".

That is an awesome name for any game society.

The nation and history of Cheliax is pretty cool.

Here is the Pathfinder wiki entry, give it a read. (http://www.pathfinderwiki.com/wiki/Cheliax)

Quote from: CRKrueger;564734So those two women should be Mwangi why? Because they're dark?

RACIST!

See how that stupid shit works.

Considering the focus of my argument is how the Mwangi are depicted in a Setting book I'd say yes, they have to be Mwangi if you want to use them as counter examples. They are also good for cherry picking.

Quote from: jeff37923;564735The nation and history of Cheliax is pretty cool.

Here is the Pathfinder wiki entry, give it a read. (http://www.pathfinderwiki.com/wiki/Cheliax)

Cheliax is a great place to set a campaign!

If only it was not racist against people with actual devil blood in their ancestery.

Five minutes with google tells me Seelah the Paladin came from Geb as a child to the town of Solku, where ever that is. (katepesh, wherever THAT is).

Quote from: MGuy;564732Too bad they didn't use those in the entry for the Mwangi. Also I don't think the paladin is from any of the MWangi regions. I don't remember anything about the cleric.

Yeah, you are desperate to find Golarion racist. See, those images bug the shit out of you because they prevent you from reducing the entirety of the setting to a couple of images or entries that you need to justify your claim of racism. The setting is large and varied, a kitchen sink that is difficult to pigeonhole.

Five more minutes tells me Kyra the Cleric is a Keleshite.

For whatever THAT is worth.



Damnit! I swore I wasn't going to participate in this trainwreck!

Quote from: jeff37923;564735The nation and history of Cheliax is pretty cool.

Here is the Pathfinder wiki entry, give it a read. (http://www.pathfinderwiki.com/wiki/Cheliax)

Cheliax is absolutely AWESOME.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;564731I just want to say "Chillaxian".

That is an awesome name for any game society.

I played a Magus from Cheliax in my brother's Pathfinder campaign. I couldn't get myself to ever pronounce the name as anything other than Chillax though.

(And yes, it is a pretty awesome area of Golarion)

Quote from: Bill;564739Cheliax is a great place to set a campaign!

If only it was not racist against people with actual devil blood in their ancestery.

See, that gives me a cool angle to work with.

Varisia was colonized by Cheliax for awhile, so there was immigration of Tieflings. When the Cheliaxian nobles retreated back to the homeland, they were left behind, and are now establishing their own townships on their own without the Cheliax overseers. They are creating their own culture and identity for themselves now, on a continent filled with ruins of the ancient Runelords. Makes for a great game setting.

Quote from: Spike;564744Five more minutes tells me Kyra the Cleric is a Keleshite.

For whatever THAT is worth.



Damnit! I swore I wasn't going to participate in this trainwreck!

So this means that BOTH the dark skinned people you tried to use as your counter example specifically AREN'T Mwangi. How surprising that jeff's counter examples aren't  really counter examples as they are both not Mwangi.

And no, jeff, I'm not "desperate" to find it racist. It already is. Its also "typical" racism. Games in general are typically racist and misogynistic (http://www.cracked.com/article_19922_5-prejudices-that-video-games-cant-seem-to-get-over.html) so I see this kind of shit all the time. It doesn't bother me at all. I play Japanese origin games all the time and they don't try very hard to not be racist:(http://blogs.gamefilia.com/files/imce/u505527/sazh.jpg) Again, its all about associations that people make. The fact that you don't find the Mwangi entry racist and are forced to avoid bringing that entry up (or making an honest comparison to some of the other entries) as an issue just shows you're suffering from dissonance. Me? It doesn't matter. I don't use published Campaign settings when I game so its a non issue for me. However, that doesn't make the laughable defense people try to make of something so obvious unamusing.

Quote from: MGuy;564752So this means that BOTH the dark skinned people you tried to use as your counter example specifically AREN'T Mwangi. How surprising that jeff's counter examples aren't  really counter examples as they are both not Mwangi.

I thought this was about portrayal of African analogues, not about the Mwangi in particular. Seelah for instance is Gurandi ethnically, which is still... for lack of a better term... black. So how is her not being Mwangi disqualify her from the examination of the portrayal of black people in Pathfinder?

(http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20080602015714/pathfinder/images/thumb/0/0b/Amiri.jpg/250px-Amiri.jpg)


I dunno. Since THIS is the picture associated with the savage barbarians (you know: Illiterates), I'd have to say Golarian is racist against white people.

Quote from: MGuy;564752So this means that BOTH the dark skinned people you tried to use as your counter example specifically AREN'T Mwangi. How surprising that jeff's counter examples aren't  really counter examples as they are both not Mwangi.

:popcorn:


So why is the entry for the Mwangi racist?

For extra credit, tell my how that racism maps from a role-playing game setting to Real Life.

I have a proposal to take this somewhere that might not just devolve into yeah, is - no, isn't.

Is it even possible to have a setting with real world analogues that can't be perceived as racist?

How would you go about it?

Quote from: jeff37923;564759:popcorn:


So why is the entry for the Mwangi racist?

For extra credit, tell my how that racism maps from a role-playing game setting to Real Life.

I've already answered this in my posts. I'm forced to believe you're just jerkin' around at this point.

So how is one to integrate a culture into their RPG inspired from an existing historical African culture without being racist?

So far I've read that it's racist unless you include all cultures from Africa, which is impossible because no one wants their handbook to be 10,000 pages long.  

I've also heard that any depiction that is tribal in nature, regardless of historical accuracy and regardless if you depict similar "ethnic" representations differently (non-tribal), is racist.

So do you just say "screw it" and not include African culture into RPGs at all?  That seems awfully odd for someone to say they want equality for everyone and at the same time take a position where the end result is one where ethnic groups are being excluded.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;564763That seems awfully odd for someone to say they want equality for everyone and at the same time take a position where the end result is one where ethnic groups are being excluded.

Which is also, by default, racist.

Quote from: One Horse Town;564760I have a proposal to take this somewhere that might not just devolve into yeah, is - no, isn't.

Is it even possible to have a setting with real world analogues that can't be perceived as racist?

How would you go about it?

Ninja'd by OHT, and in a way that is a lot less winded than mine.

Quote from: One Horse Town;564760Is it even possible to have a setting with real world analogues that can't be perceived as racist?

How would you go about it?

I don't think you can.

There will always be retarded white knights out there who will scream that some part is offensive and racist so that they have something to feel righteous outrage about.

Do you remember when Star Trek: TNG first came out? I was living in California at the time and there were people screaming that the Klingons were created as a racial slur against militant blacks. This kind of bullshit exists because of that retarded white knight tendency being a part of human nature. Protesting against things which only exist in their twisted little minds.

Quote from: MGuy;564762I've already answered this in my posts. I'm forced to believe you're just jerkin' around at this point.

Actually, you haven't.  The discussion sort of went like this:

You: It is racist because black people are portrayed as primitives.
Others: Here are representation of black people that aren't primitives.
You: But they're not this particular group of black people


Well, WTF mate.  If you create a specific culture, that is inspired/based off of a specific historical culture, then yeah, there are going to be similarities.  That in no way means that the entire ethnic group that that particular culture shares is like that.

Quote from: MGuy;564762I've already answered this in my posts. I'm forced to believe you're just jerkin' around at this point.

All you have posted is "Ohmigod! Racist!" so far. You have not explained why the depiction of the Mwangi is racist in your mind.

I suspect that you do not know and have just been cribbing arguements from another forum to use here.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;564767Actually, you haven't.  The discussion sort of went like this:

You: It is racist because black people are portrayed as primitives.
Others: Here are representation of black people that aren't primitives.
You: But they're not this particular group of black people


Well, WTF mate.  If you create a specific culture, that is inspired/based off of a specific historical culture, then yeah, there are going to be similarities.  That in no way means that the entire ethnic group that that particular culture shares is like that.

Umm the Osirons are specifically not in the Mwangi section of the book. The book/wiki/everything tells you that the major factions of the Mwangi are A, B, C, D. If you're going to make a call to the Osirons (which I said Egyptians exist by the way) why is that not in their primary entry? Because that's not the association the authors made. It seems somehow you missed that part of the conversation

Quote from: jeff37923;564768All you have posted is "Ohmigod! Racist!" so far. You have not explained why the depiction of the Mwangi is racist in your mind.

I suspect that you do not know and have just been cribbing arguements from another forum to use here.

Yes. I have explained at length why the entry for Mwangi (being nothing but primitive folk) is racist when THE VERY NEXT ENTRY not only has a well dressed white dude (compare to the shirtless spear wielding tribesman) but who's description doesn't tell you that the majority of their people are motherfucking crap covered farmers.

Part of the problem is that certain people see this:

(http://www.badassoftheweek.com/shakazulu2.jpg)

And immediately react like it was this:

(http://www.weirdwildrealm.com/filmimages/littlelionhunter.jpg)


There's a pretty big difference between the two, and it's sad the people can't see it.  One is clearly racist, while the other is a researched historical accuracy.  A company that puts the 2nd image in their book deserves to get flogged, but a company that puts the first should in no way get vilified.

Quote from: MGuy;564770Yes. I have explained at length why the entry for Mwangi (being nothing but primitive folk) is racist when THE VERY NEXT ENTRY not only has a well dressed white dude (compare to the shirtless spear wielding tribesman) but who's description doesn't tell you that the majority of their people are motherfucking crap covered farmers.

OK, so having a picture of a non-white from a primitive culture within a few pages of a picture of a "well-dressed white dude" is racist?

Where does this "well-dressed white dude" come from? What nation or culture?

As for whether or not you can make a real world analogue without stepping on people's toes, yes its possible if you're not lazy. If I were going about it (which I do not copy paste real world analogues) I'd at least step a bit more carefully than having a spear wielding black dude, a dirt covered native american, sharing the same space with other well dressed civilizations. Also I'd focus on the heights of their civilizations and not the lows. If you're going to do both then you should extend the entries in general so when players cruise through your book and see the primary racial entry for black skinned humans they don't have to walk away thinking that all of them are either tribes folk, mixed sea faring people, or people trying to be more modern by rejecting their traditions. To say nothing of the slavers/demon worshipers.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;564772Part of the problem is that certain people see this:

(http://www.badassoftheweek.com/shakazulu2.jpg)

And immediately react like it was this:

(http://www.weirdwildrealm.com/filmimages/littlelionhunter.jpg)


There's a pretty big difference between the two, and it's sad the people can't see it.  One is clearly racist, while the other is a researched historical accuracy.  A company that puts the 2nd image in their book deserves to get flogged, but a company that puts the first should in no way get vilified.

It's a total joke that Paizo is being lambasted like this when they are one of the few companies that actually do serious market research into this and purposely make all their products both female friendly and multicultural.

Quote from: MGuy;564770Yes. I have explained at length why the entry for Mwangi (being nothing but primitive folk) is racist when THE VERY NEXT ENTRY not only has a well dressed white dude (compare to the shirtless spear wielding tribesman) but who's description doesn't tell you that the majority of their people are motherfucking crap covered farmers.

Holy....


Do you not get that depictions of people in those books are usually depictions of characters that players would play?  A player is going to want to play a Zulu warrior instead of one of the women who culturally do not fight or venture forth.  A player is going to want to play a noble or knight instead of a farmer with shit all over him.

It's not that hard, and doesn't make it racist.

Quote from: jeff37923;564774OK, so having a picture of a non-white from a primitive culture within a few pages of a picture of a "well-dressed white dude" is racist?

Where does this "well-dressed white dude" come from? What nation or culture?

So... you haven't actually read the book in question I take it?

Quote from: MGuy;564778So... you haven't actually read the book in question I take it?

Fuck. I did read the book, and I think you are fucking nuts, dude.

I think the real bigots have outed themselves by expressing their disgusting anti-tribal/anti-"primitive" views...

Quote from: Sacrosanct;564772Part of the problem is that certain people see this:

(http://www.badassoftheweek.com/shakazulu2.jpg)

And immediately react like it was this:

(http://www.weirdwildrealm.com/filmimages/littlelionhunter.jpg)


There's a pretty big difference between the two, and it's sad the people can't see it.  One is clearly racist, while the other is a researched historical accuracy.  A company that puts the 2nd image in their book deserves to get flogged, but a company that puts the first should in no way get vilified.

That and the idea that using the term "primitive" is disparaging. It usually just means technology. Real World "primitive" cultures can be very complex and advanced socially. As an example, read Conversations with Ogotomelli (http://www.amazon.com/Conversations-Ogotemmeli-Introduction-Religious-Galaxy/dp/0195198212) which is a good introduction to West African religious traditions as seen through the eyes of the Dogon tribe.

People also can see:(http://www.buzzle.com/img/articleImages/354953-15010-27.jpg)(http://www.shenzhendesign.org/images/attachement/jpg/site413/20090723/001422474dbc0bd25eb10f.jpg)(http://www.african-safari-information.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/maasai-warriors.jpg)(http://www.rebirth.co.za/images/traditionalNdebeleclothing.jpg)None of which feature shirtless spear wielding men as per the little racist cartoon your brought up.

Quote from: MGuy;564752Games in general are typically racist and misogynistic (http://www.cracked.com/article_19922_5-prejudices-that-video-games-cant-seem-to-get-over.html) so I see this kind of shit all the time.

A monk was sitting by the side of the road, when a traveller passed by, seemingly angry and out of sorts. He complained to the monk about the rude and intolerant people in the last town and asked what the next town was like.

"Pretty much the same", said the monk.

Another traveller happened along, cheerful and in good form, and told the monk he had met many fine people in the last town, who had treated him well. He inquired as to what the people of the next town would be like.

"Pretty much the same", said the monk.

Quote from: Spike;564758(http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20080602015714/pathfinder/images/thumb/0/0b/Amiri.jpg/250px-Amiri.jpg)


I dunno. Since THIS is the picture associated with the savage barbarians (you know: Illiterates), I'd have to say Golarian is racist against white people.

It insinuates they're all drug addicts too, I don't know how much PCP you'd have to horse back to be able to lift that pigsticker. (I can say pigsticker right, thats not racist against police people?)

Quote from: MGuy;564775Also I'd focus on the heights of their civilizations and not the lows.

The height of the civilization (as far as romanticized fantasy goes) is the spear wielding warrior.  Those were bad ass motherfuckers.  There's nothing racist about it.  You're suggesting adding some sort of technology when it makes no cultural sense just because you want to avoid appearing to be racist?  That is sooooo dumb.  The famous tribal African warrior is depicted without much clothing because it's fucking hot in Africa.  Not because he's any less intelligent or civilized than a European counterpart.

The problem is with you, and people like you, who assume that a tribal or nomadic culture is by default inferior to a European culture.  So YOU are the one who is racist.  How do you like those apples?

Quote from: MGuy;564778So... you haven't actually read the book in question I take it?

I had it and decided I didn't need it. I do not remember this particular picture and am asking you in the hope of understanding your views.

Now, are you going to answer the fucking question or will you keep dissembling in an attempt to avoid it.

EDIT: And will you quit photobombing this thread or at least try to keep the pics to a reasonable size and not in a line across the screen.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;564785The height of the civiliaztion (as far as romanticed fantasy goes) is the spear wielding warrior.  Those were bad ass motherfuckers.  There's nothing racist about it.  You're suggesting adding some sort of technology when it makes no cultural sense just because you want to avoid appearing to be racist?  That is sooooo dumb.  The famous tribal African warrior is depicted without much clothing because it's fucking hot in Africa.  Not because he's any less intelligent or civilized than a European counterpart.

The problem is with you, and people like you, who assume that a tribal or nomadic culture is by default inferior to a European culture.  So YOU are the one who is racist.  How do you like those apples?

But the shirtless spear wielding warrior is a RACIST STEREOTYPE. If you're going to make a game and you want to avoid that slap him in some royal garb at the very least!

How about how the scandinavians and french are depicted in Golarion; such ugly racism...

Quote from: The Traveller;564784It insinuates they're all drug addicts too, I don't know how much PCP you'd have to horse back to be able to lift that pigsticker. (I can say pigsticker right, thats not racist against police people?)

Dude. Bath salts.

Quote from: jeff37923;564786I had it and decided I didn't need it. I do not remember this particular picture and am asking you in the hope of understanding your views.

Now, are you going to answer the fucking question or will you keep dissembling in an attempt to avoid it.

Well I'll show you the pictures but after this I'm quitting this conversation because the ignorance and denial being displayed here IS actually offending me.
Taldan Entry
(http://griffininn.lefora.com/composition/attachment/ea776258b8577ba400464e9946a1b6ab/836246/Taladan.jpg?thumb=1)

MwangiEntry (http://griffininn.lefora.com/composition/attachment/9740584ac15b87a80e795d8faeaa6eb3/836231/Mwangi.jpg?thumb=1)

Quote from: jeff37923;564774OK, so having a picture of a non-white from a primitive culture within a few pages of a picture of a "well-dressed white dude" is racist?

Where does this "well-dressed white dude" come from? What nation or culture?

The 'well-dressed white dude' is Taldan, who are not white.
(http://wiki.fallengodscampaign.org/images/6/6a/Race_taldan.jpg)

The preceding entry is for the Kellid, who are also not white and of the same broad 'racial' category as the Taldan who are a mixed race offshoot whose proto-Kellid ancestors hosted Azlanti refugees, whom are also not clearly meant to be "white" and have no clear real-world analogue.  They are the Golarion version of Atlantis, Aztlan or whatever.

Edit:  Correction, the Taldan are part Kelishite, not Kellid, not that it really makes a difference.

Quote from: MGuy;564787But the shirtless spear wielding warrior is a RACIST STEREOTYPE. If you're going to make a game and you want to avoid that slap him in some royal garb at the very least!

Royal garb, haha fuck, classist much you fucking halfhead?

Quote from: MGuy;564787But the shirtless spear wielding warrior is a RACIST STEREOTYPE. If you're going to make a game and you want to avoid that slap him in some royal garb at the very least!

