Rules Discussion

[Endless Flight]

Nobody should be too hard on themselves. This topic comes back around every few months. It’s actually a good reminder of how great everyone is here with self moderation concerning the only rule we have. Some people said it couldn’t be done. We proved ‘em wrong three years in.

 

[CRKrueger]

CK is trolling as usual, ignore him.

Nah, I leave that to you, bro. You’re way better at it.

No one likes these discussions, but ironing out what No Politics means in a highly charged political climate is how this place will actually keep to the No Politics rule and not just shift to the default political assumptions and definitions of it’s majority membership. You know, become like all those other sites we say this place is better than.

The day TristramEvans actually thinks I’m trolling for shits and giggles he’s welcome to ban me and I won’t squawk.

 

[TheophilusCarter]

Oh it's going on his permanent record for sure

Worse: I'm going to tell his mom ...

 

[Baulderstone]

Nah, I leave that to you, bro. You’re way better at it.

No one likes these discussions, but ironing out what No Politics means in a highly charged political climate is how this place will actually keep to the No Politics rule and not just shift to the default political assumptions and definitions of it’s majority membership. You know, become like all those other sites we say this place is better than.

On the other hand, I feel the general definition has been working fine for years, while this attempt to iron out a more specific definition of what games we are and aren't allowed to talk about is has already made things more tense around here.

 

[chuckdee]

Sorry I even said Sigmata now I just thought it was a good answer for the question, and had no agenda. And as someone else said, it doesn't read like a screed no matter what anyone says.

 

[Endless Flight]

No apology necessary. I’ve gotten quite a few PMs over the years from members who might have said something they viewed as political and apologized profusely. I usually say thanks but it’s not necessary. I just ask that everyone read everything twice before they post, especially if the topic is teetering on that line. Accidents happen and we are human. What I don’t like are trollish attempts to slowly turn discussions into train wrecks. We usually can see it coming a mile away and by the usual suspects.

 

[A Fiery Flying Roll]

No one likes these discussions, but ironing out what No Politics means in a highly charged political climate is how this place will actually keep to the No Politics rule and not just shift to the default political assumptions and definitions of it’s majority membership. You know, become like all those other sites we say this place is better than.

Although it's probably worth mentioning that "highly charged political climate" shouldn't be assumed to be the case for everyone on here. If I'm honest, I don't really give a fuck about US politics and I doubt you care that much about the UK.

 

[Baulderstone]

Sorry I even said Sigmata now I just thought it was a good answer for the question, and had no agenda. And as someone else said, it doesn't read like a screed no matter what anyone says.

Your post was fine. I don't think you can be faulted for the people that wanted to make a political debate out of it.

 

[Raleel]

On a more serious note, my opinion (and I don't think it counts for a lot here) using Sigmata as an example

• Sigmata is anti-fascist - ok, the game itself claims to be
• The author says you make society less fascist by playing it - not ok. mostly why do we care. he's could be insane, who knows, it's not really about the game
• Sigmata isn't really anti-fascist because it doesn't believe in this credo - not ok (personal opinion of what fascism is, not really about the game)
• Sigmata has worse mechanics than myfarog - ok, assuming it actually discusses the virtues of each mechanic
• The writer of myfarog and sigmata should have a cage match - ok, as long as it is on ppv and in the other media thread
• Sigmata author and myfarog author duked out politics on another board - not ok (we don't need to be gossipy old biddies)
• dumarest posting memes in the i can haz cherezeburger thread - always ok, and one reason i pay money to be here.

 

[A Fiery Flying Roll]

Your post was fine. I don't think you can be faulted for the people that wanted to make a political debate out of it.

I agree. I think Asen's post was the one that originally brought the politics of the game in and several other posters rose to it and started discussing that.

I actually think Kruger's suggestion to me that we took it to a rules thread was a sensible one and in the future I think all of us involved in this debate could do with trying to do that way earlier.

But Chuck made no political posts at all.

 

[Bunch]

Nah, I leave that to you, bro. You’re way better at it.

No one likes these discussions, but ironing out what No Politics means in a highly charged political climate is how this place will actually keep to the No Politics rule and not just shift to the default political assumptions and definitions of it’s majority membership. You know, become like all those other sites we say this place is better than.

The day TristramEvans actually thinks I’m trolling for shits and giggles he’s welcome to ban me and I won’t squawk.

I disagree. I've often heard that one of the things the Supreme Court considers before taking a case is just how valuable the vagueness of leaving it undefined is. Sometimes hard edges just encourage closer line dancing than vague edges.

 

[CRKrueger]

I disagree. I've often heard that one of the things the Supreme Court considers before taking a case is just how valuable the vagueness of leaving it undefined is. Sometimes hard edges just encourage closer line dancing than vague edges.

