...it seems like it happens a lot in RPGs where people decide that their character should be a racist misogynistic d-bag, and then use the "but its in my backstory" card when i ask them about it
why does every Barbarian or other fringe type PC have to be like that?
i'm all for coming up with compelling backstories, it makes my job easier. racism and misogyny is not compelling, its just offensive and tends to put gamers in a bad mood when the Barbarian wont listen to the wizard PC because "she's a southern wench"my question is, is this a recurring problem with gamers as a whole or just in the midwest?
do gamers use their characters to act out their deep down racism and sexism, cause it kinda seems that way from my seat.and thats really, really disappointing because in my youth it seemed that gamers were a more liberal forward thinking bunch then the general populace.
do woman gamers run into this a lot, does it turn them off from gaming?
how as a GM do you deal with this?
Now I'm not defending it, but you seem to be forgetting the setting here and what it is based off of. Think back to even in the early 1900's in the US women didn't even have the right to vote, in the 1860's there were slaves here. There are still countries where women have little to no rights at all and have to cover their faces while out in public or risk being stoned. Think back to the 1940's and WWII, you have complete genocide going on.
Now look at Golarion. It's based off of medieval fantasy with countries like Cheliax having slaves. There are other cultures who believe that women are below men in society and then you put on top of that there are different humanoids who distrust and outright dislike each other because of past transgressions, slights, or even wars.
In short, this isn't about the age of the player but the setting and the character they wish to play. I have no problem if a character is a xenophopic dwarf who doesn't trust other races. It
There's some truth to this and that's why it's important to show both sides of the evil coin. Slavery, for example, is in my setting. But I also have freedmen, abolitionists (both natives and colonists), and corsairs that actively fight against slavery and their evils. Likewise, I have some colonies and island kingdoms that are much more patriarchal, while others are gender equal, with one actually matrilineal. So I show that there is room for being against the "norm" of evil actions, and I think that's important. Mostly because a game like Pathfinder wouldn't sell if it went completely off of 21st century notions of morality and ethics, and probably would scare off whole demographics.
Also, it can be useful to make a distinction between racism within species and between species. While the racism/speciesism between species so common in fantasy gaming can certainly be problematic and could be analyzed and compared to RL racism, racism within the species can also be common in characters and is a much more clear issue.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I disagree with this greatly. Why is one form of hatred inherently more acceptable in a game than the other? That's actually something that bothers me a lot, how people think it's okay to be racist in a game because hey, it's half-orcs and half-orcs aren't real! Don't like that one bit.
So are you saying none of the various races/species in your game world have conflict? None of them dislike each other for racialy inspired reasons? There are not racially motivated situations in yoru game, good OR bad?
Have you removed the tropes of elven distrust of dwarves and vice versa?
Have you removed the hatred of goblinoids by dwarves and vice versa?
Are orcs and trolls in your world no longer cruel and violent for example?
Are half elves all accepted now in both their human and elven cultures, against the typcial of their race?
While I am not in any way intimating that racism and sexism in real life are at all acceptable, I don't think that removing them entirely makes for a better RP experience.
There have to be obstacles to overcome, both mathematically via combat and socially via RP in most RP games. These topics may be hot buttons but when handled in an appropriate manner in a group of mature players I don't think they are always abhorent in a character.
It is when the portrayal of such is merely the extention of the players actual world view where it becomes truly offensive in my opinion.
i just wanted to vent my recent issues with a few difficult gamers i'm ecstatic it is not a system wide problem as i said its been 20 years since i last gamed with anyone that doesn't share my last name and was worried that gamers had gone down hill in the last 2 decades i'm glad thats not the case:)
i just wanted to vent my recent issues with a few difficult gamers i'm ecstatic it is not a system wide problem as i said its been 20 years since i last gamed with anyone that doesn't share my last name and was worried that gamers had gone down hill in the last 2 decades i'm glad thats not the case:)
I think your personal experience is just a run of bad luck. Hopefully you can find better people in the future.
Do you have a FLGS that you can visit that might have a bulletin board of people looking for games? Might be able to talk to the staff there and cherry pick some new options for adding people to your games.
Good luck in any case. :)
Elves ARE faster and smarter than most men. Orcs ARE stronger and more violent than other races. Etc. In the setting of a fantasy RPG, racism is fact. To NOT be a racist on some level would be disengenuous to the setting and the day to day reality of that world.Technically that's not being racist, that's being a speceist!I stand corrected then. We don't have different species of intelligent humanoids in the real world and the 30 or so years of gaming I have done where all the races were called races and not species is probably what threw me. :)
The other thing to keep in mind about that is: being stronger than someone doesn't make you better than them, it just means you're the guy they call when they need something heavy pulled out of the mud; likewise smarter, faster, whatever...
My personal take on those 'races' that have some manner of mechanical bigotry built in is that if you look, you might note that frequently those races also tend to have very long lifespans. Long life often means a long memory for past wounds suffered & a corresponding inability to forget & forgive.