No it is not.  How can you not see this.  The shirtless spear wielding warrior is an accurate depiction of what a warrior of that culture is.  You want royal garb?  Do you expect every depiction of a white person to have a crown and velvet cape?

Of course not.  See the double standard?  The irony is that you are the one suggesting racist ideas.

Quote from: MGuy;564787But the shirtless spear wielding warrior is a RACIST STEREOTYPE. If you're going to make a game and you want to avoid that slap him in some royal garb at the very least!

Why is "the shirtless spear wielding warrior" a racist stereotype?

(http://ts3.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=4573853068689974&id=a9e928eb75be53c90b7f66bac5bba28e)

OHMIGOD!! RACIST!!

Quote from: MGuy;564792Well I'll show you the pictures but after this I'm quitting this conversation because the ignorance and denial being displayed here IS actually offending me.

Sorry dude, you're the one who is being ignorant.  You want to hold a particular culture to a different standard than everyone else.  That, my friend, is racism.

You're your own side's worst enemy without even realizing it.

That's right MGuy, you just keep your cocksucker shut when grownups are talking from now on.

Quote from: Wolf, Richard;564793The 'well-dressed white dude' is Taldan, who are not white.
(http://wiki.fallengodscampaign.org/images/6/6a/Race_taldan.jpg)

The preceding entry is for the Kellid, who are also not white and of the same broad 'racial' category as the Taldan who are a mixed race offshoot whose proto-Kellid ancestors hosted Azlanti refugees, whom are also not clearly meant to be "white" and have no clear real-world analogue.  They are the Golarion version of Atlantis, Aztlan or whatever.

OK, thank you.

From what I remember, the Taldans are considered to be a culture that is in the decline in Golarion. Yup, my memory has not failed me. (http://www.pathfinderwiki.com/wiki/Taldan)

So, the pic of a native in a vibrant developing culture of dark-skinned humans is racist because it is compared to a culture of decadence and crumbling empires that is white.

Quote from: MGuy;564792Well I'll show you the pictures but after this I'm quitting this conversation because the ignorance and denial being displayed here IS actually offending me.

Attaboy!

Just ride into the sunset, O White Knight.

Race/Class/Level systems and others that utilise Archetypes etc are all about stereotypes - its what characters in those systems are.

So there's always going to be an argument in relation to real world analogues that some of them are Racist, well, because they are stereotypes.

So, for example...

Zulu warrior or Zulu trader?

Gypsy pedlar or Gypsy Sculptor?

Hungarian Hussar or Hungarian Pedeotrician?

Certain combinations trigger associations that fire the imagination and make you go "oh yeah, cool!"

The fact that they are stereotypical means that some of them can be called racist because of negaitive real-world connotations.

Me? I wanna play a Zulu warrior.

Isn't there a difference between imperfect knowledge of a subject, and malicious racism intended to belittle another and glorify oneself?

I've got to go to work now, but I'd like one of the people who believes that Golarion is racist to prove that while also taking a game like Solid! The d20 Blaxploitation Experience  (http://www.amazon.com/Solid-Blaxploitation-Wingnut-Games-Staff/dp/B000PCNVOA/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1343327395&sr=1-1&keywords=Solid%21+The+d20+Blaxploitation+Experience)and explaining why that either is or is not also racist in comparison.

Quote from: Spike;564758I dunno. Since THIS is the picture associated with the savage barbarians (you know: Illiterates), I'd have to say Golarian is racist against white people.

Overall I do like Golarion, but the only definitvely 'white' ethnic group analogue are the Ulfren, who like the Mwangi, are a permanent-barbarian stereotype.

A lot of Americans probably will just think, "Vikings! Awesome!".  Back in the real world overly PC Scandinavians (almost all Scandinavians, except Icelanders) get easily butthurt over Viking stereotypes.

All in all I value my ability to play a badass Viking, Zulu warrior, or Samurai over an entire race or culture's sensibilities.  Especially when that race and culture is affluent English-speaking white progressives.

Quote from: Planet Algol;564686Are people mad that Golarion's egyptians aren't black?

I'm starting to think it's as stupid as that.

Quote from: technoextreme;563830Taking a whole entire culture and plopping it into your setting is generally considered lazy.  There is a huge difference between how Eberron is written where nothing is a straight 1:1 analog of anything in the real world and stuff like the Vistani which are gypsy ripoffs.

What you call "lazy", I call "accessible".

Quote from: Doctor Jest;564835What you call "lazy", I call "accessible".

I find it funny that those who are calling it lazy seem to have their solutions as one of the following:

1. include every culture (which is logistically impossible)

or

2. completely change the culture so that it doesn't resemble anything like it actually is.


Either one seems awfully boneheaded to me.  I haven't seen anyone give another answer.

But being "lazy" is how DMs make it feasible to emulate an inhabited planet!

Quote from: Planet Algol;564840But being "lazy" is how DMs make it feasible to emulate an inhabited planet!

I don't get the whole lazy attack. GMs take all kinds of short cuts and even designers focus their efforts on some areas over others.

Quote from: MGuy;564787But the shirtless spear wielding warrior is a RACIST STEREOTYPE. If you're going to make a game and you want to avoid that slap him in some royal garb at the very least!

Now you're just trolling or outright idiotic.  If most of the men in the culture wear no shirts and use spears, showing a man with no shirt wearing a spear is not a stereotype you useless bastard, it's an accurate representation.  If the women wear no breast coverings and you depict them without breast coverings I suppose you're the kind of idiot who thinks that is porn.

The only kind of lazy thinking in this thread is wastes of air like you.

I'm offended that you think you need to police for everyone else what they are thinking or under what intent they reference facts.

Zulu warriors didn't wear too much, they also kicked fucking ass.  If someone uses pictures of Zulus in a Zulu analogue you'll call them racist, when the Racist fucking prick is YOU for thinking first of all, the Zulus need your fucking protection and second for assuming they want the image of a Zulu king to be a snapshot of their society.

Quote from: jeff37923;564803Attaboy!

Just ride into the sunset, O White Knight.

Man, I miss all the good stuff when I work.:(

Wait...who was being ignorant?   :)

Quote from: James Gillen;564595If you go to the UK these days it's pretty clear that they conquered all those countries just so that their nationals would emigrate over and start decent restaurants.

JG

Necessity is the greatest motivator.

RPGPundit

Quote from: S'mon;564602What would constitute evidence that Golarion is not racist? Evidence can be adduced to refute specific accusations, but it is not possible to refute an allegation of racism as a free-floating miasma that includes positive depictions, negative depictions, and non-depictions, of any culture or race.

Proving the claims by the accusers are wrong.  For example, if someone says that Golarion is racist because all black humans are spear-wielding savages, then you could show evidence from the setting itself that in fact that's not true.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;564884Proving the claims by the accusers are wrong.  For example, if someone says that Golarion is racist because all black humans are spear-wielding savages, then you could show evidence from the setting itself that in fact that's not true.

RPGPundit

Which in fact Emperor Norton did, which lead to Mguy's "because...PICTURE!" meltdown and god-willing, permanent ragequit.

Quote from: jeff37923;564791Dude. Bath salts.

I have yet to find a forum with a "tongue in cheek" smiley.

Quote from: Bill;564869Wait...who was being ignorant?   :)

Mguy was doing his best "White Knight" impersonation upthread.

Quote from: Marleycat;564892Mguy was doing his best "White Knight" impersonation upthread.

He's not foolin' anyone, is he?




p.s. darned if you don't have the best avatars

Quote from: MGuy;564792Well I'll show you the pictures but after this I'm quitting this conversation because the ignorance and denial being displayed here IS actually offending me.

Fuck you're a moron.

Oh! I know. That's what the "M" stands for, isn't it? "Moron Guy". That's it.

Quote from: RPGPundit;564884Proving the claims by the accusers are wrong.  For example, if someone says that Golarion is racist because all black humans are spear-wielding savages, then you could show evidence from the setting itself that in fact that's not true.

RPGPundit

"racist because all black humans are spear-wielding savages" - I wouldn't accept this as a premise, but the funny thing is that Golarion is actually a very Politically Correct setting, and there are lots of non 'savage' black cultures. I can't be bothered to read through it again right now so you'll have to refer to other peoples' posts.

Quote from: S'mon;564953"racist because all black humans are spear-wielding savages" - I wouldn't accept this as a premise, but the funny thing is that Golarion is actually a very Politically Correct setting, and there are lots of non 'savage' black cultures. I can't be bothered to read through it again right now so you'll have to refer to other peoples' posts.

I don't see why a fictional game setting needs to be analyzed as if it were some political tract on modern day race relations every fucking time. It's like the people who claim "orcs are evil" is racism because what they are "really" saying is some sort of racist message between the lines.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

(http://www.comviz.com.ulaval.ca/module1/Images/MagrittePipe.jpg)

Quote from: John Morrow;563959So, a person is creating a fantasy world populated with various ethnicities.  They have a few choices:

1) They include non-white cultures via analogues of real-world cultures, warts and all, that will inevitably draw upon real world stereotypes.  They get called racist for promoting negative stereotypes of non-whites.

2) They include non-white cultures via analogues of real-world cultures, scrubbed of their negatives, so that they are noble and admirable.  They get called racist for promoting unrealistic positive stereotypes of non-whites.

3) They include non-white cultures with entirely made-up cultures that inevitably include some elements of the culture normally associated with some other race.  They get called racist for robbing people of their authentic culture and presenting a blackface version of European culture.

4) They don't include non-white cultures at all.  They get called racist to leaving out non-white people.

Is there really any way to win this game without someone determined to find racism in the setting being able to claim that it's there?

You missed two:

5) No historical analogues.

6) A fully historical setting.

I was about to make a post like yours before I realized that the thread probably wasn't worth the effort of keeping up with it. Haven't read anything between your post and now, so sorry if 5) and 6) were already covered.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;564785The height of the civilization (as far as romanticized fantasy goes) is the spear wielding warrior.  Those were bad ass motherfuckers.  

Which in the grand scheme of things is really dumb because the height of real Africans civilization were even bigger bad ass motherfuckers whose influence to this day is far more valuable than anything that Zulu ever did.

Quote from: beejazz;5650115) No historical analogues.

I think that's covered by 3. "They include non-white cultures with entirely made-up cultures that inevitably include some elements of the culture normally associated with some other race."

Quote from: beejazz;5650116) A fully historical setting.

The premise of my list was, "So, a person is creating a fantasy world populated with various ethnicities."  A fully historical setting would not be a fantasy world.

Quote from: beejazz;565011I was about to make a post like yours before I realized that the thread probably wasn't worth the effort of keeping up with it. Haven't read anything between your post and now, so sorry if 5) and 6) were already covered.

It seems to eventually be lurching toward the point I was making with that reply.

Quote from: John Morrow;565024I think that's covered by 3. "They include non-white cultures with entirely made-up cultures that inevitably include some elements of the culture normally associated with some other race."

I was thinking a more "nothing in common" extreme here. Like how mindflayers don't borrow elements of cultures associated with any race.

QuoteThe premise of my list was, "So, a person is creating a fantasy world populated with various ethnicities."  A fully historical setting would not be a fantasy world.

Eh, OMHAS or WoD sort of fit the bill of what I'm talking about. It's not a new world, Britain and America exist by name, but to me they're still fantasy worlds. If you're talking full-on otherworlds only I can see how it wouldn't apply.

QuoteIt seems to eventually be lurching toward the point I was making with that reply.

Yep.

FWIW, I like the Frankenculture approach more than the direct analogues approach as a rule. At least in my homebrew stuff. I tend to go for using history to make a setting alien rather than familiar.

Quote from: Doctor Jest;565001I don't see why a fictional game setting needs to be analyzed as if it were some political tract on modern day race relations every fucking time. It's like the people who claim "orcs are evil" is racism because what they are "really" saying is some sort of racist message between the lines.

I think the main thing going on here (for the people who are being sincere in their objections, anyway, rather than being trolls) is that any stereotype that resembles a stereotype historically used by racists to demean or discriminate against another culture cannot be disassociated (for them) from that racist usage and is thus inherently tainted with racism.  This is regardless of whether the stereotype is based on historical truths, is part of a broader and more nuanced portrayal, or is applied to a different group of people or even non-people.  Thus the claim that a fantasy race is inherently violent, greedy, evil, dishonest, and so on pushes the same buttons that racists pushed to make various ethnicities seem monstrous and that resemblance with racist claims make those traits also seem racist when applied to a monstrous non-human.  Thus in the case of the depictions of Africans in Golarion, the reason why the depiction of African-looking people as spear-weilding primitives is perceived as racist and that is not mitigated by the other portrayals is that the stereotyping of Africans as spear-weilding primitives has been used to justify discrimination and thus is tainted with racism.  And if that's the case (feel free to dispute my explanation if it's wrong) then there is no way to include any stereotype that resembles the stereotypes used by racists into a fantasy setting that people who feel this way would find acceptable, regardless of how innocent the intent, how many historical precedents, how many exceptions, and how much depth you claim to argue that it's not racist.

Quote from: John Morrow;565032I think the main thing going on here (for the people who are being sincere in their objections, anyway, rather than being trolls) is that any stereotype that resembles a stereotype historically used by racists to demean or discriminate against another culture cannot be disassociated (for them) from that racist usage and is thus inherently tainted with racism.  This is regardless of whether the stereotype is based on historical truths, is part of a broader and more nuanced portrayal, or is applied to a different group of people or even non-people.  Thus the claim that a fantasy race is inherently violent, greedy, evil, dishonest, and so on pushes the same buttons that racists pushed to make various ethnicities seem monstrous and that resemblance with racist claims make those traits also seem racist when applied to a monstrous non-human.  Thus in the case of the depictions of Africans in Golarion, the reason why the depiction of African-looking people as spear-weilding primitives is perceived is racist and that is not mitigated by the other portrayals is that the stereotyping of Africans as spear-weilding primitives has been used to justify discrimination and thus is tainted with racism.  And if that's the case (feel free to dispute my explanation if it's wrong) then there is no way to include any stereotype that resembles the stereotypes used by racists into a fantasy setting that people who feel this way would find acceptable, regardless of how innocent the intent, how many historical precedents, how many exceptions, and how much depth you claim to argue that it's not racist.

Which results in a situation where you can't include any minority culture in your game.  How is that a good thing?

Quote from: RPGPundit;564884Proving the claims by the accusers are wrong.  For example, if someone says that Golarion is racist because all black humans are spear-wielding savages, then you could show evidence from the setting itself that in fact that's not true.

I don't think the problem is the claim that Golarion is racist because all black humans are spear-wielding savages.  I think the problem is that they believe Golarion is racist because some black humans are spear-wielding savages, which matches stereotypes applied by racists to blacks.

Quote from: technoextreme;565014Which in the grand scheme of things is really dumb because the height of real Africans civilization were even bigger bad ass motherfuckers whose influence to this day is far more valuable than anything that Zulu ever did.

As has been aptly demonstrated in this thread when we talk about "Africans" we are apparently talking exclusively about black sub-Saharan Africans and possibly even more specifically just Bantus because slavery.

Nothing Egyptians did matter unless you are an Afrocentrist that thinks they were Bantus.  Egypt doesn't matter, Nubia doesn't matter, and Ethiopia doesn't matter (the latter two of which could be said to be represented by the Garundi in Golarion, and it doesn't matter to anyone calling Golarion racist because all anyone actually cares about are the Bantu-inspired Mwangi).

The Zulu were the last 'great' civilization that spawned specifically from the indigenous people of west Africa.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;565035Which results in a situation where you can't include any minority culture in your game.  How is that a good thing?

Which was pretty much the point that I made earlier in the thread, that there is no way to include minorities without someone feeling that it's racist and leaving them out can also be perceived as racist.  It's a no-win situation, because even if you please one person or group of people, the way you please them can trigger a reaction in others.  I'm not saying that it's a good thing.  I'm saying that it is what it is.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;565035Which results in a situation where you can't include any minority culture in your game.  How is that a good thing?

Worse than that. You can't just have a European based culture either, because then you're racist by making the whole world "white".

So, basically, you're racist no matter what you do, if they want to break out the broad brush.

Quote from: John Morrow;565032I think the main thing going on here (for the people who are being sincere in their objections, anyway, rather than being trolls) is that any stereotype that resembles a stereotype historically used by racists to demean or discriminate against another culture cannot be disassociated (for them) from that racist usage and is thus inherently tainted with racism.  

That would be a really compelling argument if it wasn't complete and utter bullshit.

That's like saying anyone who listens to Wagner is promoting Nazisim. It's both disingenuous AND fallacious. It's a slippery slope argument.

Quote from: Doctor Jest;565057That would be a really compelling argument if it wasn't complete and utter bullshit.

That's like saying anyone who listens to Wagner is promoting Nazisim. It's both disingenuous AND fallacious. It's a slippery slope argument.

Well that's the argument being made here. If you are using traditional images of Zulu warriors, you must be a racist, since the British colonials used such images to belittle the "savages".

Quote from: Benoist;565058Well that's the argument being made here. If you are using traditional images of Zulu warriors, you must be a racist, since the British colonials used such images to belittle the "savages".

Yeah, I get that. What I don't get is anyone responding to that as if it's a rational point and not laughably stupid.

Quote from: Doctor Jest;565059Yeah, I get that. What I don't get is anyone responding to that as if it's a rational point and not laughably stupid.

Yeah, I'm with you there. I don't understand it either.

It's so mindbogglingly stupid it should be well, obvious at face value, really.

What would be racist, then?  I agree that Golarion isn't, but short of the obvious RaHoWa and anything by Stormfront, what elements would get a game labeled 'racist'?

Quote from: Doctor Jest;565057That's like saying anyone who listens to Wagner is promoting Nazisim. It's both disingenuous AND fallacious. It's a slippery slope argument.

Yet there are people who feel exactly like that about Wagner or even buying Volkswagens.  And I don't think it's disingenuous or fallacious for many people, nor is it a slippery slope argument.  It's a failure to make a distinction that other people are willing to make.