And that’s a valid argument to make in the discussion, which is the point.

 

[Séadna]

Tristram and Black Leaf although that might have become a political discussion, it was still at the definitional-historical side. It's like talking about how Roman and Orthodox Catholics differ in belief isn't really the sort of "talk about religion" one wants to avoid here.

Anyway the central difficulty in a lot of this is whether you have rules defining No Politics or if you just leave it at "know it to see" in the hands of a few people you trust. It's worth considering.

Abstractly it is a valid argument that the latter is open to essentially confirming/enshrining the mods' views. In this case I won't provide some definitive logical argument because I can't. I'll just say I trust the personal judgement and objectivity of Endless, Apparition, Baulderstone and Tristram more than I'd value the ensuing discussions and atmosphere from hammering out and implementing fixed rules. I think that relates to Bunch above.

Also just to say it's valuable to those of us from elsewhere to have a place like this since genuinely outside of obvious stuff I don't know what's left/right in America and the complex web of associations that go with it, so threads in other places are not only fraught but quickly become incomprehensible.

Also chuckdee your original post was clearly "innocent".

 

[Doc Sammy]

Well, I was going to make a detailed post on the matter but since it's settled, I'll leave it at this...

There are games that are hyper-political in the common understanding of the word, like MYFAROG or #iHunt, but even without the politics, those games tend to be shitty games that are a mess to play even if you Rule Zero out any hot-button issues.

Lion & Dragon's a great game, but it's mechanically sound and is more of a "medieval simulator" game than a political screed, regardless of the author's tweets and blog posts.

The only RPG's that I can think of as "extremist political screeds disguised as games" are RaHoWa, MYFAROG, #iHunt, and apparently Stigmata. Two far-right and two far-right.

Four relatively obscure and generally garbage titles among hundreds of other games, many of which are actually awesome.

 

[TristramEvans]

I've taken some time for reflection, and to ruminate on the issues brought up, and think about what "No Politics" means to myself and for The Pub.

We've always resisted making rules here at The Pub more explicit. There's some very good reasons for that, the obvious one being that there are people who will attempt to "game the system". But it's also caused some confusion about where lines are drawn, whether or not the mods step in.

We don't really have a banned topics list (and that includes specific games), but as mentioned in the LotFP thread, and in this thread, there are certain controversial figures in the hobby that we do at least very much appreciate people not bringing up on a regular basis, unless there is some compelling reason (and there rarely is).

The fact that some games are written specifically as political tracts is a completely fair point. This is actually getting to be prettycommon these days, as is RPG companies using politics as a way to promote their games, and altering content of games to appeal to particuar ideologies. We're likely all aware of the Orc/Drow issue that's been blowing up all over social media the last few months. And what I'd like to do is share one of my responses to that from a Facebook RPG group :

Here's my thoughts on the nontroversy of orcs and evil fictional races - one of the huge advantages that RPGs have over other games, and what makes them unique, is that they are a form of entertainment that requires active engagement. Meaning that they are ultimately always what the group decides to do with them. The rules of D&D dont determine how the fantasy worlds that you roleplay in function. Hell, you don't even need to follow the rules to roleplay. So WoTC actually have no say whatsoever in how orcs are handled in your games - they never did. If you want to have orcs be evil, souless creatures that are manifestations of hate and brutality, that's just as legitimate as if you want Orcs to be humanlike, good natured sapient beings. Because there's no such thing as a "Real Orc" - theres only YOUR game, and that's the only thing that matters. The rules that WoTC puts out, the fluff they write - all of that is ultimately just a tool for you to use, ignore, build upon, or discard at your lesiure. And I think that we should, as hobbyists, never grant them any undue importance or authority for that reason. What any RPG company or authors think about how the game should be played or what fantasy worlds should involve matters about as much as what a pencil manufacturer thinks about art.

In other words, it doesn't matter what a game's intentions are, political or otherwise, it only matters how you chose to use that tool, and likewise, insofar as The Pub, what you chose to discuss regarding that game.

If you look at our recent threads regarding potentially controversial or politics line-crossing game subjects - the charity bundle, and the Christian-themed crowdfunder, if we've shown anything it is that the posters here are perfectly capable of having discussions about these things that focus entirely on what's relevant to gaming without crossing that line. And we call that line "Politics", but as we've pointed out before that word is simply shorthand for that are anathema to friendly conversation and good-faith debating.

The reason The Pub works is not because of Mods imposing the No Politics rule on posters, it's because the posters here genuinelly don't want that - the divisiveness, pointless arguments, tribalism, and unending hostility and blame that is corrupting online discourse. That's why the best moderators here at The Pub are ...everyone. We share the responsibilities for and thus reap the benefits of this community. And as Endless pointed out, it's been three years and this is still the best hobby forum experience that I've ever had. I wake up each morning and I'm excited to hop onto The Pub, to read what's going on.