I disagree with this greatly. Why is one form of hatred inherently more acceptable in a game than the other? That's actually something that bothers me a lot, how people think it's okay to be racist in a game because hey, it's half-orcs and half-orcs aren't real! Don't like that one bit.So are you saying none of the various races/species in your game world have conflict? None of them dislike each other for racialy inspired reasons?
Have you removed the tropes of elven distrust of dwarves and vice versa?
Have you removed the hatred of goblinoids by dwarves and vice versa?
Are orcs and trolls in your world no longer cruel and violent?
While I am not in any way intimating that racism and sexism in real life are at all acceptable, I don't think that removing them entirely makes for a better RP experience.
There have to be obstacles to overcome, both mathematically via combat and socially via RP in most RP games. These topics may be hot buttons but when handled in an appropriate manner in a group of mature players I don't think they are always abhorent in a character.
It is when the portrayal of such is merely the extention of the players actual world view where it becomes truly offensive in my opinion.
there is elven distrust or goblin hate which i don't mind and then theres "i won't adventure with any dwarves or listen to the woman in the group because my character hates them" i don't mind if the elven fighter or ranger or whatever doesn't care for the dwarven wizard or rogue in the party or would rather hire a male smith to repair his armor but when it becomes an issue with working with the group thats where the problems develop
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wow,
Never had any racist or mysogynistic players in any game I've ever run or been in. I did have some characters like that in games, but, and this is important, they really were just characters, not the players themselves. I had a DEA agent in a game one time who played a racist human who hated elves with a passion (in a Shadowrun game). I had a player (who was a pretty decent guy) play a complete womanizer in a World of Darkness campaign (which honestly kind of lends itself to that sort of thing, due to the nature of the world). Then there was the player who played a super hero with x-ray vision who got an apartment across from a major women's only gym, and would keep notes (in character, not out of character) on the type and color of female superheroes and supervillains underwear (or lack thereof). But again, this was more of a comedic thing than anything else, especially given the player was female and the character male. :)
But I've never had any one OOC act like any of the people being talked about in this thread.
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
But the same process is true in a lot of other cultural forms too - look at all misogynistic and racist characters and portrayals in popular TV shows, where the creator can always go on the defense with "but it's the character who's sexist/chooses to act in a stereotypical way!", completely ignoring that the creator themself created the character and made all the choices for it.
Wait, so it's racist if you write a story with racist characters in it? I don't buy that.
On-topic: The game includes racism and sexism already. Upthread folks have pointed out that dwarves hate orcs, etc. There are also differences within species over culture. For instance, Korvosans hate Shoanti and vice versa. This same fact sometimes holds true even within ethnic groups: settled Ustalavic Varisians dislike itinerant Varisian Sczarni. And the way the Ustalavic Kellids are portrayed is kind of racist against them in a Hills Have Eyes kind of way. The salient point of the cultural differences that give a game world verisimilitude is that they are differences, and people from very different cultures often have a hard time understanding each other.
I think the bright line should be drawn at, don't be a jerk. OK, if your Shoanti tribesman is racist against Korvosans and orcs, fine. But don't be a jerk to the player who's playing a Korvosan. Trade jibes if you want, but keep it in the spirit of fun, and don't stop the game with it.
Case in point: in Jade Regent, I'm playing a pretty xenophobic Tian-Min samurai. He spent most of his life in a monastery, so his travels in Varisia and beyond have really challenged some of his assumptions. He does still refer to the Ulfen as "straw-headed barbarians," and makes ear jokes at Shalelu, but nobody at the table finds any of that offensive.
So basically what pennywit said.
i have lots of experience with history, just because the game is set in olden times (take your pick Golarion has them all!) doesn't mean people have to act like they did then, its a game not 1468 (or any other year you pick).
i get your point, well said, its just that Pathfinder isn't meant to be a HISTORICAL game, its a FANTASY game based on certain parts of history and just because the House of Thrune owns slave or Absalom condones it doesn't make it right
As I said, not defending it, but if it's part of said setting (Golarion) which has a lot of that stuff going on from slave owning devil worshipers to tree hugging druids to paladins that try to redeem anyone they come across. I don't see any reason to get mad at the players for having characters who want to be played that way. They just need to understand that those attitudes don't always work in the different areas they adventure to and they will have some hard times when dealing with other people who are just as xenophobic or intolerant as they are towards them. Social settings will definitely be a challenge, good luck with your diplomacy rolls!
My group is pretty good about things like this and we use these as opportunities to role play and delve into characters a bit deeper. If they treat NPC's like garbage, they will be treated like garbage. Their party members will frown at them and tell them to shut up, etc. They are basically playing characters with flaws in my group. We do use the drawbacks system from Ult Camp and 3.5 flaws to give our characters more depth. It makes things interesting.
The game itself is made in such a way that the speciesism is very rational and understandable, which greatly encourages specieistic characters - and a character completely devoid of speciesism would be a naive hippy, basically.