Quote from: Doctor Jest;565059Yeah, I get that. What I don't get is anyone responding to that as if it's a rational point and not laughably stupid.

Morality isn't rational.  It's emotional.  One considers certain things morally objectionable because thinking about those things produces a feeling of anger and disgust.  See this article (http://discovermagazine.com/2004/apr/whose-life-would-you-save) for the details.

Quote from: John Morrow;565066Morality isn't rational.  It's emotional.  One considers certain things morally objectionable because thinking about those things produces a feeling of anger and disgust.  See this article (http://discovermagazine.com/2004/apr/whose-life-would-you-save) for the details.

I don't agree that this is a moral dilemma. It doesn't meet the criterion set even in that article. There is no dilemma here.

Being mad about something isn't the same as having a moral viewpoint. People can, and do, get mad about really stupid things.

Quote from: John Morrow;565065Yet there are people who feel exactly like that about Wagner or even buying Volkswagens.  And I don't think it's disingenuous or fallacious for many people, nor is it a slippery slope argument.  It's a failure to make a distinction that other people are willing to make.

"A failure to make a distinction other people are willing to make" is a very nice way of saying it, to be sure.

Quote from: Doctor Jest;565069I don't agree that this is a moral dilemma. It doesn't meet the criterion.

And that's the problem.  For the people who genuinely see the portrayals in Golarion as racist do see it as a moral concern.  And no amount of pointing to elements or talking about what the problem really is will necessarily make you feel what they feel or make them stop feeling what they feel about it.  The reason why discussions about moral issues usually consist of people talking past each other and making incorrect assumptions about what the other side thinks is that their difference of opinion doesn't hinge on a rational argument but on how the parties feel about things.  And both sides frequently assume that the other side feels what they feel, which often isn't the case.

Quote from: John Morrow;565071And that's the problem.  For the people who genuinely see the portrayals in Golarion as racist do see it as a moral concern.  

It's not a dilemma by definition. Which is what the article you linked to was about.  You understand the distinction between a moral dilemma and "something I think is wrong because it makes me unhappy"?

Quote from: Doctor Jest;565072It's not a dilemma by definition. Which is what the article you linked to was about.

The article is about moral reasoning and how "morality may be hardwired into our brains by evolution".

Quote from: John Morrow;565073The article is about moral reasoning and how "morality may be hardwired into our brains by evolution".

Yeah, but the morality it's addressing isn't what you're talking about. There's a difference between morality and self-righteous pomposity. Since there's no dilemma present, it can't be a moral issue, by definition. Morality isn't just "things that make me sad". It's how we come to the answers to moral quandaries and dilemmas, and what a fictional game setting is like isn't either.

Scroo it. I'm just going to leave this here:

(http://www.smbc-comics.com/comics/20120715.gif)

Quote from: Doctor Jest;565074Yeah, but the morality it's addressing isn't what you're talking about.

The point of the trolley problem is to illustrate that even the same person can come to two diametrically opposed opinions about a scenario that is, from a rational pros and cons perspective, identical simply by changing how they feel about it.  

Quote from: Doctor Jest;565074There's a difference between morality and self-righteous pomposity.

Is there?  Doesn't self-righteousness come from moral certainty?

Quote from: Doctor Jest;565074And even if I just give you the argument and say ok, sure, it's a moral belief and there's an evolutionary impetus to it... So what? There's an evolutionary impetus for hitting people who you don't like with rocks until they bleed out of the eyes, but we still don't allow that sort of thing in polite company.

Actually, the moral impetus for normal people is not to kill people, even people that they don't like.  Modern militaries actually do quite a bit to convince soldiers to act as expected without thinking because soldiers who think about killing their opponents often won't do it.  

Why are you reacting so emotionally to this?

Quote from: Sacrosanct;564772Part of the problem is that certain people see this:
(http://www.badassoftheweek.com/shakazulu2.jpg)

And immediately react like it was this:
(http://www.weirdwildrealm.com/filmimages/littlelionhunter.jpg)
There's a pretty big difference between the two, and it's sad the people can't see it.  One is clearly racist, while the other is a researched historical accuracy.  A company that puts the 2nd image in their book deserves to get flogged, but a company that puts the first should in no way get vilified.

In general, I agree.  I'm all for researched historical accuracy, as in general the researched historical accuracy strongly diverges from the stereotypes of old fiction.  So Fu Manchu isn't like real 1920s Chinese; and real Africans aren't like the Africans in depicted in Burrough's Tarzan stories.  

From what has been said in this thread so far, I'm not convinced that Golarion is racist - but the arguments on both sides have been pretty limited.  

Quote from: John Morrow;564541I'll ask less rhetorically this time...

So what's wrong with old historical race stereotypes? (This question is intended to identify the problem or problems, not claim that there is no problem.)

I don't think that being ingrained and expected is a problem.  As the quote from S. John Ross argues above, I think that's often a feature, not a bug.  But is that really your primary problem?

Old race stereotypes (to give an idea - say from prior to 1950) are generally racist - i.e. the grasping moneylending Jew; the lazy, watermelon-eating pickaninny; the lying thieving gypsy; etc.  These examples are typical of the stereotypes of non-white characters in old fiction.  These stereotypes are not based on accurate depictions of historical reality, but rather on the biased views of mainstream Western authors.  (Non-Western authors have different stereotypes - often that are also racist.)  

So, on the one hand, Fu Manchu is certainly an powerful stereotype that is familiar and quickly conveys content - that may be seen as a feature to use.  However, I think that there is a problem with continuing to use that stereotype straight.  

I could go on a bit about why I think it is bad, but I'd like to hear first from you - do you think that stereotypes like Fu Manchu or the lying thieving gypsy should be considered features and used for good effect?  Or do you think that they are a problem - but that they rare offshoots and that non-white stereotypes in old fiction are usually not like that?

Quote from: StormBringer;565064What would be racist, then?  I agree that Golarion isn't, but short of the obvious RaHoWa and anything by Stormfront, what elements would get a game labeled 'racist'?

Something that was actually racist.  Hint, orcs don't qualify.  ;)

Quote from: StormBringer;565064What would be racist, then?  I agree that Golarion isn't, but short of the obvious RaHoWa and anything by Stormfront, what elements would get a game labeled 'racist'?

Killing Orc babies like murderhobos and dressing up their parents like Zulu warriors? (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=20868)

I see that it's time to log out for a while.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;564777Holy....


Do you not get that depictions of people in those books are usually depictions of characters that players would play?  A player is going to want to play a Zulu warrior instead of one of the women who culturally do not fight or venture forth.  A player is going to want to play a noble or knight instead of a farmer with shit all over him.

Character Classes: Nobleman, Knight, Woman Who Stays in the Castle, Farmer With Shit All Over Him

Quote from: jeff37923;564800OK, thank you.

From what I remember, the Taldans are considered to be a culture that is in the decline in Golarion. Yup, my memory has not failed me. (http://www.pathfinderwiki.com/wiki/Taldan)

So, the pic of a native in a vibrant developing culture of dark-skinned humans is racist because it is compared to a culture of decadence and crumbling empires that is white.

I always thought the Taldans were supposed to be analogous to the Spanish (or Romans) who were white if "Mediterranean".

JG

Quote from: One Horse Town;564805Race/Class/Level systems and others that utilise Archetypes etc are all about stereotypes - its what characters in those systems are.

So there's always going to be an argument in relation to real world analogues that some of them are Racist, well, because they are stereotypes.

So, for example...

Zulu warrior or Zulu trader?

Gypsy pedlar or Gypsy Sculptor?

Hungarian Hussar or Hungarian Pedeotrician?

Certain combinations trigger associations that fire the imagination and make you go "oh yeah, cool!"

The fact that they are stereotypical means that some of them can be called racist because of negaitive real-world connotations.

Me? I wanna play a Zulu warrior.

Elven Archer or Elven Dentist?

JG

Quote from: Benoist;565108Killing Orc babies like murderhobos and dressing up their parents like Zulu warriors? (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=20868)

Quote from: CRKrueger;565106Something that was actually racist.  Hint, orcs don't qualify.  ;)

Ok, how overtly racist?  It would literally have to say "This book is racist" on the cover, then have n*gger in the header of every page, with sp*cs as a playable class?  Nothing short of that could even be considered to have some degree of racism?

This is still defining what it isn't.  We need to find out what it is.  What kind of depictions or art would make you say "Ok, this is racist."?

Quote from: James Gillen;565115Elven Archer or Elven Dentist?

JG

I'll play an Elven Dentist who uses his mad archery skills to pull teeth from 100 yards away. Rapid fire style.

Quote from: Wolf, Richard;565042As has been aptly demonstrated in this thread when we talk about "Africans" we are apparently talking exclusively about black sub-Saharan Africans and possibly even more specifically just Bantus because slavery.

Nothing Egyptians did matter unless you are an Afrocentrist that thinks they were Bantus.  Egypt doesn't matter, Nubia doesn't matter, and Ethiopia doesn't matter (the latter two of which could be said to be represented by the Garundi in Golarion, and it doesn't matter to anyone calling Golarion racist because all anyone actually cares about are the Bantu-inspired Mwangi).

The Zulu were the last 'great' civilization that spawned specifically from the indigenous people of west Africa.

Hm, I'll check out the Garundi - I'm always looking for Ethiopia analogue stuff I can use.

I think I agree with your general point (except I dislike the use of 'civilisation' to mean 'culture').

I think I would count modern Nigeria as a significant indigenous (though post European contact) Bantu civilisation, it obviously took a lot of stuff from the British, but Nigeria seems to (a) very much dominate much of modern sub-Saharan Africa and (b) maintains a significant economy beyond just oil, notably in shipping. Nigeria also has a very good education system, IME better than Britain and vastly superior to north Africa, the Middle East, or even south Asia.

Quote from: James Gillen;565113I always thought the Taldans were supposed to be analogous to the Spanish (or Romans) who were white if "Mediterranean".

JG

I don't know, I always hooked on to the "empire in decline" part and thought of Rome when it began turning inward and abandoned the furthest outposts of the Empire.

Quote from: John Morrow;565065Yet there are people who feel exactly like that about Wagner or even buying Volkswagens.  

My wife is annoyed that our Toyota Avensis is a load of junk. Yesterday she proposed buying a Volkswagen. I couldn't resist:

"Ein Volk! Ein Reich! Ein Wagen!" :D

Quote from: John Morrow;565073The article is about moral reasoning and how "morality may be hardwired into our brains by evolution".

Check out this article:
http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/haidt-weird-liberals-righteous-mind-america/

I recently bought the Haidt book, haven't read it yet though. It's competing with the Pathfinder Core Rulebook for attention. :D

Quote from: Wolf, Richard;565042Nothing Egyptians did matter unless you are an Afrocentrist that thinks they were Bantus.  Egypt doesn't matter, Nubia doesn't matter, and Ethiopia doesn't matter (the latter two of which could be said to be represented by the Garundi in Golarion, and it doesn't matter to anyone calling Golarion racist because all anyone actually cares about are the Bantu-inspired Mwangi).

Uhhh.... If you ever actually performed math in your life which given the average education level of the people here it might be possibly you haven't then yeah Egypt does matter.

Quote from: technoextreme;565175Uhhh.... If you ever actually performed math in your life which given the average education level of the people here it might be possibly you haven't then yeah Egypt does matter.

Maybe you're thinking of Babylon, or India? Egypt is not noted for its contribution to mathematics; although they clearly got quite good at geometry.

Quote from: S'mon;565177Maybe you're thinking of Babylon, or India? Egypt is not noted for its contribution to mathematics; although they clearly got quite good at geometry.

I am fuzzy on specific contributions but the Musaeum in Alexandria was a pretty important center of scholarship and learning on a range of subjects from the Ptolemies through much of the Roman empire. Pretty sure Euclid did most of his work in Alexandria. It is Ptolemaic Egypt, so maybe not what people have in mind when they think Egyptians though.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;565184I am fuzzy on specific contributions but the Musaeum in Alexandria was a pretty important center of scholarship and learning on a range of subjects from the Ptolemies through much of the Roman empire. Pretty sure Euclid did most of his work in Alexandria. It is Ptolemaic Egypt, so maybe not what people have in mind when they think Egyptians though.

I've found it's surprisingly common for people to have no idea that there is any distinction between Egypt of the Pharaohs and Egypt of the Ptolemys. They just lump them together.

Quote from: Dimitrios;565185I've found it's surprisingly common for people to have no idea that there is any distinction between Egypt of the Pharaohs and Egypt of the Ptolemys. They just lump them together.

In the US at least I think it is because there is so little ancient history taught in middle school or highschool (at least that was the case when I attended).

Quote from: technoextreme;565175Uhhh.... If you ever actually performed math in your life which given the average education level of the people here it might be possibly you haven't then yeah Egypt does matter.

How was your grammar education?

Regardless, what does Egypt have to do with Paizo's depictions of black people?

Quote from: StormBringer;565119Ok, how overtly racist?  It would literally have to say "This book is racist" on the cover, then have n*gger in the header of every page, with sp*cs as a playable class?  Nothing short of that could even be considered to have some degree of racism?

This is still defining what it isn't.  We need to find out what it is.  What kind of depictions or art would make you say "Ok, this is racist."?

It seems like you're looking for the creation of a line, so then it becomes easy to label something racist and be legit, which, actually doesn't surprise me too much, based on that other thread.

The problem with defining racism is that in many cases it is a thoughtcrime, defined by intent.  A historical article defining and explaining what a Minstrel Show is, showing white people in blackface, is not racist, no matter how offensive the imagery might be, or the racial background of the author.  Creating a blog article about the BET awards using those same pictures would be obscenely racist(or would it - if it was satire by Spike Lee?).

Talking about black people in Golarion and saying "They're all like this" and showing a picture of a shirtless, spearwielding tribesman is racist.  Showing that same exact picture as an accurate representation of one black culture (one of which Norton proved there are many) is not racist.  Except for yet another white person looking for yet another way to have a conversation about how the modern white world is racist.


BTW, do some reading on the neuroscience/psychology of stereotyping.  Guess what?  The act itself is not "ist", it's a way our brain categorizes and processes information.  I go to a town in the backwoods country of West Virginia, my brain is going to have some ideas about what I will find when I go there.  My brain is playing percentages for me.  It's up to me whether I actually stop in the town and talk to anybody or drive through thinking everyone is going to be an ignorant inbred hick.  What I do with the stereotype is the racist act.  Now some stereotypes are formed from real experience and facts, others are formed from propaganda and "echo-chamber learning" and some are deliberately created as a racist act itself.  

Knowing the difference and judging on an individual basis is the key.

Quote from: StormBringer;565119Ok, how overtly racist?  It would literally have to say "This book is racist" on the cover, then have n*gger in the header of every page, with sp*cs as a playable class?  

That would be my view. If they don't actually say "We're racist!" then you are engaging in witch-hunting.  You're trying to associate them with Nazi ideology. Unless they are actual Neo-Nazis, you should not be doing that.

Quote from: Dimitrios;565185I've found it's surprisingly common for people to have no idea that there is any distinction between Egypt of the Pharaohs and Egypt of the Ptolemys. They just lump them together.

Technically, the Ptolemys were the Pharaohs. But I know what you mean :p

Quote from: S'mon;565270That would be my view. If they don't actually say "We're racist!" then you are engaging in witch-hunting.  You're trying to associate them with Nazi ideology. Unless they are actual Neo-Nazis, you should not be doing that.

I don't think people have to announce themselves as racist for them to be so. Most racists probably don't believe they are racist. There is real racism that should be addressed (I know I have encountered it in various forms during my life)...I am just not convinced that using cultural analogs (especially historical ones) is the same as promoting racist stereotypes. I live in an area where all kinds of stereotypes float around and are a big problem. It is ugly and QI don't like it when I encounter it because it can have a real impact on people. But I don't think having a culture in a fantasy rpg with a tea ceremony or samurai is the same sort of thing. Fantasy games draw on iconic images from history all the time. For the most part that is what this Golarion setting appears to be doing. Everyone knows what a zulu warrior is, what a samurai is, and what a knight is.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;565369I don't think people have to announce themselves as racist for them to be so. Most racists probably don't believe they are racist. There is real racism that should be addressed (I know I have encountered it in various forms during my life)...I am just not convinced that using cultural analogs (especially historical ones) is the same as promoting racist stereotypes. I live in an area where all kinds of stereotypes float around and are a big problem. It is ugly and QI don't like it when I encounter it because it can have a real impact on people. But I don't think having a culture in a fantasy rpg with a tea ceremony or samurai is the same sort of thing. Fantasy games draw on iconic images from history all the time. For the most part that is what this Golarion setting appears to be doing. Everyone knows what a zulu warrior is, what a samurai is, and what a knight is.

This is my thoughts almost exactly.  If something wasn't racist unless explicitly said as much, we wouldn't have any racism.  Yay!

But we all know it doesn't work that way.  Just look at B.T.

I think the problem is when people go looking for racism when there might not be any, and interpret things in the most negative way possible.  Or do whatever the hell MGuy was suggesting with his "it's racist unless you put all the African warriors in royal garb" thing, which makes no sense at all.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;565382MGuy was suggesting with his "it's racist unless you put all the African warriors in royal garb" thing, which makes no sense at all.

Mguy was saying that when Zulu Warriors actually look like this:
(http://themitchycakesestate.wikispaces.com/file/view/ZuluWarrior.jpg/56917772/ZuluWarrior.jpg)

It's racist to portray them as looking like this:
(http://themitchycakesestate.wikispaces.com/file/view/ZuluWarrior.jpg/56917772/ZuluWarrior.jpg)

Instead, they should look like this:
(http://wiimedia.ign.com/wii/image/article/105/1050312/tatsunoko-vs-capcom-ultimate-all-stars-20091130025311343-000.jpg)

Quote from: TomatoMalone;563883You cannot be this fucking obtuse. The Viking and the Pict, inaccurate though all their depictions may be, are stereotypes made by other white people. They have never been used to marginalize or oppress minorities. They have never been used to dismiss the entirety of white people as a bunch of savages/thieves/honorable tea-swilling samurai. Stop talking out of your ass and think before you post.