So, just as an RPG is simply a tool, and it's up to every individual group to make of it what they will, The Pub (and even us mods) are simply tools, it's ultimately up to the Posters to make it what it is.

 

[TristramEvans]

Nah, I leave that to you, bro. You’re way better at it.

No one likes these discussions, but ironing out what No Politics means in a highly charged political climate is how this place will actually keep to the No Politics rule and not just shift to the default political assumptions and definitions of it’s majority membership. You know, become like all those other sites we say this place is better than.

The day TristramEvans actually thinks I’m trolling for shits and giggles he’s welcome to ban me and I won’t squawk.

For the record, I don't think CRK is a troll. I think he has very consistent viewpoints that are likewise consistently applied, and that he is perfectly wiling to take the people to task over that. Some people may find him abrasive,or argumentative, but personality clashes aren't the same as trolling.

 

[TristramEvans]

Tristram and Black Leaf although that might have become a political discussion, it was still at the definitional-historical side. It's like talking about how Roman and Orthodox Catholics differ in belief isn't really the sort of "talk about religion" one wants to avoid here.

Anyway the central difficulty in a lot of this is whether you have rules defining No Politics or if you just leave it at "know it to see" in the hands of a few people you trust. It's worth considering.

Abstractly it is a valid argument that the latter is open to essentially confirming/enshrining the mods' views. In this case I won't provide some definitive logical argument because I can't. I'll just say I trust the personal judgement and objectivity of Endless, Apparition, Baulderstone and Tristram more than I'd value the ensuing discussions and atmosphere from hammering out and implementing fixed rules. I think that relates to Bunch above.

Also just to say it's valuable to those of us from elsewhere to have a place like this since genuinely outside of obvious stuff I don't know what's left/right in America and the complex web of associations that go with it, so threads in other places are not only fraught but quickly become incomprehensible.

Also chuckdee your original post was clearly "innocent".

It's true that The Pub's one rule is left open to the staff's interpretations, and maybe not everyone will trust us in that regard they way Séadna does, but I think there's two counterpoints to this situation that are worth mentioning:

1) as I've stated before, we aren't quick to judgement or condemnation of posters. In fact, our approach to modding doesn't really involve disciplining individuals at all, except in the most extreme situations. At worst a thread is locked or a post deleted. If we had an Infractions board, it would be a ghost town. In other words, there isn't any need to "walk on eggshells" or overly concern oneself with accidentally crossing a line or breaking the rule, because that doesn't mean we're going to jump in and treat you like an enemy, or ban you unfairly. Our motivations are based on maintaining The Pub as a community, not in seeking out undesireables and exerting punishment for wrongthink.

2) Criticizing or questioning the mods, or our mod calls has never been verboten here. Hence the reason we can have this discussion, in this thread. The mods aren't setting themselves up on some pedastal handing down moral edicts from on high that anyone has to blindly accept on faith. Discussion is fine. We're human, and I don't consider my perception or interpretation inherently more valid or of more worth than that of any other poster here. I don't have an ego on the line here, and have no problem with considering another PoV, adapting my perceptions, or even admitting when I may be wrong.

I think between the two of those, we have a situation where, even if it requires a bit of trust in the mods, it's a two-way street where the mods likewise extend trust to the posters. And somewhere in the middle we've found a workable situation to create that unicorn of online forum pipe dreams: a friendly community.

 

[Mankcam]

Although it's probably worth mentioning that "highly charged political climate" shouldn't be assumed to be the case for everyone on here. If I'm honest, I don't really give a fuck about US politics and I doubt you care that much about the UK.

I'm quite concerned about the apparent lack of interest in the local politics of the rural township of Texas, in the Goondiwindi/Southern Downs district of the Darling Downs region of Queensland, Australia.
There has been a heated debate for years regarding which is the biggest tourist drawcard to the region: the 'Spirit of Texas' Main Street Sculpture, or the historic Tobacco Museum.
It's really highly charged stuff, and I don't think anyone here is taking things seriously

Texas, QLD - Aussie Towns

www.aussietowns.com.au

 

[Giganotosaurus]

I'm quite concerned about the apparent lack of interest in the local politics of the township of Texas, in the Goondiwindi district of the rural Darling Downs region of southern Queensland, Australia.
There has been a heated debate for years regarding which is the biggest tourist drawcard to the region, the Spirit of Texas Main Street Sculpture or the Tobacco Museum. It's really highly charged stuff, and I don't think anyone here is taking things seriously

Texas, QLD - Aussie Towns

www.aussietowns.com.au

I can't believe you would leave out the Historical Rabbit Processing Works, which were built in 1928 to take advantage of the rabbit plague.