This is a problem.  I see two scenarios:

A) You include a Zulu rip off because you're lazy.  You're a racist.

B) You decide not to include a Zulu rip off because some people would get offended.  Guess what, you're still a racist because everyone in your game is European and Asian.

I'd say in this set-up, then it's probably okay to be a racist, because everyone would be.

Quote from: John Morrow;565041I don't think the problem is the claim that Golarion is racist because all black humans are spear-wielding savages.  I think the problem is that they believe Golarion is racist because some black humans are spear-wielding savages, which matches stereotypes applied by racists to blacks.

Well, in the original thread on tangency.net, there were people claiming that the one spear-wielding tribal culture was the ONLY "african"-esque culture presented in Golarion, which is in fact not true.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;565404Well, in the original thread on tangency.net, there were people claiming that the one spear-wielding tribal culture was the ONLY "african"-esque culture presented in Golarion, which is in fact not true.

Attention-seeking, narcissistic political fanatics lie to make the chosen targets of their Five Minute Hate look bad.

Quelle surprise!

Quote from: Sacrosanct;564838I find it funny that those who are calling it lazy seem to have their solutions as one of the following:

1. include every culture (which is logistically impossible)

or

2. completely change the culture so that it doesn't resemble anything like it actually is.


Either one seems awfully boneheaded to me.  I haven't seen anyone give another answer.

I'm going to repeat this, because it seems certain folks keep glossing over it.  I know there are a lot more African cultures other than the Zulu or Swahili.  But when you're creating a setting book, you're only going to have between a handful to a dozen cultures, depending on if you're doing a specific region or an entire world.  The Zulu is the most romanticized culture from non-Egyptian Africa in most fantasy settings.  That's inarguable fact.  We can validate this by just looking at how many works of fiction (books and movies) that focus on pre-modern, non-Egyptian Africa are out there.

Am I to believe that you should just skip the most popular romanticized culture because that would be racist because you didn't include every other one?  How fucking ridiculous is that?  It's the same reason why most European cultures that in fantasy settings are based from Britain, Germany, or France, and not Hungary, Sweden, and Spain.  You're limited to a few choices, so you choose the most popular ones to go with.  If you're racist for not including the Soninke in your setting book, then you're racist for not including the Danes as a unique culture as well.

And MGuy's solution to make it not racist?  Make sure every depiction of an African warrior is in royal garb.  Do you depict every European wearing a crown and velvet cape?  Of course not.  In his fight to eliminate this so-called racism, he's holding an ethic group to a different standard than another.  Gee, I wonder what that is called...

Come on guys, seriously?

Quote from: James Gillen;565111Character Classes: Nobleman, Knight, Woman Who Stays in the Castle, Farmer With Shit All Over Him

'ow do you know he's the king?
'e 'asn't got shit all over him.

Quote from: CRKrueger;565388Mguy was saying that when Zulu Warriors actually look like this:
(http://themitchycakesestate.wikispaces.com/file/view/ZuluWarrior.jpg/56917772/ZuluWarrior.jpg)

It's racist to portray them as looking like this:
(http://themitchycakesestate.wikispaces.com/file/view/ZuluWarrior.jpg/56917772/ZuluWarrior.jpg)

Instead, they should look like this:
(http://wiimedia.ign.com/wii/image/article/105/1050312/tatsunoko-vs-capcom-ultimate-all-stars-20091130025311343-000.jpg)

Unbelievably Awesome!

Quote from: jhkim;565099Old race stereotypes (to give an idea - say from prior to 1950) are generally racist - i.e. the grasping moneylending Jew; the lazy, watermelon-eating pickaninny; the lying thieving gypsy; etc.  These examples are typical of the stereotypes of non-white characters in old fiction.  These stereotypes are not based on accurate depictions of historical reality, but rather on the biased views of mainstream Western authors.  (Non-Western authors have different stereotypes - often that are also racist.)

Thomas Sowell discusses the near universal maligning of "middleman minorities" around the globe regardless of the ethnicities involved in his book Race and Culture.  Sowell writes, "Whatever the race or culture of the middlemen, they have aroused suspicions, resentments, and misunderstandings in the most disparate societies around the world. Even where they were not a distinct minority at all, the very functions they performed have been misunderstood and the people performing them condemned. Selling the same product for more than it cost the seller has been seen as morally objectionable, and requiring more money to be repaid than was lent originally has been condemned in both secular and religious laws. Merchants were held in low esteem in Confucian China and usury was outlawed in both the Christian societies of medieval Europe and the Moslem societies of North Africa and the Middle East."  Those feelings are only made worse by the fact that "middleman minorities" are often a closed and close-knit ethnicity that has more success than the majority population, even in the face of persecution and discrimination, which leads to suspicions of dishonesty, cheating, collusion, theft, and even supernatural workings.   The end result is often not only discrimination but violent persecution and one can find the same pattern across a variety of ethnicities around the world and in the more general demonization of merchants, moneylenders, venture capitalists, and private equity firms (paging Gordon Gekko and Bain Capital) within the majority culture.

Similarly, I think that the Roma touch upon similar primal suspicions against wanderers, entertainers, and self-styled mystics who are distrusted because they lack social ties to the local community and, again, form a closed and close-knit ethnicity yet seem to have a powerful and alluring ability to draw people to them, get them to part with money, and seemingly control their lives.  Here, too, you can see the same stereotype applied to others who live a similar lifestyle (e.g., Irish Travellers) as well as those who make a living in a similar way (e.g., wandering entertainment troupes, traveling circuses, etc.).   They are an opaque social influence outside of the control of the existing social order.  

Even if you isolate these stereotypes from their historical ethnicities, people will connect them back to real world ethic stereotypes that have a similar package of traits.  If you want to see this at work, Google the words "Scrooge" and "Jewish", even though there is plenty of evidence that Scrooge is not, in fact, Jewish in A Christmas Carol, but he is a predictably greedy moneylender.  Basically, these same stereotypes appear again and again in fiction because they reflect a common train of thought that leads from particular characteristics, whether it reflects the truth or not.

So how should this be handled?  Should the stereotype of the greedy merchant or mysterious and alluring but dangerous wanderer be banished?  Is it enough to simply not associate those roles with a specific ethnicity, leaving the possibility of greedy merchants or alluring but dangerous wanderers as individuals in a broader ethnicity open?  Is it possible to illustrate the inaccuracies of the stereotypes and emphasize the common humanity of those groups without coming off as preachy and self-righteous?  I don't know what the right answer is here, but I do think that justifying their use simply on the basis of their ubiquitous presence in the source fiction that many role-playing games draws doesn't sound very persuasive to me.

Quote from: jhkim;565099So, on the one hand, Fu Manchu is certainly an powerful stereotype that is familiar and quickly conveys content - that may be seen as a feature to use.  However, I think that there is a problem with continuing to use that stereotype straight.

I think Fu Manchu used as a model for an individual villain is different than Fu Manchu used as a model for an entire ethnicity, the later clearly being a problem.

For example, the character Lo Pan in the movie Big Trouble In Little China is a classic Fu Manchu-style villain (so much so that he's given as an example of the type on the Fu Manchu WIkipedia page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fu_Manchu)) and the movie contains other Chinese stereotypes that led Roger Ebert to comment that the movie was "straight out of the era of Charlie Chan and Fu Manchu, with no apologies and all of the usual stereotypes." (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19860702/REVIEWS/607020301/1023)  yet the movie also featured fully Americanized Chinese characters with no discernible accent, emphasized commonality as well as exotic otherness, and portrayed the Americans somewhat simplistically and even negatively at times.  So is that movie racist?  I don't think it is, but I'd be curious if you disagree and like to know why if you do.

Quote from: jhkim;565099I could go on a bit about why I think it is bad, but I'd like to hear first from you - do you think that stereotypes like Fu Manchu or the lying thieving gypsy should be considered features and used for good effect?  Or do you think that they are a problem - but that they rare offshoots and that non-white stereotypes in old fiction are usually not like that?

I think that otherness, exotic villains, and alluring but dangerous strangers are all common, useful, and strong fictional elements that can produce enjoyable results.  As I said above, they resonate with the way people interpret certain social roles, even when they are not tied to a particular ethnicity.  I also think that context can matter (whether the stereotype is the only depiction presented or part of a broader palette of characters and character types for that ethnicity).  For example, I think a Fu Manchu villain and other stereotypes in Big Trouble In Little China that exists alongside a wider ranger of Chinese characters is not the same as a Fu Manchu villain leading faceless Chinese minions in a heavy-handed Cold War thriller depicting the Chinese people as a menace.  So part of my answer is that I can imaging a Fu Manchu villain being used to good effect in an appropriate context, holding up Big Trouble In Little China as an example, but  I also can imagine it being a problem and coming off quite racist.

With Gypsies (and Jews, which you mentioned above), the best solution is to probably not tie an ethnicity to those social roles such that the wandering entertainers are more akin to wandering Renaissance acting troupes than an ethnicity and the merchants and moneylenders are more independent businessmen than an ethnicity and then you can have your Gordon Gekko, Scrooge, hard-partying rock band tour bus, traveling circus side-show, or even members of an ethnicity that are bad apples without maligning an entire ethnicity in the process or evoking nasty real world stereotypes.  That Gypsies and Jews filled the roles they filled was at least partially because the discrimination face by those people closed other options to them.  On the other hand, that situation is not uncommon and such groups exist around the world, so maybe one could include such ethnicities, along with some misperception and persecution to illustrate why such stereotypes are a problem in the real world, though I find it difficult to imagine this being done without coming off as preachy and self-righteous.

Quote from: CRKrueger;565228It seems like you're looking for the creation of a line, so then it becomes easy to label something racist and be legit, which, actually doesn't surprise me too much, based on that other thread.

Well, that is kind of the point of the thread, right?  :)

QuoteThe problem with defining racism is that in many cases it is a thoughtcrime, defined by intent.  A historical article defining and explaining what a Minstrel Show is, showing white people in blackface, is not racist, no matter how offensive the imagery might be, or the racial background of the author.  Creating a blog article about the BET awards using those same pictures would be obscenely racist(or would it - if it was satire by Spike Lee?).

Sure, the line isn't always easy to draw.  Nor do I think it should be; this kind of thing requires a good deal of thought and reflection.  I also don't think "No it isn't" makes for a particularly thoughtful answer.  Paraphrasing Doctor Jest's cartoon, 'P makes me uncomfortable, so P cannot be true' isn't a particularly stringent application of logic.

QuoteTalking about black people in Golarion and saying "They're all like this" and showing a picture of a shirtless, spearwielding tribesman is racist.  Showing that same exact picture as an accurate representation of one black culture (one of which Norton proved there are many) is not racist.  Except for yet another white person looking for yet another way to have a conversation about how the modern white world is racist.

A good point.

QuoteBTW, do some reading on the neuroscience/psychology of stereotyping.  Guess what?  The act itself is not "ist", it's a way our brain categorizes and processes information.  I go to a town in the backwoods country of West Virginia, my brain is going to have some ideas about what I will find when I go there.  My brain is playing percentages for me.  It's up to me whether I actually stop in the town and talk to anybody or drive through thinking everyone is going to be an ignorant inbred hick.  What I do with the stereotype is the racist act.  Now some stereotypes are formed from real experience and facts, others are formed from propaganda and "echo-chamber learning" and some are deliberately created as a racist act itself.  

Knowing the difference and judging on an individual basis is the key.

Absolutely.

Quote from: CRKrueger;565228BTW, do some reading on the neuroscience/psychology of stereotyping.  Guess what?  The act itself is not "ist", it's a way our brain categorizes and processes information.  I go to a town in the backwoods country of West Virginia, my brain is going to have some ideas about what I will find when I go there.  My brain is playing percentages for me.  It's up to me whether I actually stop in the town and talk to anybody or drive through thinking everyone is going to be an ignorant inbred hick.  What I do with the stereotype is the racist act.  Now some stereotypes are formed from real experience and facts, others are formed from propaganda and "echo-chamber learning" and some are deliberately created as a racist act itself.

I highly recommend Tucker And Dale Vs Evil (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQOZHEYhVtU).  

Quote from: CRKrueger;565228Knowing the difference and judging on an individual basis is the key.

Stereotypes are naturally used as a way to improve are ability to make predictions in the face of unknowns.  Accurate stereotypes improve the accuracy of guesses, while inaccurate stereotypes can make the guesses worse.  Normal people readily discard their broad stereotypes once they learn more about an individual and can use that information to make better predictions because they understand that stereotypes aren't universal and individuals vary.  Hard core racists, on the other hand, will hang on to their stereotypes even when their knowledge of an individual should invalidate that stereotype or they won't even bother to gather more information about the individual.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;564838I find it funny that those who are calling it lazy seem to have their solutions as one of the following:

1. include every culture (which is logistically impossible)

or

2. completely change the culture so that it doesn't resemble anything like it actually is.

Either one seems awfully boneheaded to me.  I haven't seen anyone give another answer.

I don't think #2 is such a bad idea.  How about the African analogues are the advanced peoples, and the Northern Europeans analogues are the barbarian 'savages'?  Not the height of brilliance or anything, I admit, bit it's a start.  

In other words, do the dark-skinned people have to be based on real African history?  Wouldn't some mixing and matching work better?  Maybe they aren't from a continent that is rather poorer in metal, and has temperate grasslands instead of savannah.  The warmer southern region is bounded by rugged jungles and rainforest, but the somewhat cooler northern part is mostly mountainous deciduous forest.  The southern peoples would probably stick to lighter armours, but they would definitely have better iron or steel weapons and utensils.  The darker skin is a holdover from having to hide in the dim light of the forested areas from predators with very keen eyesight; the ones who were able to blend into the shadows better survived to pass on those genes.

How about all cultures are roughly equal in advances and regressions?  Perhaps Golarion already has this, but each culture (African, Asian, European, Middle Eastern) has one really advanced group (civilized), one really primitive group (savages/barbarians), and several that fall between the two.  I assume it isn't a problem for the various analogues to have similar advances in astronomy, metallurgy, spell craft, or whatever else that is roughly comparable to the baseline assumption for D&D (12th-15th c. Europe).

I'm not saying anyone here is a bad player/DM, or that they lack imagination.  I understand the 'shortcuts'.  I do think they are a bit lazy in this case.  Why use real world analogues at all?  But if they are necessary, just shifting everything one place to the left would probably head off many racism complaints; whether they are valid or not, we can't deny that they exist.  Make the 'Asians' shirtless, spear-wielding 'savages'.  Give the 'Africans' a 'coffee ceremony' and an honour-based culture.  The 'Middle Easterners' explore the world in pursuit of 'scientific' advancements, while the 'Europeans' are almost lost in the inner workings of mysticism.

Maybe I am just too optimistic.  :)

Quote from: StormBringer;565508I don't think #2 is such a bad idea.  How about the African analogues are the advanced peoples, and the Northern Europeans analogues are the barbarian 'savages'?  Not the height of brilliance or anything, I admit, bit it's a start.  

The is pretty close to what Golarion already does.

Quote from: Wolf, Richard;565517The is pretty close to what Golarion already does.

That isn't exactly what I am getting from the descriptions provided so far, but I don't have the books to hand and likely never will. If that is what they are doing, then obviously I would approve.

On the other hand, I am speaking in more general terms, as the racism in Golarion (again, with the above caveat) appears virtually non-existent, and where it could be argued to exist, it sounds more like laziness than malice, as others have pointed out.

Quote from: John Morrow;565468So how should this be handled?  Should the stereotype of the greedy merchant or mysterious and alluring but dangerous wanderer be banished?  Is it enough to simply not associate those roles with a specific ethnicity, leaving the possibility of greedy merchants or alluring but dangerous wanderers as individuals in a broader ethnicity open?  Is it possible to illustrate the inaccuracies of the stereotypes and emphasize the common humanity of those groups without coming off as preachy and self-righteous?  I don't know what the right answer is here, but I do think that justifying their use simply on the basis of their ubiquitous presence in the source fiction that many role-playing games draws doesn't sound very persuasive to me.

Like I said, my preference is to use stereotypes in unexpected ways - deliberately breaking from how they are used in old fiction.  I talked about how I did that with Iroquois and Algonquians in my Vinland game.  

I did have fairly stereotypical gypsies in my old Gothic Fantasy campaign, but in retrospect I regret that.  If I were to do it again, I would probably include a Romany analog and have them fit a number of stereotypes different from the gypsy stereotypes of old fiction but consistent with Romany culture.  For example, I might have the main group of Romany in my game matching pilgrim stereotypes - taking cues from portrayals of Puritans or Mormons.  

Quote from: John Morrow;565468I think that otherness, exotic villains, and alluring but dangerous strangers are all common, useful, and strong fictional elements that can produce enjoyable results.  As I said above, they resonate with the way people interpret certain social roles, even when they are not tied to a particular ethnicity.  I also think that context can matter (whether the stereotype is the only depiction presented or part of a broader palette of characters and character types for that ethnicity).  For example, I think a Fu Manchu villain and other stereotypes in Big Trouble In Little China that exists alongside a wider ranger of Chinese characters is not the same as a Fu Manchu villain leading faceless Chinese minions in a heavy-handed Cold War thriller depicting the Chinese people as a menace.  So part of my answer is that I can imaging a Fu Manchu villain being used to good effect in an appropriate context, holding up Big Trouble In Little China as an example, but  I also can imagine it being a problem and coming off quite racist.

I'd largely agree with this - though I feel like "coming off quite racist" seems hedging.  The original Fu Manchu stories and films were racist, and many later uses of those same tropes were as well.  Big Trouble in Little China took very deliberate steps to deviate from the usual Chinese stereotypes in most of its characters - and even to some degree in David Lo Pan.  It did not simply use the established Chinese stereotypes in American film, but rather mixed things up a lot.  