 

[Dammit Victor]

Libertarian/Authoritarian is separate to left/right. (Complicated by the fact hadly anyone identifies as authoritarian).

It's a lot like the problem with D&D's alignment system: 90% of the problem is that 90% of humanity is True Neutral but 90% of humanity thinks it's Lawful Good.

90% of humanity thinks they support liberté, egalité, and fraternité, but... there's always a "but" and everything after the "but" proves that everything before the "but" is a goddamned lie.

 

[Mankcam]

I can't believe you would leave out the Historical Rabbit Processing Works, which were built in 1928 to take advantage of the rabbit plague.

Shhh...that's too controversial, no one wants to throw gasoline on those flames !!!
heh heh

 

[A Fiery Flying Roll]

Lion & Dragon's a great game, but it's mechanically sound and is more of a "medieval simulator" game than a political screed, regardless of the author's tweets and blog posts.

Yep, as I've said before I rate L&D as a kind of OSR version of WFRP. I only really used it because it's an obvious example of a game with political marketing. I don't see it as a "medieval simulator" but that's mostly because I have pretty rigid wargame standards for "simulation".

The only RPG's that I can think of as "extremist political screeds disguised as games" are RaHoWa, MYFAROG, #iHunt, and apparently Stigmata. Two far-right and two far-right.

Think you meant "and two far-left"?

I don't know RaHoWa.

MYFAROG is a playable game and what the politics (or specifically the racism) does there is inform the setting. Still an actual game, although it's not a good one. (Mechanically it's incredibly clunky and has little to offer).

#iHunt is borderline and about 50% political screed and 50% game. The actual game parts are solid. (Say what you like about Hill, but she knows how to design). But that is a case where I think the setting is so impossible to separate from the manifesto that I wouldn't bother it on here.

I would strongly advise not taking the idea that Sigmata is a political screed disguised as a game at face value. It's much closer to something like Eclipse Phase; political inspiration but the setting itself is something different, alt history in Sigmata's case. Read the Dan Davenport interview for a more balanced view - https://gmshoe.wordpress.com/2017/12/06/qa-chad-walker-sigmata-this-signal-kills-fascists/

For the actual non-games, you want to look at some of the weird fringes of Apocalypse World and some of the one page stuff- the "games" about organising a trade union etc.

I tend to find this stuff interesting in the same way I find the concept of Christian RPGs interesting; I like stuff from unusual worldviews.

 

[A Fiery Flying Roll]

It's a lot like the problem with D&D's alignment system: 90% of the problem is that 90% of humanity is True Neutral but 90% of humanity thinks it's Lawful Good.

90% of humanity thinks they support liberté, egalité, and fraternité, but... there's always a "but" and everything after the "but" proves that everything before the "but" is a goddamned lie.

Every test I do tells me I'm Chaotic Neutral. I accepted that was probably accurate years ago.

 

[Lundgren]

Well, then we also have the discussion of what each of the nine alignments actually means

 

[Ladybird]

I'm going to take a break for a while, get my head together. I'm not acting like The sort of Pubber that I want to be...

Eh, no damage done, we're good. I think some relaxing of the rule for meta-discussions about the rule isn't going to cause any harm, as long as everyone's on the same page as to what they're doing and where the limits are.

Well, then we also have the discussion of what each of the nine alignments actually means

Frankly I always just go "Chaotic Good" because then I can do whatever I want and it's all legit.

 

[A Fiery Flying Roll]

Frankly I always just go "Chaotic Good" because then I can do whatever I want and it's all legit.

We should modernise it and all work out what Sabbat Path we're on instead.

 

[Lundgren]

I any case, I have two topics I want to discuss here on the PUB, but refrain from doing so because it would be politics. Well, I have also not brought them up as I don't really have had time either. After all, the mods and admins here might consider it okay to bring up an invitation for a topic, and then hold in in PMs or off-site.

On of those are for my alternative Traveller setting, where Earth is brought into the Interstellar Community in our time. Discussing how different groups and nations would react if a fleet of space ships suddenly appeared and built a base on Mars would be discussing politics.

The other one is that the TV series Babylon Berlin (still waiting on getting my hand on season 3) have made me interested in using the Weimar Republic's Berlin for a Noir-ish setting. However, as knowing the exact date for the stock-market crash and a certain party coming to power could affect the game; I'm thinking about going the alternative history route. The crash will happen on some other date, and Adolf got killed during the Beer Hall Putsch.

In my mind, talking about where Göring was in late 1925 or early 1926 (the TV Series Circle of Evil says Austria, but Wikipedia says Sweden) in real history wouldn't be politics. However, the entire topic of what the nazis was up to during the 20's could potentially go political, and it could attract people that want to bring up certain cherry picket historical nuggets; or what they think are historical facts.

Then, discussing things as what sentences those arrested for the Putsch would had got if Hitler was killed or where Goebbels would have ended up if he hadn't read the court transcripts about Hitler's trial would be politics, as it would be to talk about how people in real history actually think.

Talking about a decision made for the game (say I decide Röhm would be sentenced to ten years, but released after four) would not in itself be political as I see it. If I also bring up why I made that decision, then that could potentially be political depending on what I based my decision on (for example "I think that would make a more interesting setting for the game" would be stating gaming preferences, not politics).

Then of course, there would always be people trying to read political opinions people's gaming interests. Based on what I would be interested in gaming, I must be a war-mongering capitalistic communist with a pacifist agenda; or something.

 

[Nobby-W]

Eh, no damage done, we're good. I think some relaxing of the rule for meta-discussions about the rule isn't going to cause any harm, as long as everyone's on the same page as to what they're doing and where the limits are.


Frankly I always just go "Chaotic Good" because then I can do whatever I want and it's all legit.

For some reason my DM doesn't think 'Chaotic Silly' is a valid alignment.

 

[A Fiery Flying Roll]

I any case, I have two topics I want to discuss here on the PUB, but refrain from doing so because it would be politics. Well, I have also not brought them up as I don't really have had time either. After all, the mods and admins here might consider it okay to bring up an invitation for a topic, and then hold in in PMs or off-site.

On of those are for my alternative Traveller setting, where Earth is brought into the Interstellar Community in our time. Discussing how different groups and nations would react if a fleet of space ships suddenly appeared and built a base on Mars would be discussing politics.

The other one is that the TV series Babylon Berlin (still waiting on getting my hand on season 3) have made me interested in using the Weimar Republic's Berlin for a Noir-ish setting. However, as knowing the exact date for the stock-market crash and a certain party coming to power could affect the game; I'm thinking about going the alternative history route. The crash will happen on some other date, and Adolf got killed during the Beer Hall Putsch.

In my mind, talking about where Göring was in late 1925 or early 1926 (the TV Series Circle of Evil says Austria, but Wikipedia says Sweden) in real history wouldn't be politics. However, the entire topic of what the nazis was up to during the 20's could potentially go political, and it could attract people that want to bring up certain cherry picket historical nuggets; or what they think are historical facts.

Then, discussing things as what sentences those arrested for the Putsch would had got if Hitler was killed or where Goebbels would have ended up if he hadn't read the court transcripts about Hitler's trial would be politics, as it would be to talk about how people in real history actually think.

Talking about a decision made for the game (say I decide Röhm would be sentenced to ten years, but released after four) would not in itself be political as I see it. If I also bring up why I made that decision, then that could potentially be political depending on what I based my decision on (for example "I think that would make a more interesting setting for the game" would be stating gaming preferences, not politics).

Then of course, there would always be people trying to read political opinions people's gaming interests. Based on what I would be interested in gaming, I must be a war-mongering capitalistic communist with a pacifist agenda; or something.

This whole post is why I think we could do with really making clear that not all discussions that vaguely touch on politics is verboten. Because those sound really interesting and I absolutely think should be allowed on here. On the second, I am going to roll my eyes if we're not allowed to discuss Godlike because it's about WW2.

 

[The Butcher]

I guess Bill Maher shares those stances and politics, too, eh?
So now you’re saying Brendan made a political right wing game...BRENDAN? Are you out of your goddamn mind?

Though (as you have handily reminded everyone) I have a history of making horribly wrong assumptions, I have always assumed that Terror Network was Brendan’s take on a 24 RPG.

The end result of that debacle, if you recall, was me apologizing and saying that I handled it badly.

Unnecessarily so. That trainwreck is on me.

Ok, at the point where 40k is being put forth seriously as a Pro-Right Wing game, to compare to the political authorial intent of Sigmata, I’m done.

Thank God the Dalwhinnie isn’t all gone.

How’s the Dalwhinnie? (I know assumptions get me into trouble, but I’m assuming it’s the 15.) I almost got it last year but the reviews seemed to be damning it with faint praise?

And 40K strikes me as a funny beast in that it’s aesthetic owes a lot to the over-the-top (and very politically charged!) AD2000 dystopian future comics, especially Nemesis The Warlock (where the Catholic Space theocrats were the bad guys and literally led by Space Torquemada).

But a certain segment of the online fandom (thinking of the chans, here) does seem to overlap with... shall we say, certain radical positions that might have been the original object of caricature.