I could talk more, but I don't have time.  I might follow up later with some more thoughts.

I think the best way to create an interesting Fantasy culture is to make sure that it is "loosely" identifiable as a real-world analogue or blend of analogues.

However, the kicker is to have the players know enough at a glance about the culture so they don't feel like they're on an alien world, yet give the cultures enough depth that there is a lot to discover.

If you do that, I don't care if the Zulu-esque analogue people are pale yellow skinned, with green hair, and live in the bitter north or not.  Because in the end, they're not Zulus and someone who thinks I'm saying something about Zulus through my fantasy culture is a fucking moron.

Quote from: John Morrow;565065Yet there are people who feel exactly like that about Wagner or even buying Volkswagens.

"Jews in BMWs.  What's up with that?"
-Sarah Silverman

Quote from: StormBringer;565508I don't think #2 is such a bad idea.  How about the African analogues are the advanced peoples, and the Northern Europeans analogues are the barbarian 'savages'?  Not the height of brilliance or anything, I admit, bit it's a start.  

The European Dark Ages were the heyday of the Mali Empire.

JG

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;565369I don't think people have to announce themselves as racist for them to be so. Most racists probably don't believe they are racist.

I'm talking about accusing games of being racist and not engaging in witch-hunts. Here's a parrallel that occurred to me yesterday:

The Southern Poverty Law Centre (SPLC) lists the Nation of Islam as a Hate Group, because the Nation of Islam say "We hate whites, they are demons created by a mad scientist". All well and good. The SPLC don't then go over the views of the NAACP and say "Hm, this is an explicitly pro-black group that has some views in common with the Nation of Islam - I bet some of their members are closet racists - better list them as a Hate group too!"
When it comes to dealing with black Hate groups, the SPLC go by whether the group explicitly define themselves around Hate. They don't engage in witch-hunting activity, trying to delegitimise every group whose views in any way resemble those of the Hate group.

If you don't want to engage in witch-hunting of RPGs and their designers, this is the better model to follow.

Quote from: John Morrow;565488Hard core racists, on the other hand, will hang on to their stereotypes even when their knowledge of an individual should invalidate that stereotype or they won't even bother to gather more information about the individual.

I watched "Louis Theroux and the Nazis" again recently. Tom Metzger is pretty much the definition of a hard core racist, but he had a non-white friend he was clearly fond of.  He simply compartmentalised his mind and when away from his friend, denied that they were really friends - he was just 'being polite' or somesuch.

Quote from: StormBringer;565508I don't think #2 is such a bad idea.  How about the African analogues are the advanced peoples, and the Northern Europeans analogues are the barbarian 'savages'?  Not the height of brilliance or anything, I admit, bit it's a start.  

I've seen simplistic role-reversal used in a few sf stories, but I don't think it works well.

I have created campaign settings (or, one setting in different time periods) where the most advanced civilisation is a black tropical empire that sends missionaries and paladins north to civilise the barbaric white northerners; it works IMO because:

a) No heavy handed inverse racism; the 'European' culture may be going through a dark age in one version of the setting, but it's not denigrated.

b) I use the real world dark age & medieval 'Prester John' myth that a great Christian nation in the east, often identified with Ethiopia, would save beleaguered Christendom from the Arabs/Turks/Mongols. Basing it on stuff that people actually believed keeps it a lot more plausible, and gets away from the post-18th-century worldview of Europeans on top.

Quote from: S'mon;565553I'm talking about accusing games of being racist and not engaging in witch-hunts. Here's a parrallel that occurred to me yesterday:

The Southern Poverty Law Centre (SPLC) lists the Nation of Islam as a Hate Group, because the Nation of Islam say "We hate whites, they are demons created by a mad scientist". All well and good. The SPLC don't then go over the views of the NAACP and say "Hm, this is an explicitly pro-black group that has some views in common with the Nation of Islam - I bet some of their members are closet racists - better list them as a Hate group too!"
When it comes to dealing with black Hate groups, the SPLC go by whether the group explicitly define themselves around Hate. They don't engage in witch-hunting activity, trying to delegitimise every group whose views in any way resemble those of the Hate group.

If you don't want to engage in witch-hunting of RPGs and their designers, this is the better model to follow.

Ah, then we are in luck:, "There is no racism in RPGs, yay!".  Even RaHoWa does not mention 'hate' or 'racism', let alone admit to it.  So all we have to do is keep a lookout for games that flat out claim to promote racism using those exact words, and we are good to go.

Quote from: James Gillen;565546The European Dark Ages were the heyday of the Mali Empire.

JG

I think you mean the European Middle Ages.  :)

Quote from: StormBringer;565520That isn't exactly what I am getting from the descriptions provided so far, but I don't have the books to hand and likely never will. If that is what they are doing, then obviously I would approve.

How have you missed the numerous examples that have been posted in this thread?

I think it's been covered, but I wanted to answer the question -

Golarion isn't racist, but only because they're drawing from established settings and tropes.

If you listen to their stories about the history of Paizo, there's a good one about Lisa going over TSR's books after Wizards took them over.  She found their world splintering led to their demise.  To prevent that in Golarion, they deliberately decided to include every fantasy genre in a single world, as regions rather than alternate dimensions.

Including African tribes in this mix isn't because Golarion feels that black people are inferior, so the accusation doesn't hold much water.

Quote from: kythri;565615How have you missed the numerous examples that have been posted in this thread?

I must have skimmed over the numerous posts describing the African analogues as the most advanced culture in Golarion, and the European-analogues as backwards savages.  Do you have a link to those posts?

Quote from: StormBringer;565638I must have skimmed over the numerous posts describing the African analogues as the most advanced culture in Golarion, and the European-analogues as backwards savages.  Do you have a link to those posts?

Obviously.

Here's one reference:

http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=563720&postcount=54

It's also been pointed out that the iconic barbarian (i.e. "savage" is a European-analog, not African.

You can go back and re-read for the rest, I'm not your research assistant.

Quote from: jhkim;565525Like I said, my preference is to use stereotypes in unexpected ways - deliberately breaking from how they are used in old fiction.  I talked about how I did that with Iroquois and Algonquians in my Vinland game.

While I think that's fine as an option, it can be problematic as a mandate, especially since it runs against the value of cliché issue.  Clichés are an important shorthand that makes the information in role-playing games manageable, and while games like Tékumel, Jorune, and the Madlands get consistent kudos for being innovative, evocative, and creative, they don't do well commercially or have lots of players.  Perhaps that problem can be mitigated by applying the differences as clichés as well, as you did by describing one of the groups as "fascist".  

And I still think that applying a negative cliché to a non-white people, even one that evidence suggests actually happened historically, can still cause problems.  As I pointed out, there are cases where someone has said that the evidence shows that a particular culture actually practiced cannibalism and people have gone nuts attacking them as racists (e.g., this article (http://www.usnews.com/usnews/doubleissue/mysteries/anasazi.htm) says of Christy Turner and the Anasazi cannibalism controversy, "Critics have charged him with everything from shoddy science to racism."), and that's hardly the only place that happens.  For example, Lawrence Keeley jokes about the absurdity anthropologists describing axes carried everywhere by certain tribesmen as "tools" rather than "weapons" by quipping that they carry them everywhere in case the sudden urge to chop down a tree overcomes them.  That this actually happens in the social sciences and that attitudes drawn from those controversies and disciplines are what drives the controversies over fictional people and settings on the Internet is why I do not believe this is simply a hypothetical concern.  

I do think that what some people are asking for and want is that essentially non-white characters always be depicted positively and never be depicted negatively, which was one of the main points I was trying to make by the Keith Richburg article I sent you via PM (American in Africa: Part 1 (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/richburg/richbrg1.htm) and American in Africa: Part 2 (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/richburg/richbrg2.htm)).  The relevant bit is here:

QuoteAre you black first, or a journalist first?

The question succinctly sums up the dilemma facing almost every black journalist working for the "mainstream" (read: white) press. Are you supposed to report and write accurately, and critically, about what you see and hear? Or are you supposed to be pushing some kind of black agenda, protecting black American leaders from tough scrutiny, treating black people and black issues in a different way?

Many of those questions were at the heart of the debate stirred up a decade ago by my Post colleague, Milton Coleman, when he reported remarks of Jesse Jackson referring to Jews as "Hymie." Coleman was accused of using material that was off the record; more troubling, he was accused of betraying his race. For being a hard-nosed journalist, he suffered the wrath of much of the black community, and even had to endure veiled threats from Louis Farrakhan's henchmen.

I have had to deal with many of the same questions over the years, including those asked by family members during Thanksgiving or Christmas gatherings in Detroit. "Let me ask you something," my favorite cousin, Loretta, began once. "Why does the media have to tear down our black leaders?" She was referring to Marion Barry and his cocaine arrest, and to Coleman Young, the longtime Detroit mayor who was always under a cloud for something or other. I tried to explain that journalists only do their job and should expose wrongdoing no matter if the wrongdoer is black or white. My cousin wasn't convinced. "But they are the only role models we have," she said.

It was an argument that couldn't be won. And it was an argument that trailed after me as a black reporter covering black Africa. Was I supposed to travel around looking for the "good news" stories out of the continent, or was I supposed to find the kind of compelling, hard-hitting stories that I would look for any other place in the world? Was I not to call a dictator a dictator, just because he happened to be black? Was I supposed to be an apologist for corrupt, ruthless, undemocratic, illegitimate black regimes?

Apparently so, if you subscribe to the kind of Pan Africanism that permeates much of black American thinking. Pan Africanism, as I see it, prescribes a kind of code of political correctness in dealing with Africa, an attitude that says black America should bury its head in the sand to all that is wrong in Africa, and play up the worn-out demons of colonialism, slavery and Western exploitation of minerals. Anyone who does, or writes, otherwise is said to be playing into the old "white conspiracy." That attitude was confirmed to me in Gabon, in May 1993, when I first met C. Payne Lucas of Africare, a Washington-based development and relief organization. "You mean you're a black man writing all of that stuff about Africa?" he said.

Blacks and other minorities have been getting the crappy end of the stereotype stick and have been told that they and their ancestors were inferior for so long that there are people who feel we have an obligation to compensate by burying the negatives and emphasizing only the positives, which is how I think we get to the claim that the portrayal of African-analogue people in Golarion should only draw on the best examples the continent has to offer, the peaks of their cultural achievements (e.g., Mali and Egypt, no matter how much of a stretch the latter is) and the highest levels of their culture (dressing like nobility).  Please note that while I don't personally agree that this is the right solution, I do think that the intentions are often admirable and the problem they are seeking to remedy is real.

My point here is not that your suggestions are wrong.  You can make a strong case that favoring more complicated cliché hybrids over simpler straight clichés is a worthwhile price to pay to avoid using a straight cliché that evokes stereotypes used by racists to encourage discrimination and that might even encourage racist thinking in readers.  I think another solution is the Big Trouble in Little China approach, which is also what Golarion seems to do, which is to include some straight clichés but also alternatives, as well, which remind readers that all people are human and have the potential to embrace different cultures and that there can be variation within a culture.  

My point here is that even if you do that, there will be people who will still complain because their expectations go beyond simply steering clear of racism and racist cliches.  They want to take proactive steps to reverse past wrongs.

Quote from: jhkim;565525I did have fairly stereotypical gypsies in my old Gothic Fantasy campaign, but in retrospect I regret that.  If I were to do it again, I would probably include a Romany analog and have them fit a number of stereotypes different from the gypsy stereotypes of old fiction but consistent with Romany culture.  For example, I might have the main group of Romany in my game matching pilgrim stereotypes - taking cues from portrayals of Puritans or Mormons.

And how would you convey the differences and the full intent quickly and clearly to the GM and players were you to publish such a thing for others?  Do you think it's effectively conveyed simply by presenting the multiple cliché influences and some idea of how they mesh together or do you think it would require a write-up of the culture to properly convey what you are trying to get across?  And would your game analogue, merged with stereotypes about Puritans and Mormons, fit the bill for such people in a Gothic Fantasy campaign, at least part of which traditionally relies on the danger and allure of the Gypsy cliché?

Quote from: jhkim;565525I'd largely agree with this - though I feel like "coming off quite racist" seems hedging.

I'm trying to focus on appearance rather than intent, which is a broader issue that other people have been raising.  That choice of phrase whas meant to convey a portrayal that most reasonable people would look at and say, "Yup, that looks racist."

Quote from: jhkim;565525The original Fu Manchu stories and films were racist, and many later uses of those same tropes were as well.  Big Trouble in Little China took very deliberate steps to deviate from the usual Chinese stereotypes in most of its characters - and even to some degree in David Lo Pan.  It did not simply use the established Chinese stereotypes in American film, but rather mixed things up a lot.

I agree with this.  But some of the stereotypes were still there and Roger Ebert still found it objectionable.  This goes back to what I asked earlier, "What's the actual problem? That a stereotype used echoes a real world stereotype used for malicious purposes? That the stereotype is false? That the stereotype is negative? That it's a stereotype at all? Depending on who you talk to, any, all, or none of those things might be a problem."  Ebert seems to have a problem with those stereotypes evoked at all and to a large degree the line between racist and not racists is going to be in the eye of the beholder.

Quote from: StormBringer;565590Ah, then we are in luck:, "There is no racism in RPGs, yay!".  Even RaHoWa does not mention 'hate' or 'racism', let alone admit to it.  So all we have to do is keep a lookout for games that flat out claim to promote racism using those exact words, and we are good to go.

Go at what?

Quote from: StormBringer;565520That isn't exactly what I am getting from the descriptions provided so far, but I don't have the books to hand and likely never will. If that is what they are doing, then obviously I would approve.

I'm not going to give descriptions of every race and culture, but I'll list a few to give you an example of what I'm talking about.

In Golarion's history there was a catastrophe called "Earthfall" that shattered the world.  There were numerous great civilizations, mostly that are greater and more civilized than the ones that exist in the setting's 'present day'.

The ones that were more or less totally destroyed were the Azlanti.  Only refugees survived, and those refugees mixed with various other humans to spawn their cultures, including the Taldan, and the Chelaxians (who have their own offshoots now).  

Of these the Taldan are a half-Azlanti offshoot of the Keleshites, who are Arab inserts whom created their own great civilization without any real outside help.  The Taldan get called white but are not described as white in the text nor does the artwork portray them that way, nor would it make any sense to perceive them that way given their background.  They might be broadly considered Caucasoid, but that hardly seems to count considering we largely don't consider real-life Caucasoid Arabs "white" in the modern Anglophone world.

The Chelaxians are another half-Azlanti offshoot, but of the Ulfren, who are Viking inserts.  These Vikings have never had any independent social advancement, and are morally just as happy raiding and raping as they have been for thousands of years if it weren't for the days of longships being the height of military technology long since passing.

The Chelaxians, I would describe as white, and are often depicted as white-looking although not always, sometimes having an Asiatic look (which isn't uncommon in lots of northern and eastern Europe anyway).  

The Chelaxians and their offshoots are the only high civilization that any 'white people' in Golarion have ever had, and that only due to being ruled by their half-Azlanti aristocracy that brought them that civilization in the first place.  

The only fully white ethnic group, left completely to their own devices are raping, pillaging barbarians incapable of advancing themselves beyond log meadhalls, and they can't even look at the military technology of their neighboring cousins and copy it they are so fucking stupid.

Now, we still have the primitive Mwangi, but that's only one half of the coin.  The other definitively black African insert in Golarion are the Garundi, who like the Azlanti were a once great civilization whose nation was destroyed in Earthfall.  Except the Garundi are still around, both as nomads and bordering the Mwangi realm, and many Mwangi convert to the Garundi lifestyle.  The setting features two nations founded by two rival Garundian archmages even.  

Unlike whites in Golarion, black Africans, Arabs, Asians, et al can create a relatively high level of technology (within the scope of the setting) without needing Numenorian, or Atlantean ripoff refugees to get them there.

Worse still, those upjumped whites sole real contribution to Golarion is imperialism, slavery and war.  Overall it's a very "progressive" setting.

Quote from: John Morrow;565686While I think that's fine as an option, it can be problematic as a mandate, especially since it runs against the value of cliché issue.  Clichés are an important shorthand that makes the information in role-playing games manageable, and while games like Tékumel, Jorune, and the Madlands get consistent kudos for being innovative, evocative, and creative, they don't do well commercially or have lots of players.  Perhaps that problem can be mitigated by applying the differences as clichés as well, as you did by describing one of the groups as "fascist".

Quote from: John Morrow;565686And how would you convey the differences and the full intent quickly and clearly to the GM and players were you to publish such a thing for others?  Do you think it's effectively conveyed simply by presenting the multiple cliché influences and some idea of how they mesh together or do you think it would require a write-up of the culture to properly convey what you are trying to get across?  And would your game analogue, merged with stereotypes about Puritans and Mormons, fit the bill for such people in a Gothic Fantasy campaign, at least part of which traditionally relies on the danger and allure of the Gypsy cliché?

In short, yes, I think this works.  Mixed, contrasting cliches works as a quick way to convey things.  I think Big Trouble in Little China is a great example of this.  Jack Burton is in no way a stereotypical leading white hero, but in less than five minutes the movie quickly conveys a picture of him.  Likewise, Eddie Li is not an established Chinese stereotype, but he is quickly understood.  This is no less accessible than something that only uses established stereotypes of Asians.  

I'd suggest the Imaro books as another good example.  It uses a lot of African ideas, including a hero from a primitive spear-wielding tribe.  However, the character of Imaro draws more on the stereotypes like Conan or Tarzan rather than the traditional stereotypes of Africans seen in old fiction.  It is in my opinion a very accessible work even though it is a non-traditional fantasy world.  

Within RPGs, I think GURPS Voodoo is a good example of such mixed stereotypes which remains accessible.  By contrast, I think the original GURPS Fantasy is a bad way to handle this - using old stereotypes for its portrayal of the Sahudese, as highlighted in features like the "Sahudese Fire Drill" adventure.  