In any case, I like 40K for what it is, even if I believe it’s lost a bit of its irreverent soul across the decades (same goes for WFRP really).

On the Pub we've discussed Paranoia, Comrades, The Price of Freedom, Grim's John Norman game, Winninger's Underground, Dragonraid and DC Heroes Watchmen supplement, all games with overt politics with no issues because we're all adults with real-world perspective interested in having a conversation rather than scoring points with our tribe.

CK is trolling as usual, ignore him.

I don’t think Krugs is trolling — I think there’s a genuine concern for the Pub behind those posts — but I also firmly believe you’re right and would like to add Eclipse Phase to this list. (The Jovian Junta made me cringe at places, but even they got treated as “buzzkill reactionaries that we’re nonetheless making common cause with against the TITANs and the Exsurgent threat.” Man, just typing this makes me want to play the game.)

Sure, Sigmata wears its politics on its sleeves and might not be for everyone, for whatever reason. But I think even if we can map the game’s politics to the real world, doesn’t mean we can’t play it even if these politics don’t line up with yours.

God knows I don’t share the politics of many (most?) of my characters, or approve e.g. of the manifest destiny philosophy that inspires the D&D endgame that I love. Hell, I’ve played a Nazi collaborator in a CoC game once (but that’s OK, ‘cuz I died like a chump) and a former Brazilian junta secret police type in a Changeling: the Lost game (but I did try to make him more or less “reformed” by the horrors of his Durance).

I would, as in every media that I consume, draw the line at hate speech pamphlets in RPG drag like Myfarog or RaHoWa, authored by notorious and unrepentant racists with racism undeniably and explicitly baked into the text.

 

[The Butcher]

• The author says you make society less fascist by playing it - not ok. mostly why do we care. he's could be insane, who knows, it's not really about the game

Wait what

 

[TristramEvans]

Wait what

Marketing.

It's the obvious corrallary to the belief that fiction that isn't...nice...inadvertantly turns you into a not nice person.

"Buying this game proves youre a good person" is an atypical schilling technique among that group.

 

[The Butcher]

Marketing.

It's the obvious corrallary to the belief that fiction that isn't...nice...inadvertantly turns you into a not nice person.

"Buying this game proves youre a good person" is an atypical schilling technique among that group.

Author’s got chutzpah, I’ll give him/her/they that.

Is the game any good, though?

 

[A Fiery Flying Roll]

Author’s got chutzpah, I’ll give him/her/they that.

Is the game any good, though?

I'm not a fan. It's a weird mix of gritty cyberpunk satire and full on silver age morality. On the latter, you can't attack your enemy if they take their helmets off. Which is just silly.

 

[A Fiery Flying Roll]

Marketing.

It's the obvious corrallary to the belief that fiction that isn't...nice...inadvertantly turns you into a not nice person.

"Buying this game proves youre a good person" is an atypical schilling technique among that group.

f you buy this record today
It's not true what the advertisements say
Your life won't be greatly improved
Oh but Christ, you've nothing to lose
And we've got so much to gain

Carter USM - "Total Commercial Fucking Suicide".

Same vibe, but unironically.

 

[CRKrueger]

Though (as you have handily reminded everyone) I have a history of making horribly wrong assumptions, I have always assumed that Terror Network was Brendan’s take on a 24 RPG.

Even if it does, what does that say about Brendan’s politics? Anything? Did he write it as a political treatise?

How’s the Dalwhinnie? (I know assumptions get me into trouble, but I’m assuming it’s the 15.) I almost got it last year but the reviews seemed to be damning it with faint praise?

It’s the Winter Frost. I got it on a lark when I picked up the Lagavulin. It’s more warm, fruity, and honeyed and ...floral if that makes sense.

And 40K strikes me as a funny beast in that it’s aesthetic owes a lot to the over-the-top (and very politically charged!) AD2000 dystopian future comics, especially Nemesis The Warlock (where the Catholic Space theocrats were the bad guys and literally led by Space Torquemada).

But a certain segment of the online fandom (thinking of the chans, here) does seem to overlap with... shall we say, certain radical positions that might have been the original object of caricature.

Not even going to go there, bro, except to say, don’t paint with a 2 color palette and a 6 inch house brush. The trolls on the chans are professional grade. Your knee jerk reaction to what they say is why they said it. Besides, you like ACKS, there’s some loud people out there who believe you’re doing some overlapping yourself. Is that true? See where we go from here?

="The Butcher, post: 186658, member: 17"]In any case, I like 40K for what it is, even if I believe it’s lost a bit of its irreverent soul across the decades (same goes for WFRP really).

Aye, too much Grimdark, not enough British Grimdark. You can always count on Orks though, and Commissar Cain.

="The Butcher, post: 186658, member: 17"]I don’t think Krugs is trolling — I think there’s a genuine concern for the Pub behind those posts — but I also firmly believe you’re right and would like to add Eclipse Phase to this list. (The Jovian Junta made me cringe at places, but even they got treated as “buzzkill reactionaries that we’re nonetheless making common cause with against the TITANs and the Exsurgent threat.” Man, just typing this makes me want to play the game.)

Sure, Sigmata wears its politics on its sleeves and might not be for everyone, for whatever reason. But I think even if we can map the game’s politics to the real world, doesn’t mean we can’t play it even if these politics don’t line up with yours.

God knows I don’t share the politics of many (most?) of my characters, or approve e.g. of the manifest destiny philosophy that inspires the D&D endgame that I love. Hell, I’ve played a Nazi collaborator in a CoC game once (but that’s OK, ‘cuz I died like a chump) and a former Brazilian junta secret police type in a Changeling: the Lost game (but I did try to make him more or less “reformed” by the horrors of his Durance).

I would, as in every media that I consume, draw the line at hate speech pamphlets in RPG drag like Myfarog or RaHoWa, authored by notorious and unrepentant racists with racism undeniably and explicitly baked into the text.

Yeah, that’s the thing, I don’t even think RaHoWa is an RPG from what I’ve heard. The Wendy’s game makes more sense. The only possible redeeming value I could see is Myfarog is the magic system. Being a Norwegian Black Metal guy, Varg might have drawn from Asatru and Viking NeoPagan stuff, which might be interesting. I haven’t seen anyone say “But it’s got a cool magic system!” so I’m not about to start wading to see how bad it is.

 

[Baulderstone]

I any case, I have two topics I want to discuss here on the PUB, but refrain from doing so because it would be politics. Well, I have also not brought them up as I don't really have had time either. After all, the mods and admins here might consider it okay to bring up an invitation for a topic, and then hold in in PMs or off-site.

On of those are for my alternative Traveller setting, where Earth is brought into the Interstellar Community in our time. Discussing how different groups and nations would react if a fleet of space ships suddenly appeared and built a base on Mars would be discussing politics.

The other one is that the TV series Babylon Berlin (still waiting on getting my hand on season 3) have made me interested in using the Weimar Republic's Berlin for a Noir-ish setting. However, as knowing the exact date for the stock-market crash and a certain party coming to power could affect the game; I'm thinking about going the alternative history route. The crash will happen on some other date, and Adolf got killed during the Beer Hall Putsch.

In my mind, talking about where Göring was in late 1925 or early 1926 (the TV Series Circle of Evil says Austria, but Wikipedia says Sweden) in real history wouldn't be politics. However, the entire topic of what the nazis was up to during the 20's could potentially go political, and it could attract people that want to bring up certain cherry picket historical nuggets; or what they think are historical facts.

Then, discussing things as what sentences those arrested for the Putsch would had got if Hitler was killed or where Goebbels would have ended up if he hadn't read the court transcripts about Hitler's trial would be politics, as it would be to talk about how people in real history actually think.

Talking about a decision made for the game (say I decide Röhm would be sentenced to ten years, but released after four) would not in itself be political as I see it. If I also bring up why I made that decision, then that could potentially be political depending on what I based my decision on (for example "I think that would make a more interesting setting for the game" would be stating gaming preferences, not politics).

I'd say that the Traveller setting with discussion about current nations might cross the line. On the other hand, the Weimar Republic setting sounds like it would make for a great thread here.

Then of course, there would always be people trying to read political opinions people's gaming interests. Based on what I would be interested in gaming, I must be a war-mongering capitalistic communist with a pacifist agenda; or something.

I think it is best to not worry about the people trying to read political opinions into people's gaming habits. Like T The Butcher, I've played plenty of characters that are far from my own beliefs.

Getting back to the topic of adding more specificity to the "no politics" rule, people need to keep in mind that we mostly mod just by talking to people. If we were coming in fast with banhammers, I could see people feeling a need to know exactly where the line is. That isn't the situation here. If a line is crossed, we usually just step in and ask people to dial it back a little. We certainly want people to be mindful of crossing the line, but there isn't much reason to be afraid of it.

 

[CRKrueger]

I any case, I have two topics I want to discuss here on the PUB, but refrain from doing so because it would be politics. Well, I have also not brought them up as I don't really have had time either. After all, the mods and admins here might consider it okay to bring up an invitation for a topic, and then hold in in PMs or off-site.

On of those are for my alternative Traveller setting, where Earth is brought into the Interstellar Community in our time. Discussing how different groups and nations would react if a fleet of space ships suddenly appeared and built a base on Mars would be discussing politics.