None of these rely on long meta-explanations of "this is the stereotype I am using".  Instead, they just jump in and present the character as is.  The way Imaro is written, it quickly becomes clear that he is a hero in the mold of Conan.  This image of him is dominant, rather than traditional Zulu stereotypes.  Likewise, I never used the word "fascist" in my portrayal of the proto-Pequot, but their militarist and nationalist posture evoked that stereotype.  


While there are different ways to approach the issue - one way that does not work is just taking and using stereotypes straight from old fiction.  Mixing and varying stereotypes is not a magic bullet which will make it impossible for anyone in the world to call your work racist - but that isn't necessary.  While it is impossible to please everyone, there are lots of authors and works that are consistently praised for their treatment of race - and don't particularly suffer from criticism.  

I'm hearing mixed things about Golarion, and I'm interested since just today I ran Pathfinder set in Golarion for my son and two nephews.  I may be buying more material, in which case I'll see for myself.

Quote from: Wolf, Richard;565831I'm not going to give descriptions of every race and culture, but I'll list a few to give you an example of what I'm talking about.

Certainly, I wasn't expecting a virtual copy and paste from the books; this summary is more than sufficient for our purposes here, thanks for putting it up.

QuoteWorse still, those upjumped whites sole real contribution to Golarion is imperialism, slavery and war.  Overall it's a very "progressive" setting.

It sounds like they have a pretty good handle on things, then.  I don't see what the problem is here (again, without the books in my possession).  Perhaps give the 'white' nations a bit more of their own progress, but it sounds like Paizo did their research.  This is a shitload more than none, which is about how much other companies tend to do.  I am convinced Steve Jackson has a time machine, so their historical books don't count.  :)

Quote from: Marleycat;564499I can't disagree about Ettin. He comes off as false and very two faced to me.

Fits his screenname quite well, doesn't he?

Quote from: MGuy;564787But the shirtless spear wielding warrior is a RACIST STEREOTYPE. If you're going to make a game and you want to avoid that slap him in some royal garb at the very least!

El Jefe beat me to posting the 300 pic.
I also was tempted to grab a pic of one of my own ancenstors, in Pict warpaint, ready for battle.
I don't call those people "racist stereotypes"; I call them National Heroes!

What the fuck can you do against such blatant, outright, unquestionable stupidity, really?

Quote from: Benoist;565922What the fuck can you do against such blatant, outright, unquestionable stupidity, really?

Expose it for what it is.

Quote from: Wolf, Richard;565831Worse still, those upjumped whites sole real contribution to Golarion is imperialism, slavery and war.  Overall it's a very "progressive" setting.

Yes, IMO it's a lot easier to find the self-consciously Politically Correct stuff in Golarion than it is to identify (pro white) racism, (pro male) sexism, etc. As Politically Correct settings go, I think it works pretty well; the pulp vibe helps.

When people ask me what my background, my heritage is, I tell them I'm German/Irish. I invariably follow that up by telling them that my idea of a good weekend is to get drunk and invade small countries. I, of course, have never been to Germany or Ireland, nor have I invaded a small country (not in real-life anyway, but I do get drunk a lot), being a born-and-rasied citizen of the United States, but I say it nonetheless.

Does that make me racist? No, it makes me hilarious, and self-deprecating, and also shows the use of stereotypes - not racism.

Stereotyping is shorthand - usually based on some degree of actual fact, broadly applied, in order to get an idea across in a few words or lines of text. Stereotyping Irish as drunks or Germans as warlike is not true for every member of their culture, of course - no culture is a monobloc of beliefs or ideals or behaviors - but stereotypes exist for a reason, not just in the Real World (tm) but in books, movies, RPGs, whatever. Nobody woke up one day and said "Hey, all Asians are smart and like rice!" - it is an idea that developed over time, and of course it isn't wholly accurate, not by a long shot.  

Am I going to say that all stereotypes are valid? Not literally, of course not, but they do serve a purpose. However, in our modern age of Liberal Arts majors with nothing better to do than come up with something to be offended by while living semester to semester off mom and dad's money (see what I did there?), stereotypes have become racist.

Racist means something very specific - that someone holds the belief that their specific genotype is inherently superior to any other, for whatever reason. In this era, however, the term has been co-opted in order to shame a party who disagrees with a political viewpoint into silence, or abject apologetics and contortions, in order not to appear to be mean or evil. Stereotypically (see what I did there again?), this is a leftist's weapon of choice.

RPGs have a limited number of pages, a limited word-count, in order to bring their societies to life. As such, stereotypical descriptions are unavoidable. Sure, you could have your Viking-culture hail from dry lands to the south and have dark skin, or have your enlightened Greek-analog culture be red-skinned peoples from across the sea, and none of that is inherently racist - you're using ingrained stereotypical memes (Western, to be sure, but let's be honest, our hobby is dominated by the West) as a shorthand way of putting images into the minds of GMs and players.

You could, of course, try to come up with a truly unique culture, avoiding at all costs any aspect of any known Earth culture - but then you're creating something alien, something so outside the normal "Western" experience that it would takes dozens, if not hundreds of pages to describe them in enough detail to make them playable. Many people think Tekumel falls into this catagory, for example, because it draws heavily on non-Western, "dead" civilizations - something very few people outside of academia or South/Central America have experience with, and of which there are almost no stereotypes aside from obisidian dagger-wielding priests on top of pyramids. Tekumel, of course, is nothing like that at all, but it has the reputation (the stereotype?) of being too "hard" to grasp to be playable.

I don't know about you, but I want to start playing my games without having to take a six-week course in alien cultures first. So - stereotyping. Broad-brush, bold descriptions, that synch up with images and details in our own minds that can be readily grasped and applied. You can mix and match parts and pieces from several established and known cultures, or even throw in some unique bits of our own, but if you want to get your setting across, you almost have no choice but the draw upon stereotypes in order to bring your setting to life.

That's not racism.

Unless someone wants it to be.

Quote from: Werekoala;566178Stereotyping Irish as drunks or Germans as warlike is not true for every member of their culture, of course - no culture is a monobloc of beliefs or ideals or behaviors - but stereotypes exist for a reason, not just in the Real World (tm) but in books, movies, RPGs, whatever. Nobody woke up one day and said "Hey, all Asians are smart and like rice!" - it is an idea that developed over time, and of course it isn't wholly accurate, not by a long shot.  

The stereotyping of Irish people as drunks began, or more properly found its fullest expression with the "scientific racism" of the 19th century, as the rulers of the English cast about themselves for ever more creative means to dehumanise perceived enemies. Similarly with the "Frogs" expression for French people. Personally, I quite enjoy frogs legs. Its tragic persistence to this day is merely indicative of ignorance, almost all of the Scandinavian and Eastern European cultures consume more alcohol per capita, as does the UK. The lesser lights will crack a paddy joke about potatoes while stuffing themselves with fries.

Otherwise I agree, neutral or positive stereotypes are not only desireable but often have a reasonable basis in reality, simply because there is little other reason for them to exist.

True, of course, but I was just using my own stereotypical answer to questions about my heritage as an example. And of course, alcohol consumption does not always equate to drunkness - I am a professional drinker, and could likely pass a field sobriety test when a less-proficient imbiber would be hauled off to jail on a similar number of drinks. Therefore, we could say that the Irish are probably LESS inclined to drunkeness than others, because of their lifelong experience tipping the bottle. This would, of course, invalidate the stereotype. :)

Quote from: Werekoala;566181Therefore, we could say that the Irish are probably LESS inclined to drunkeness than others, because of their lifelong experience tipping the bottle. This would, of course, invalidate the stereotype. :)

Hahaha, but no, less alcohol per capita means less alcohol per capita. Not less inclined to being shitfaced (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/7616405/Britain-is-the-binge-drinking-capital-of-Europe.html).

Quote from: Werekoala;566178When people ask me what my background, my heritage is, I tell them I'm German/Irish. I invariably follow that up by telling them that my idea of a good weekend is to get drunk and invade small countries. I, of course, have never been to Germany or Ireland, nor have I invaded a small country (not in real-life anyway, but I do get drunk a lot), being a born-and-rasied citizen of the United States, but I say it nonetheless.

Does that make me racist? No, it makes me hilarious, and self-deprecating, and also shows the use of stereotypes - not racism.

From the Science News article Fighting Stereotype Stigma: Studies chart accuracy, usefulness of inferences about social groups (http://www.sciencenews.org/pages/pdfs/data/1996/149-26/14926-14.pdf):

QuotePsychologist Yueh-Ting Lee received an electronic mail message several years ago that included some barbed observations about the quality of life in several countries. "Heaven is a place with an American house, Chinese food, British police, a German car, and French art," Lee's correspondent wrote.

"Hell is a place with a Japanese house, Chinese police, British food, German art, and a French car."

While these national stereotypes fall short of absolute truths, asserts Lee of Westfield (Mass.) State College, they are accurate enough to give the aphorism its humorous punch. Houses in the United States indeed boast more space, on average, than Japanese dwellings. A Chinese inn probably holds greater culinary potential than a British pub.

In this respect, stereotypes, rather than representing unjustified prejudices, typically function as thought-efficient starting points for understanding other cultures and social groups, as well as the individuals who belong to them, Lee holds.

"Stereotypes are probabilistic beliefs we use to categorize people, objects, and events," Lee proposes. "We have to have stereotypes to deal with so much information in a world with which we are often uncertain and unfamiliar."

Many psychologists find this opinion about as welcome as a cut in their research grants. They view stereotyping as a breeding ground for errant generalizations about others that easily congeal into racism, sexism, and other forms of bigotry.

See also the overview of how the complaints about stereotypes measure up to research on them in this chapter from the book mentioned in that article (http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/%7Ejussim/why%20study%20stereo%20acc.pdf).  Lee Jussim's has other articles he's published on stereotype accuracy online at his web site here (http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/%7Ejussim/papers.html).

Quote from: jhkim;565880While there are different ways to approach the issue - one way that does not work is just taking and using stereotypes straight from old fiction.

Out of curiosity, what's your opinion about Mongoose's Conan game and presenting the Hyborian Age based on Howard's work?  As you are aware, I do think it's fair to call Robert E. Howard a racist (http://www.rehupa.com/OLDWEB/romeo_southern.htm) and his work certainly has some racist steroetypes in it regardless of how someone feels about him, personally.  Do you think it would be best to avoid publishing such settings, modernize them a bit to minimize or eliminate the racist stereotypes, or something else?  Since the role-playing hobby has some affection for the pulp genre, this question has relevance beyond simply Conan because racist stereotypes (such as the Fu Manchu stereotype already mentioned) are pretty widespread in classic pulps.

I'm fine with saying that harmless, non-racist, and/or accurate stereotypes exist.  I'm fine if an evaluation of Golarion says that the stereotype use in it is not racist.  I've just started playing in Golarion now, and I haven't had any issues with it so far - but I'm currently only using the Pathfinder Beginner Box to run games for my son and nephews.  

However, some people seem to be going further and arguing that any complaints about racist stereotypes are inherently wrong.  I completely disagree. There are many racist stereotypes that are real and have serious negative effects.  

Quote from: John Morrow;566201See also the overview of how the complaints about stereotypes measure up to research on them in this chapter from the book mentioned in that article (http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/%7Ejussim/why%20study%20stereo%20acc.pdf).  Lee Jussim's has other articles he's published on stereotype accuracy online at his web site here (http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/%7Ejussim/papers.html).

I've now read the chapter in the first link (1995 Jussim et al).  It concentrates on knocking down straw men - like the dismissal of racism in stereotypes on page 11.  Most of the points addressed in this whole section have no attribution at all, and the minority that do are citations from the 1960s at the latest.  

Sure, not every stereotype falsely attributes a genetic component to the trend.  That doesn't mean that racist stereotypes don't exist.  The authors in principle acknowledge something like this, saying "Although ethnocentrism undoubtedly sometimes influences evaluations (e.g. Campbell, 1967), it is premature to conclude that even stereotypes about personality necessarily reflect ethnocentrism."  

This goes back to my point.  I contend that stereotypes like the lying thieving gypsy, the greedy Jew, Sambo and pickaninny, and others really are problematic - even if some other stereotypes are not problematic.  I think you agree with me in this, John, but it seems like people keep implying that there are no problems in stereotypes.

Quote from: John Morrow;566204Out of curiosity, what's your opinion about Mongoose's Conan game and presenting the Hyborian Age based on Howard's work?  As you are aware, I do think it's fair to call Robert E. Howard a racist (http://www.rehupa.com/OLDWEB/romeo_southern.htm) and his work certainly has some racist steroetypes in it regardless of how someone feels about him, personally.  Do you think it would be best to avoid publishing such settings, modernize them a bit to minimize or eliminate the racist stereotypes, or something else?  Since the role-playing hobby has some affection for the pulp genre, this question has relevance beyond simply Conan because racist stereotypes (such as the Fu Manchu stereotype already mentioned) are pretty widespread in classic pulps.

I'm familiar with Mongoose's Conan game, and while I'm fine with playing it as is, I'm not comfortable with how they handle it.  In the game, they have attribute modifiers and included skills for close parallels to real-world race.  So, for example, if you are a Shemite, you get bonuses to lying and evaluate the price of items (along with archery and other skills).  I think that the game authors softened Howard's views regarding Africans, so they don't have lower Int scores, say.  Still, in short I don't like it.  

I dislike bowdlerization in general - by which I mean covering up and editing out the most extreme racist parts, giving the impression that the original wasn't really racist.  It wouldn't be the commercial thing to do - but if I were doing such a game I would be up-front that R.E. Howard was racist, explicitly acknowledging that and differentiating my game from that.  Rather than taking the races straight (i.e. Shemites are good at lying and money handling), I might drop the idea of race mechanics completely.  Instead, I'd have pure background description that included common outsider stereotypes about each race along with their own view of themselves - then let players select appropriate background options for how they view the character.  i.e. Is their Shemite good with money like the stereotype, or not good?  This didn't come up in my Conan run since I used pregens that were all the same race (Cimmerian),

http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/brawnythews/

I'm not much of a game designer, but this is in general how I handle old source material.  For example, at Gen Con I'm running a larp where the characters are all pulp villains including Fu Manchu, Professor Moriarty, The Shadow's enemy Shiwon Khan, Tarzan's foe Zanaka, and others.  By making these the central characters, even though I'm mostly staying true to their nature as written in the original, the game definitely works as a tongue-in-cheek commentary on the pulps, I think.  

I've also been running a steampunk game with my weekly group recently using the FATE edition of the Kerberos Club.  One of the things I like about Kerberos Club is that it at least takes some distinct steps towards highlighting the class bias in Victorian fiction.  (Moreso than some other steampunk games like Castle Falkenstein or Space 1889.)

IIRC, the Meadow Shemites have different skill bonuses then the Shemites, which begs the question is a "racial bonus" a genetic bonus or a cultural bonus?  Even if it seems to be a genetic bonus, is it really just natural selection, ie. Vanir selecting for Strength and the hand-eye coordination to wield swords while Shemites who live in ancient huge cities select for the ability to move through that society?  Most of the skill bonuses stuff I see as cultural, so a Shemite raised by Vanir for example would be a better swordsman then a liar.

I do think they could have varied things up a bit, for example differentiated the Asshuri culture from the rest of Shem, and more strongly associated the bonuses with Culture rather then Race.

I think Mongoose did a decent job of walking the line between staying true to the setting and avoiding the obvious racism of the creator.

Also did Howard claim the Shemites the greatest liars because they are Proto-Jews or are they the greatest liars because they are the most civilized of the Western countries and thus must be the most deceitful and corrupt?  It's really hard to tell when his central Barbarian vs. Civilization theme crosses over into 1930's Badlands-of-Texas-Brand racism.  Except when dealing with the Black Kingdoms, then his racism is obvious and pathetic to behold.

I'm not a fan of mongoose Conan's racial ability score and skill modifiers, and find some of them distasteful.

Quote from: jhkim;566212This goes back to my point.  I contend that stereotypes like the lying thieving gypsy, the greedy Jew, Sambo and pickaninny, and others really are problematic - even if some other stereotypes are not problematic.  I think you agree with me in this, John, but it seems like people keep implying that there are no problems in stereotypes.

I think and assume that many on this list would agree with you about some or all of those stereotypes.

However labeling someone or something as racist has become as politically charged as being labeled a "red" during the Red Scare. It is very effective for character assassination and damaging credibility for whatever special agenda the labeler has, and so readily and regularly used nowadays that it provokes counter-response, even if there is some agreement.

Well, part of the problem, is the problem of racism varies from person to person.

You could show that picture of a Zulu warrior to a group of people, and get different responses from each. One would think him "a Noble Savage, defending his land from Imperial oppression", another would look and say "It's a historical Zulu Warrior, in typical dress", another would say "It's an African displaying their inferred inferiority, in loincloth and pointed stick" (or worse, but I feel dirty enough just for writing what I did...).

Is the depiction racist? No.
Is how people react to it? Quite possibly.

Some stereotypes are inherently racist. Not every Jew is greedy. Not every Asian is good at math. Black people do not bear the Mark of Cain.

The problem becomes taking a good hard look at yourself, and determining if something is inherently racist, or if your own bias makes them racist.

JHKim remember though this thread isn't "No Stereotypes in RPGs are Racist", it's "Is Golarion Racist?" based on awfulpurple.

The claim was made that Golarion was racist based on stereotypes, with some people's arguments basically sounding like all stereotypes are automatically racist (Hello McGuy).

I don't think anyone was claiming "no stereotypes are racist", but instead were saying "using a sterotype in RPG world creation isn't inherently a racist act".

Quote from: CRKrueger;566358JHKim remember though this thread isn't "No Stereotypes in RPGs are Racist", it's "Is Golarion Racist?" based on awfulpurple.

The claim was made that Golarion was racist based on stereotypes, with some people's arguments basically sounding like all stereotypes are automatically racist (Hello McGuy).

I don't think anyone was claiming "no stereotypes are racist", but instead were saying "using a sterotype in RPG world creation isn't inherently a racist act".

Well, I haven't read any of this on RPGnet because, well, RPGnet.  So I'm only responding to what I see here, and I'm trying to qualify to see if we actually disagree.  

I am fine with the use of stereotypes in, say, the Imaro stories (in fiction) or in GURPS Voodoo (in RPGs).  Examples I am uncomfortable with include the Sahudese in GURPS Fantasy, gypsies in World of Darkness: Gypsies, and various races of Mongoose's Conan RPG.  

Given that many people aren't familiar with these products, I'll add in a hypothetical.  A hypothetical person makes an RPG setting, and the black people in that setting generally conform to stereotypes from old fiction like Conan, Tarzan, and other old adventure fiction.  This is propagating racism.

Quote from: jhkim;566391A hypothetical person makes an RPG setting, and the black people in that setting generally conform to stereotypes from old fiction like Conan, Tarzan, and other old adventure fiction.  This is propagating racism.

That one I'll agree with.  

Been a long time since I've read any Burroughs, but Howard at least has some alluded to depth in the Black Kingdoms with tales of ancient kingdoms with cities of stone and temples of gold and ivory rising out of the jungles etc, but the only real blacks we see in the stories are the savage Corsairs of Belit and the tribesman Conan attacks to save a white woman. To be fair Conan probably would have turned on a Vanir or Aesir band he was with doing the same thing, but it's painfully clear that's not why Howard was writing that.

Anyway, my point is, there's enough threads in the setting for you to weave African kingdoms with actual depth and still be 'Sword and Sorcery" or "Conanesque".

Of course if you didn't, and stuck to the most basic examples, yeah, you'd be showing yourself to be pretty ignorant.

Quote from: The Traveller;566180The stereotyping of Irish people as drunks began, or more properly found its fullest expression with the "scientific racism" of the 19th century, as the rulers of the English cast about themselves for ever more creative means to dehumanise perceived enemies.

I grew up around a lot of drunken young Irishmen on the University of Ulster campus at Jordanstown. My mother saved the lives of several, when their drunken-ness caused them to walk through plate glass doors (then go to sleep with blood pouring from their wounds), fall into the freezing-cold stream in winter, etc.

Yet I never saw them as less than human.

Quote from: Werekoala;566181Therefore, we could say that the Irish are probably LESS inclined to drunkeness than others, because of their lifelong experience tipping the bottle.

No, it's the opposite - the cultures that drink most (Italians, southern Germans, French) are the least likely to get 'roaring drunk'. The English think they have a drunkenness problem*, and they do compared to the French etc, but much less than the Irish. The usual pattern is that the longer a group has been exposed to alchohol, the better they tolerate it.

*I was at a University in England, an English academic lamented the drunken behaviour of the students. I laughed, and explained that compared to what I had seen from southern-Irish students in Ulster, his supposed rowdy behaviour was incredibly sedate.

Quote from: S'mon;566525I grew up around a lot of drunken young Irishmen on the University of Ulster campus at Jordanstown. My mother saved the lives of several, when their drunken-ness caused them to walk through plate glass doors (then go to sleep with blood pouring from their wounds), fall into the freezing-cold stream in winter, etc.

Yet I never saw them as less than human.

(http://www.eirefirst.com/archive/images/gold.gif)

Note the ape-like facial features of the Irish on the right, and look at the message, lazy, free-loading, waiting for a hand-out while the real Americans worked.  All the racist stereotypes leveled against minorities in America today by hate groups were initiated and used against minorities back then...who were immigrant european whites.

Quote from: S'mon;566525I grew up around a lot of drunken young Irishmen on the University of Ulster campus at Jordanstown. My mother saved the lives of several, when their drunken-ness caused them to walk through plate glass doors (then go to sleep with blood pouring from their wounds), fall into the freezing-cold stream in winter, etc.

Yet I never saw them as less than human.

Quote from: S'mon;566527No, it's the opposite - the cultures that drink most (Italians, southern Germans, French) are the least likely to get 'roaring drunk'. The English think they have a drunkenness problem*, and they do compared to the French etc, but much less than the Irish. The usual pattern is that the longer a group has been exposed to alchohol, the better they tolerate it.

*I was at a University in England, an English academic lamented the drunken behaviour of the students. I laughed, and explained that compared to what I had seen from southern-Irish students in Ulster, his supposed rowdy behaviour was incredibly sedate.

You're an Ulster Scot, S'mon, its that very group of nasties, loyalists, who are most responsible for promoting anti-Irish racism. You know, that same group who are burning out pregnant women because they have brown skin and intimidating schoolgirls because they come from the wrong part of town. The ones that beat up homosexuals and were armed by apartheid-era South Africa.

UU is a fine example of this "culture", it was a tenured professor there who released two seperate academic papers detailing his earnest belief that black people had naturally lower IQs than white people, and women couldn't do mathematics.

Now approaching Belfast airport, please set your watches to local time, 1740 AD.

I'm not saying that's you, far from it, but lets just say I'm not surprised you were unable to resist sticking your oar in.

Quote from: jhkim;566212I'm fine with saying that harmless, non-racist, and/or accurate stereotypes exist.  I'm fine if an evaluation of Golarion says that the stereotype use in it is not racist.  I've just started playing in Golarion now, and I haven't had any issues with it so far - but I'm currently only using the Pathfinder Beginner Box to run games for my son and nephews.  

However, some people seem to be going further and arguing that any complaints about racist stereotypes are inherently wrong.  I completely disagree. There are many racist stereotypes that are real and have serious negative effects.

I think that the reasonable/moderate people in this discussion are all taking an opinion somewhere between all stereotypes are fine and all stereotypes are wrong, if not racist.  And the impression I have is that those who are complaining about Golarion are either people who believe all stereotypes are bad or who believe anything short of unassailably positive are bad (perhaps believing that, "Extremism in the opposition to racism is no vice.")  

What I'm looking for is some detail on the criteria that the rest of the people in the middle  are using to distinguish the acceptable stereotypes from the unacceptable stereotypes.  It seems pretty clear that the overtly racist stereotypes are being universally rejected as bad and cultural quirks such as the Tea Ceremony are OK, but by what measure is a line drawn between those two?  Is any stereotype that's been used to demean or dehumanize a minority and fuel real world discrimination a problem, even if it's detached from a real world people and applied to a fantasy culture (e.g., savage, drunk, greedy, thieves, violent, swindler, cannibal, etc.)?  Can a stereotype be softened enough to be acceptable by providing mitigating positives or by otherwise humanizing the holders of those traits?  Is there a right and wrong way to use them?

This relates to points I raised in  Evil Orcs = Genocidal Colonial endorsement (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=20868), which is that I think people who have trouble with common depictions of evil monstrous humanoids as being racist see resonance between the monstrous traits attributed to them and the traits used by racists to justify the slaughter of persecuted minorities.  Does simply applying a negative stereotype to a fantasy ethnicity or race evoke the application of those same traits against real people?  I can see where it might.

Quote from: jhkim;566212I've now read the chapter in the first link (1995 Jussim et al).  It concentrates on knocking down straw men - like the dismissal of racism in stereotypes on page 11.  Most of the points addressed in this whole section have no attribution at all, and the minority that do are citations from the 1960s at the latest.

The references are at the end, but as the Science News article explains, "For more than 60 years, scientists have treated stereotypes as by definition erroneous, illogical, and inflexible."  In other words, few people were doing research on stereotype accuracy because doing so goes against prevailing opinion and could get one branded a racist.  That book was published in 1996 and Lee Jussim has more recent papers on his web site (http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/%7Ejussim/papers.html), including articles on Stereotypes (http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/%7Ejussim/Stereotypes%20-%20Jussim%20-%20Cambridge%20Dictionary.doc) and Sterotyping (http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/%7Ejussim/Stereotyping%20-%20Jussim%202%20--%20Cambridge%20Dictionary.doc) to be included in the Cambridge Dictionary of Psychology.  And of course the reason why they spend all that time knocking down what you see as straw men is because there are actually people making those arguments in academia.

Quote from: jhkim;566212Sure, not every stereotype falsely attributes a genetic component to the trend.  That doesn't mean that racist stereotypes don't exist.  The authors in principle acknowledge something like this, saying "Although ethnocentrism undoubtedly sometimes influences evaluations (e.g. Campbell, 1967), it is premature to conclude that even stereotypes about personality necessarily reflect ethnocentrism."

The author does acknowledge that racist and inaccurate stereotypes can exist, and I'm not claiming that they don't.  But I think it would be difficult to say almost anything about any culture without relying on the sorts of generalizations that are the stuff of stereotypes, even if plenty of exceptions exist.  So I don't see how stereotypes can be avoided, either.

Quote from: jhkim;566212This goes back to my point.  I contend that stereotypes like the lying thieving gypsy, the greedy Jew, Sambo and pickaninny, and others really are problematic - even if some other stereotypes are not problematic.  I think you agree with me in this, John, but it seems like people keep implying that there are no problems in stereotypes.

I agree with you, but I'm trying to get even more specific about why they are problems.  In particular, is the "thieving Gypsy", "greedy Jew"", and so only only problematic as a matched set or are cultural characteristics such as "thieving" or "greedy" problematic no matter where they are used, both because such negative stereotypes will inevitably be used to justify discrimination and because of how readily they evoke the same attributes being applied to specific real world ethnicities?  As I pointed out earlier, there are people who interpret Scrooge in A Christmas Carol as Jewish, even though he seems pretty clearly not Jewish to me, simply on the basis of his profession and greed.  Similarly, the "noble savage" seems to get called out regardless of the specifics of the ethnicity put into that role.  And as I mentioned above, other people see the shadow of racial stereotypes in the monstrous traits applied to evil humanoids in games, too.  So is there a safe way to use a negative stereotype often used to justify discrimination, persecution, or even genocide or are they inherently toxic?  And is it ever acceptable to include a deliberately nasty culture in the setting (e.g., fantasy Nazis) such that their nation is readily seen as bad guys and the players should generally want to wipe them (or perhaps just their culture) out?

I know you've given an answer for that, which is to mix things up so that they don't quite fit the common packages of traits.  I think your examples also implied that making them more well-rounded with more to them than the simple stereotype helps, too.  I think your answer is pretty good, but I'm also curious what other people think about it.

Quote from: CRKrueger;566557(http://www.eirefirst.com/archive/images/gold.gif)

Note the ape-like facial features of the Irish on the right, and look at the message, lazy, free-loading, waiting for a hand-out while the real Americans worked.  All the racist stereotypes leveled against minorities in America today by hate groups were initiated and used against minorities back then...who were immigrant european whites.

Really?  To me the two guys look pretty similar.  It's just that the one in America is wearing work clothes and doing labor like a "real American" and his "ape-like" counterpart who stayed on the old sod is wearing a top hat and suit but has to look out on the beach and wait for the pot of gold... cause there's no jobs in the old country.

They're the same guy, or could be the same guy.  It's just that one moved where the opportunity was.

JG

Quote from: CRKrueger;566557(http://www.eirefirst.com/archive/images/gold.gif)

Note the ape-like facial features of the Irish on the right, and look at the message, lazy, free-loading, waiting for a hand-out while the real Americans worked.  All the racist stereotypes leveled against minorities in America today by hate groups were initiated and used against minorities back then...who were immigrant european whites.

?? Surely the picture shows Irish immigrants on the left working, to send home money to their relatives in Ireland? The facial features are the same in both, and unless you're some kind of anti-Irish racist they are not 'apelike' IMO. There's a common, distinctive Irish facial & skull type which you see on eg actor Colm Meaney, IRA leader Martin McGuinness, or Scots-Irish Senator Jim Webb - (https://encrypted-tbn3.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSPrUsqM-Wm3E9Wz9q2b_lb0_UGqsYdOKNmP1jFQxjT0_MfBwmn)

Webb's a bit of a hero of mine.

Quote from: The Traveller;566560You're an Ulster Scot, S'mon, its that very group of nasties, loyalists, who are most responsible for promoting anti-Irish racism.

Yeah, yeah - but my mother's family are mostly indigenous to Donegal in north-west Ireland. They're McBrides, who have always been Irish. They are a sept of the MacDonalds, the Scottish 'Lords of the Isles', who ruled a kingdom from the north & northeast coasts of Ireland to western Scotland, including much of the Highlands.

Hence, Ulster Scot.

(Also, I was born in Edinburgh).

Quote from: James Gillen;566692Really?  To me the two guys look pretty similar.  It's just that the one in America is wearing work clothes and doing labor like a "real American" and his "ape-like" counterpart who stayed on the old sod is wearing a top hat and suit but has to look out on the beach and wait for the pot of gold... cause there's no jobs in the old country.

They're the same guy, or could be the same guy.  It's just that one moved where the opportunity was.

JG

Yup.

Quote from: The Traveller;566560You're an Ulster Scot, S'mon, its that very group of nasties, loyalists, who are most responsible for promoting anti-Irish racism. You know, that same group who are burning out pregnant women because they have brown skin and intimidating schoolgirls because they come from the wrong part of town. The ones that beat up homosexuals and were armed by apartheid-era South Africa.

UU is a fine example of this "culture", it was a tenured professor there who released two seperate academic papers detailing his earnest belief that black people had naturally lower IQs than white people, and women couldn't do mathematics.

Now approaching Belfast airport, please set your watches to local time, 1740 AD.

I'm not saying that's you, far from it, but lets just say I'm not surprised you were unable to resist sticking your oar in.

1690 AD, surely.

Quote from: The Traveller;566560You're an Ulster Scot, S'mon, its that very group of nasties, loyalists, who are most responsible for promoting anti-Irish racism. You know, that same group who are burning out pregnant women because they have brown skin and intimidating schoolgirls because they come from the wrong part of town. The ones that beat up homosexuals and were armed by apartheid-era South Africa.

BTW, how is this not 'racist stereotyping'?

Heh, you're right with the jaw, I grabbed one fast, try these then.

(http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/ellis-island/cartoon-2.jpg)

(http://i145.photobucket.com/albums/r209/zaragozabill/IrishApe.jpg)

(http://chnm.gmu.edu/exploring/images/ape.jpg)

(http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/files/2011/01/1.gif)

(http://faculty.millikin.edu/~moconner/in151h/images/irish_ape1.gif)

(http://faculty.millikin.edu/~moconner/in151h/images/Irish_zoo.gif)

How the fuck is this thread still going?

Quote from: danbuter;566837How the fuck is this thread still going?

And how did it transform from "Is Golarion racist?" into a history of Irish persecution in the 1800's?

Quote from: danbuter;566837How the fuck is this thread still going?

Well there was the part where we asked if wizards were more racist than fighters.

Quote from: jeff37923;566842And how did it transform from "Is Golarion racist?" into a history of Irish persecution in the 1800's?

Well, it's been quite a while since the answer was proven to be no, so the thread has to continue somehow.  

As for my part, I was told my "Irish Ape" example was flawed, so I needed to correct my mistake with better examples.

Quote from: Imp;566886Well there was the part where we asked if wizards were more racist than fighters.

Well, obviously Dwarven Gods are racist against Elves. Not granting spells and the like! :mad:

Quote from: S'mon;566710BTW, how is this not 'racist stereotyping'?

That would be like being racist against the Ku Klux Klan.

Anyone identifying themselves as "Ulster Scot" and coming out with lies (whether invented personally or received from mawmay) about drunken Irish people constantly wandering into these panes of glass apparently strewn all over the place before collapsing into raging icy torrents from which they had to be heroically rescued by the sober protestant, is probably not someone to invite around for dinner. Especially as its the preferred ethnic identification of the aforementioned loyalist/unionists.

Perhaps it might be an idea to keep it in your pants in future, I otherwise quite enjoyed your posts.

Quote from: The Traveller;566930That would be like being racist against the Ku Klux Klan.

Anyone identifying themselves as "Ulster Scot" and coming out with lies (whether invented personally or received from mawmay) about drunken Irish people constantly wandering into these panes of glass apparently strewn all over the place before collapsing into raging icy torrents from which they had to be heroically rescued by the sober protestant, is probably not someone to invite around for dinner. Especially as its the preferred ethnic identification of the aforementioned loyalist/unionists.

Both those things really happened, of course. You racist piece of shit.

If we really must, let's get back to Golarion.

Yes, again, this thread is exclusively for talking about whether Golarion is racist and trying to show how it is or it isn't, NOT for talking about the larger questions of racism as a whole except in direct relation to the game. Please immediately cease any posts not directly related to the subject.

RPGPundit

Interesting take on how RQ6 designers view the problem (http://gamingaswomen.com/posts/2012/07/runequest-6-interview/).

Quote from: Loz, Pete or both.On the other hand it is becoming more difficult to write roleplaying game settings and historical supplements in general. Of late there has been a growing reactionary movement to censure certain negative aspects of human culture and society, which in itself is no bad thing, but maybe shouldn’t be applied so stridently in a hobby which is based upon escapism. Especially when many roleplaying games are based upon challenging and overcoming societal inequalities and evils.

Quote from: CRKrueger;568096Interesting take on how RQ6 designers view the problem (http://gamingaswomen.com/posts/2012/07/runequest-6-interview/).

Now that is a very good point.

What is the point of being one of the Good Guys if everyone is a Good Guy or simply a Misunderstood Neutral?

Quote from: jeff37923;568098Now that is a very good point.

What is the point of being one of the Good Guys if everyone is a Good Guy or simply a Misunderstood Neutral?

The thread at this point is about Golarion only I think, I moved my post here. (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=23651)

Quote from: CRKrueger;568103The thread at this point is about Golarion only I think, I moved my post here. (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=23651)

Thank you for doing so.  This is a good example of what to do.  Only, of course, if the subject is related to RPGs, which yours was.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;567032Yes, again, this thread is exclusively for talking about whether Golarion is racist and trying to show how it is or it isn't, NOT for talking about the larger questions of racism as a whole except in direct relation to the game. Please immediately cease any posts not directly related to the subject.