The other one is that the TV series Babylon Berlin (still waiting on getting my hand on season 3) have made me interested in using the Weimar Republic's Berlin for a Noir-ish setting. However, as knowing the exact date for the stock-market crash and a certain party coming to power could affect the game; I'm thinking about going the alternative history route. The crash will happen on some other date, and Adolf got killed during the Beer Hall Putsch.

In my mind, talking about where Göring was in late 1925 or early 1926 (the TV Series Circle of Evil says Austria, but Wikipedia says Sweden) in real history wouldn't be politics. However, the entire topic of what the nazis was up to during the 20's could potentially go political, and it could attract people that want to bring up certain cherry picket historical nuggets; or what they think are historical facts.

Then, discussing things as what sentences those arrested for the Putsch would had got if Hitler was killed or where Goebbels would have ended up if he hadn't read the court transcripts about Hitler's trial would be politics, as it would be to talk about how people in real history actually think.

Talking about a decision made for the game (say I decide Röhm would be sentenced to ten years, but released after four) would not in itself be political as I see it. If I also bring up why I made that decision, then that could potentially be political depending on what I based my decision on (for example "I think that would make a more interesting setting for the game" would be stating gaming preferences, not politics).

Then of course, there would always be people trying to read political opinions people's gaming interests. Based on what I would be interested in gaming, I must be a war-mongering capitalistic communist with a pacifist agenda; or something.

Alt-History stuff should be good, especially if we’re not saying “What did Person-X actually believe and does that make them Good or Evil?”

The current trip to Mars thing is tough. If it’s literally now, then we’re likely to get into “is Trump or Biden less likely to frack Mars?”, which I can’t see as being very helpful.

Fast forward a bit, positing different world leaders and some renamed corporations and now you’re really no different than any Near Future Sci-Fi game. However, one of the thorniest topics with First Contact isn’t going to be how the governments handle it, but the religion.

Have you picked up the Chaosium book on Weimar Berlin?

 

[The Butcher]

Even if it does, what does that say about Brendan’s politics? Anything? Did he write it as a political treatise?

He did not and that would be my point. He just wanted a game where someone could play Jack Bauer.

And yes, 24 might be politically charged, but arguably so is every action-oriented piece of fiction ever, from the Epic of Gilgamesh to The Three Musketeers to Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Commando.

It’s the Winter Frost. I got it on a lark when I picked up the Lagavulin. It’s more warm, fruity, and honeyed and ...floral if that makes sense.

It absolutely makes sense. Very typically Highland-y. Many reviewers describe this floral note as “heather” which is apparently common in the Highlands. The joys of terroir.

Not even going to go there, bro, except to say, don’t paint with a 2 color palette and a 6 inch house brush. The trolls on the chans are professional grade. Your knee jerk reaction to what they say is why they said it. Besides, you like ACKS, there’s some loud people out there who believe you’re doing some overlapping yourself. Is that true? See where we go from here?

Hence, “a certain segment.” That’s a broad brush?

Did you miss the part where I said I like 40K?

Aye, too much Grimdark, not enough British Grimdark. You can always count on Orks though, and Commissar Cain.

Glad to see you didn’t miss it.

Yeah, that’s the thing, I don’t even think RaHoWa is an RPG from what I’ve heard. The Wendy’s game makes more sense. The only possible redeeming value I could see is Myfarog is the magic system. Being a Norwegian Black Metal guy, Varg might have drawn from Asatru and Viking NeoPagan stuff, which might be interesting. I haven’t seen anyone say “But it’s got a cool magic system!” so I’m not about to start wading to see how bad it is.

Didn’t even bother look at the mechanical bits, to be honest.

 

[Ladybird]

I guess Bill Maher shares those stances and politics, too, eh?
So now you’re saying Brendan made a political right wing game...BRENDAN? Are you out of your goddamn mind?

You were the one that suggested you wouldn't see it as political...

I disagree about consistency. “RPGs as political treatise” amounts to a catalog of 2. From what I’ve heard, Myfarog doesn’t even hit that bar, despite its odious subtext. Calling your company Politically Incorrect Games isn’t even in the same cosmos. If all ”I’m With Her Games” put out was Terror Network games, Arrows of Indra and Two Fisted Tales, it would be hard to see the politics, unless they made a big deal about all the proceeds going to HRC.

TBH I honestly can't see much difference in the two game's premises, other than Sigmata's addition of superhero mechanics, and if we were told not to discuss any games with political themes I'd expect them both to be excluded.

Glad to see you didn’t miss it.

Worth remembering that British Grimdark didn't just pop up out of nowhere; Britain of the late 70's / 80's was an angry and grim country, which came across in a lot of it's alternative media, even if the things those creators were trying to say have been forgotten now and too many people take them at face value (Especially 40k).