RPGPundit

I want to point out that at the end of the day you have to look at racism as a whole because the thing about it is while I find their campaign setting obviously racist other people who don't can come up with reasons (varying from laughable to laudable) for feeling how they do. I think the setting is racist because the writers were lazy, perhaps insensitive. But I think when bringing shit like this up you should be asking whether the results are negative (its not, its run of the mill status quo, unsurprising) or whether or not the writers had malicious intent (they didn't they're just lazy). So is it racist? I think it is. There are other people who will say the same. There are also other people who don't feel negatively about it at all. No amount of arguing back and forth is going to change the various sensibilities of people on the subject.  The fact is the writers were just lazy and cut a little too close to the edge without thinking it through thoroughly. That's it. Its that simple.

Fucking rain man over here...

Quote from: MGuy;568476I want to point out that at the end of the day you have to look at racism as a whole because the thing about it is while I find their campaign setting obviously racist other people who don't can come up with reasons (varying from laughable to laudable) for feeling how they do.

I think its possible to make a vast number of arguments on this subject while still remaining focused on the particular "case study" of Golarion; rather than absolutely having to branch out into changing the entire subject into some other examples of racism or non-racism.    Anything within the range of still actually talking about Golarion and making arguments about Golarion is acceptable, including comparing it to other things in the RPG world, or comparing the material in golarion to non-rpg literature or other media that you think are racist (just not branching out into actually starting to argue about those other things without arguing about Golarion).  If you can't do that within these parameters, then you might have to consider if the problem isn't with a lack of coherent argument to be made.

RPGPundit

Quote from: MGuy;568476I want to point out that at the end of the day you have to look at racism as a whole because the thing about it is while I find their campaign setting obviously racist other people who don't can come up with reasons (varying from laughable to laudable) for feeling how they do. I think the setting is racist because the writers were lazy, perhaps insensitive. But I think when bringing shit like this up you should be asking whether the results are negative (its not, its run of the mill status quo, unsurprising) or whether or not the writers had malicious intent (they didn't they're just lazy). So is it racist? I think it is. There are other people who will say the same. There are also other people who don't feel negatively about it at all. No amount of arguing back and forth is going to change the various sensibilities of people on the subject.  The fact is the writers were just lazy and cut a little too close to the edge without thinking it through thoroughly. That's it. Its that simple.

Or, you're full of shit.  It's that simple.

Or j'accuse of racism WAAAAY too quickly.
I tend to attribute racism to malice, not ignorance, m'self.

Quote from: Novastar;568856Or j'accuse of racism WAAAAY too quickly.
I tend to attribute racism to malice, not ignorance, m'self.

Running through these kind of debates between those who see racism as located (or not-located) in the person producing the game or book, or film, and those who locate racism in the product.  (Of course, in the latter case most people still seem to, at least implicitly, given the sheer venom on display, make the moralistic assumption that a racist product must necessarily have been written by a racist person, however hidden, deep and secret that racism is presumed to be).

And of course we are never allowed to have degrees of racism.  Something is always assumed to be racist or not, all parties being either pure as the driven snow or guilty of the blackest of black sins.

It's going to be almost impossible to actually create a fantasy version of Africa and not stumble upon stereotypes that have, at some point, been linked to a form of racist discourse. In all likelihood you'd struggle even if you were African.  The history of Africa in popular culture is entwined with colonialism.  This doesn't mean a failure to attain absolute purity needs to be denounced.  Failure to attain purity really ought to read in the context of the significance of even attempting to make a playable Africa setting.

I think the thing is one has to distinguish between archetypes and stereotypes.  Contrary to what certain people try to claim, they're not the same thing.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;569161I think the thing is one has to distinguish between archetypes and stereotypes.  Contrary to what certain people try to claim, they're not the same thing.

RPGPundit

Well if you're a Jungian they're not.  But who's a Jungian?

I don't give a fuck if it is or not, and I'm sick of the whining about it.  Less yakking.  More hacking.

Quote from: Bradford C. Walker;569472I don't give a fuck if it is or not, and I'm sick of the whining about it.  Less yakking.  More hacking.

The RPGSite: Less talk, more rock.

JG

OK, I played a bunch of the Pathfinder beginner box with my son and nephews over the past two weeks.  Just yesterday, I picked up the Golarion "Inner Sea World Guide" and was looking through it.  I'm not sure if this is what most of the fuss was over, but was curious about the setting.  

I don't have a strong opinion yet - it's a big book.  I do note that Garund is the continent in the geographic position of Africa, but it is standing in for more than that including the Caribbean (pirates in the East) as well as having the majority of Arab-parallel cultures.  

Quote from: Dog Quixote;568940It's going to be almost impossible to actually create a fantasy version of Africa and not stumble upon stereotypes that have, at some point, been linked to a form of racist discourse. In all likelihood you'd struggle even if you were African.  The history of Africa in popular culture is entwined with colonialism.  This doesn't mean a failure to attain absolute purity needs to be denounced.  Failure to attain purity really ought to read in the context of the significance of even attempting to make a playable Africa setting.

I'm not sure what "purity" really means here.  I definitely give points for attempting to make a playable Africa setting.  I am often annoyed at the idea that having settings with only white races aren't racist by definition - which produces the logical result that be erasing the non-whites from your setting you can make the work less racist.  

Still, there can be negative biases in the how a setting handles things, and I think those are worth criticizing.  For a good use of archetypes in fantasy Africa, I'd recommend the Imaro books.  It uses plenty of stereotypes, but they are modified and remixed in a way that greatly changes around the message.

Jhkim; I'd be curious whether in your opinion/experience you've found any settings that actually have a "good" (ie. non-racist) portrayal of Africa or Asia?

Quote from: Dog Quixote;569164Well if you're a Jungian they're not.  But who's a Jungian?

::raises hand::

Quote from: RPGPundit;570159Jhkim; I'd be curious whether in your opinion/experience you've found any settings that actually have a "good" (ie. non-racist) portrayal of Africa or Asia?

Treatments of Africa are pretty rare.  I've heard good things about Nyambe but don't own it.  Somewhat related is GURPS Voodoo - which is not a generic treatment of the subject of Voodoo, but rather a specific modern-day fantasy background based around Caribbean black culture.  I think it is excellent and in particular it twists around common stereotypes.  You might have some issues with it because it has Lodges including Freemasons as dark though not evil rivals to the heroes.  

There are a number of mostly-historical treatments of Asia that seem fine.  I like what I've seen of Paul Mason's Outlaws of the Water Margin.  Although I have a personal anti-Japanese bias, there are a number of decent treatments of medieval Japan.  Sengoku stood out to me as among the best.  

I haven't seen any Asian fantasy games that I would call "good".  There are a few Chinese wuxia games and some Japanese fantasy games - but the ones I've seen have all bought into traditional stereotypes from a narrow genre - i.e. everyone is honor-bound fighters of martial arts movies.  Exalted is a little different, but it's full of a lot of other issues.

Quote from: jhkim;570290There are a number of mostly-historical treatments of Asia that seem fine.  I like what I've seen of Paul Mason's Outlaws of the Water Margin.  Although I have a personal anti-Japanese bias, there are a number of decent treatments of medieval Japan.  Sengoku stood out to me as among the best.

Paul Mason's interest in Outlaws of the Water Margin was based on a Japanese drama series (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Water_Margin_(1973_TV_series)) that was run in the UK in the 1970s and Paul actually lives in Japan, though he also did quite a bit of research on the Chinese sources and tried to make the Chinese culture fairly authentic.  That Paul actually lived in Asia may have helped quite a bit.  You can still find Paul's excellent Imazine 'zine, where he talks a bit about his Outlaws game, archived here (http://www.firedrake.org/panurge/imaz.htm).  

Quote from: jhkim;570290I haven't seen any Asian fantasy games that I would call "good".  There are a few Chinese wuxia games and some Japanese fantasy games - but the ones I've seen have all bought into traditional stereotypes from a narrow genre - i.e. everyone is honor-bound fighters of martial arts movies.  Exalted is a little different, but it's full of a lot of other issues.

When I lived in Japan, I met with a Japanese couple who played tabletop RPGs (Yoko Miyamoto had been posting to the Usenet RPG groups) and we talked briefly about Legend of the Five Ring.  She said it was so "wrong" about Japanese culture that some Japanese people actually liked it as it's own sort of exotic thing.

Quote from: John Morrow;570365When I lived in Japan, I met with a Japanese couple who played tabletop RPGs (Yoko Miyamoto had been posting to the Usenet RPG groups) and we talked briefly about Legend of the Five Ring.  She said it was so "wrong" about Japanese culture that some Japanese people actually liked it as it's own sort of exotic thing.

L5R is to feudal Japan as WFRP is to 16th-Century Germany.

And this is a good thing, too. It gives the players a way to start grokking the setting, and yet remains its own thing.

Quote from: John Morrow;570365When I lived in Japan, I met with a Japanese couple who played tabletop RPGs (Yoko Miyamoto had been posting to the Usenet RPG groups) and we talked briefly about Legend of the Five Ring.  She said it was so "wrong" about Japanese culture that some Japanese people actually liked it as it's own sort of exotic thing.

That's funny, but you could probably have figured that out yourself. You were there for a couple of years, right?

TSR/WotC and Paizo both created Asian settings which seem to blend together China and Japan (and mostly forget SE Asia), which to me, creates an inedible dish.

I ran a Bushido game for a short time, but it fell apart because half the players were playing seriously and the other half couldn't get it that you don't sass the samurai.

Quote from: John Morrow;570365When I lived in Japan, I met with a Japanese couple who played tabletop RPGs (Yoko Miyamoto had been posting to the Usenet RPG groups) and we talked briefly about Legend of the Five Ring.  She said it was so "wrong" about Japanese culture that some Japanese people actually liked it as it's own sort of exotic thing.

Think of it as our revenge against Japanese drawing Caucasians with cat-size eyes and pastel hair.

JG

Quote from: Lynn;570375TSR/WotC and Paizo both created Asian settings which seem to blend together China and Japan (and mostly forget SE Asia), which to me, creates an inedible dish.

That would be one of my few complaints, too.
But I usually just shoehorn them in somewhere in the big "This is our Asian-themed part of the world!"

Quote from: Novastar;568856Or j'accuse of racism WAAAAY too quickly.
I tend to attribute racism to malice, not ignorance, m'self.

I don't think that's a useful view of racism - it basically boils down to excusing anything racist so long as it isn't premeditated racism which the alleged racist in question explicitly conceived off as racist to begin with.

Quote from: James Gillen;570424Think of it as our revenge against Japanese drawing Caucasians with cat-size eyes and pastel hair.

JG

Which did lead to pretty girls doing cosplay at conventions, so can it really be considered a bad thing?

Quote from: James Gillen;570424Think of it as our revenge against Japanese drawing Caucasians with cat-size eyes and pastel hair.

JG

Japanese don't actually draw Caucasians with pastel hair - all Westerners in anime and manga are all blonde and blue eyed. Without exception. Multicolored hair is reserved for Japanese people.

If you want a cool Asian fantasy setting, just look at what cool Asian fantasy settings Asians have made for themselves.

HIGH FANTASY
(http://chinesemov.com/images/2012/painted-skin-2-2012-1.jpg)
畫皮II
This is a Chinese movie that came out this year. It's about a demon who wants to be human making a deal with a human who wants to become immortal, and a Demon Hunter gets dragged into the mess because they are both hot women.
Notice his armor; Chinese movies have been moving away from the '3 Kingdoms' look for fantasy and going with other era's armor, which makes it Japanese lookin', because China and Japan have a shared root culture so the director can always say "it's not samurai, it's the stuff from china that influenced samurai man" and that is true.

Tang dynasty is Best Dynasty, that's the dynasty that most heavily influenced Japan, that's where Japan got its Zen buddhism and sexy fox girls. The coolest 'Outlaws of the Marsh' artwork I've seen is from 1800's Japan
(http://jamesthen.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/9dragons.jpg)


The main difference between Japanese and Chinese fantasy though is the sword swings to staring ratio (Japan= 10 minute stare->1 fatal slash, China= 100 back and forth blows while staring at each other)

Back to movies...

The Sorcerer and the White Snake
http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMzg5NDU0MjYw.html
This is a movie starring Jet Li as a demon hunting monk, came out last year. That link is the entire movie, check out the first 10 minutes to see a fight between a Buddhist Demon Hunter, his henchman, and an ice Demon.

HEROIC LEADERS
Red cliff
http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMjAzMTUwODA4.html
3 Kingdoms era. Mass combat, great leaders that lead them. There's no outright mystic leaping martial arts, but you do see lone warriors fight off dozens of men.
go to the 18:40 mark to see a guy kill like 100 dudes while holding a baby



GRITTY REALISM
Wu Xia
http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMzMyNDk5NzY4.html
the title sequence of this movie is the 'x-ray' view of a brain dying from a hemmorage (y'know, from being bludgeoned to death)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wu_Xia_(film)
The protagonist is a police officer/detective who suspects that a villager who killed two bandits is hiding something when he investigates the fight scene.

Go to the 7:40 mark to see two bandits rob a butcher (the villager intervenes and fights them), he seems to bumble through the fight

At the 18:00 mark, the detective is investigating the scene of the fight, where he begins to pick up clues that the humble villager is hiding something... (that he is an extremely skilled martial artist who killed those two wanted men with his bare hands)

If we're recommending Asian Fantasy films, then The Great Yokai War and Once Upon a Time in China definitely deserve a nod...

Plus, let me say that I totally agree with and support the praise for both Paul Mason's Outlaws of the Water Margin RPG (which I assume is still available free online somewhere), and Imazine

Somewhere in all those embedded menus in that Youku site is there a subtitle selector?

Quote from: Stackmaster J;564467Ettin isn't a good person. He's actually a 4channer, and is basically just trolling both SA and RPGnet. There's a 4chan related IRC called suptg that plans this shit. I was, sadly, a part of it, but then they started turning it into some weird social justice thing instead of just doing it for fun.

It's wrong, whether you do it for the lulz or some "weird social justice."

Quote from: Axiomatic;570534I don't think that's a useful view of racism - it basically boils down to excusing anything racist so long as it isn't premeditated racism which the alleged racist in question explicitly conceived off as racist to begin with.

There's a galaxy or two of difference between deciding an area of your world which is supposed to be kind of like Africa is populated with people who look, act and dress kind of like historical Africans (which at the absolute worst accusation you could level would be cultural or historical ignorance or lazy worldbuilding, not Racism), and Stormfront or Irateirishman (which is what real Racism looks like. Protip: It isn't lazy: it's active, intellectually violent and sickening in the extreme.)

Anyone who uses the word 'racist' is a moron.

Quote from: _kent_;570661Anyone who uses the word 'racist' is a moron.

I'm willing to blithely use it on people who are members of the KKK, or Neo-Nazi's, or other Hate Groups. People who are, as CRKrueger pointed out "...active, intellectually violent and sickening in the extreme."

Most game designers, fall far below that measure, I've found.

Quote from: OgreBattle;570559If you want a cool Asian fantasy setting, just look at what cool Asian fantasy settings Asians have made for themselves.

HIGH FANTASY
http://chinesemov.com/images/2012/painted-skin-2-2012-1.jpg
畫皮II
This is a Chinese movie that came out this year. It's about a demon who wants to be human making a deal with a human who wants to become immortal, and a Demon Hunter gets dragged into the mess because they are both hot women.
Notice his armor; Chinese movies have been moving away from the '3 Kingdoms' look for fantasy and going with other era's armor, which makes it Japanese lookin', because China and Japan have a shared root culture so the director can always say "it's not samurai, it's the stuff from china that influenced samurai man" and that is true.

That looks way cool. Any idea if it's going to be possible to get it subbed?

Quote from: _kent_;570661Anyone who uses the word 'racist' is a moron.

No, _kent_, you are the morons.

Quote from: jeff37923;570535Which did lead to pretty girls doing cosplay at conventions, so can it really be considered a bad thing?

It also led to ManFaye.

JG

Quote from: James Gillen;570729It also led to ManFaye.

You speak of one of the many horrors, that cannot be unseen, once it has been seen.

Tremble lesser mortals, and be ye warned.

Quote from: Axiomatic;570537Japanese don't actually draw Caucasians with pastel hair - all Westerners in anime and manga are all blonde and blue eyed. Without exception. Multicolored hair is reserved for Japanese people.

Very typical. And then you have the Texans with big hats, sort of loud and friendly.

Quote from: CRKrueger;570653There's a galaxy or two of difference between deciding an area of your world which is supposed to be kind of like Africa is populated with people who look, act and dress kind of like historical Africans (which at the absolute worst accusation you could level would be cultural or historical ignorance or lazy worldbuilding, not Racism), and Stormfront or Irateirishman (which is what real Racism looks like. Protip: It isn't lazy: it's active, intellectually violent and sickening in the extreme.)

Basically right. I'd be somewhat more generous and take things one further step, however: there is also a difference between deciding an area of your world is supposed to be kind of like Africa and have people who look, act, and dress like you IMAGINE historical Africans would look, dress and act on the one hand; and on the other between deciding an area of the world is supposed to be kind of like Africa and have people who look, act and dress kind of like historical Africans based on a minimum of research on your part.

The former, depending on what you're "imagining" and what sources were the product of said imagination, may very well be unintentionally racist AND lazy worldbuilding.

The latter would be neither of the two.

The problem is that the Psuedo-activism Swine aren't interested in that, so they want to claim that a guy who's actually researched African historical cultures and makes a setting that is based on these is STILL "racist" because basically they want to claim that everything in western civilization is racist because reasons.

RPGPundit

I remain unconvinced that "lazy worldbuilding" is as gauche as some people make it out to be.

Quote from: James Gillen;570729It also led to ManFaye.

JG

Oh God,  I googled "Manfaye" using image search...  

The horror....... The Horror.......  The Horror........