This is problematic in itself, and it is telling that in many other, especially older, P&P RPG's there are stat modifiers and special abilities of even different human races and ethniticies (don' know if D&D has ever done that though). It is however at the very core of much of the fantasy today, so it can't easily be gotten rid of without hurting the genre in a lot of other ways.
I think the speciesism can be an issue, and it surely relates to racism in many ways, but I don't think it as a phenomenon should be treated the same way as racism as a phenomenon. Some players will have their characters be extremely speciesistic, to the point where it's a thinly veiled way to get out racist urges, but I think those players are fewer and it's less of a problem than the so often encountered sexism and sometimes-encountered racism.
edit:
.
But the same process is true in a lot of other cultural forms too - look at all misogynistic and racist characters and portrayals in popular TV shows, where the creator can always go on the defense with "but it's the character who's sexist/chooses to act in a stereotypical way!", completely ignoring that the creator themself created the character and made all the choices for it.Wait, so it's racist if you write a story with racist characters in it? I don't buy that.
Not necessarily at all, but when you look at media at large and see a large amount of _protagonists_ being racist/sexist, and you see a large amount of racism/sexism framed in such a way that the racism/sexism evokes a positive reaction from the viewer/reader/listener etc, then it's a symptom of a racist society - and I think it is a racist (for example) act to make a story in which racism and racists are framed in a positive way. That doesn't mean the person who makes it is necessarily an ideological racist, but the act is racist as it benefits the racist power structures.
This is IME even more obvious with sexism in media - if there is one character type that is all too common nowadays (or has always been, but it's seen a boost the last ten years or so) it's the blatantly sexist white smart guy who might sometimes be critizised of his sexism in-show but it never gives him any real consequences and at the end of the day he's always hailed as The Hero (or antihero, which is still a kind of hero).
A lot of times this is defended with "but it's the character who chooses to act sexist!" while ignoring the fact that the creator made the character sexist. When you cast the hero as a sexist, that generally leads to conveying the message that sexism is heroic/something that heros do/at the most a little rude and not something actually harmful.
Also, note that it's nearly always guy-heros who are misogynistic, nearly never female heroes who are "man-hating". Nearly every "man-hating" female character around is an antagonist.
I disagree with this greatly. Why is one form of hatred inherently more acceptable in a game than the other? That's actually something that bothers me a lot, how people think it's okay to be racist in a game because hey, it's half-orcs and half-orcs aren't real! Don't like that one bit.So are you saying none of the various races/species in your game world have conflict? None of them dislike each other for racialy inspired reasons? There are not racially motivated situations in yoru game, good OR bad?
Have you removed the tropes of elven distrust of dwarves and vice versa?
Have you removed the hatred of goblinoids by dwarves and vice versa?
Are orcs and trolls in your world no longer cruel and violent for example?
Are half elves all accepted now in both their human and elven cultures, against the typcial of their race?
While I am not in any way intimating that racism and sexism in real life are at all acceptable, I don't think that removing them entirely makes for a better RP experience.
There have to be obstacles to overcome, both mathematically via combat and socially via RP in most RP games. These topics may be hot buttons but when handled in an appropriate manner in a group of mature players I don't think they are always abhorent in a character.
It is when the portrayal of such is merely the extention of the players actual world view where it becomes truly offensive in my opinion.
You... completely missed my point... I was saying that it's silly for a player to be more accepting of one type of hatred than another because the races aren't real people. Like, the mindset of "Sexism is bad and a sign of immaturity in a gamer, but racism is fine because orcs and elves aren't people" is kind of a hypocritical and somewhat... scary. Can't explain the scary part. Now, I would accept "My players aren't comfortable with that" as a good excuse because you don't want to do anything that makes your players feel uncomfortable.
But the same process is true in a lot of other cultural forms too - look at all misogynistic and racist characters and portrayals in popular TV shows, where the creator can always go on the defense with "but it's the character who's sexist/chooses to act in a stereotypical way!", completely ignoring that the creator themself created the character and made all the choices for it.Wait, so it's racist if you write a story with racist characters in it? I don't buy that.
On-topic: The game includes racism and sexism already. Upthread folks have pointed out that dwarves hate orcs, etc. There are also differences within species over culture. For instance, Korvosans hate Shoanti and vice versa. This same fact sometimes holds true even within ethnic groups: settled Ustalavic Varisians dislike itinerant Varisian Sczarni. And the way the Ustalavic Kellids are portrayed is kind of racist against them in a Hills Have Eyes kind of way. The salient point of the cultural differences that give a game world verisimilitude is that they are differences, and people from very different cultures often have a hard time understanding each other.
I think the bright line should be drawn at, don't be a jerk. OK, if your Shoanti tribesman is racist against Korvosans and orcs, fine. But don't be a jerk to the player who's playing a Korvosan. Trade jibes if you want, but keep it in the spirit of fun, and don't stop the game with it.
Case in point: in Jade Regent, I'm playing a pretty xenophobic Tian-Min samurai. He spent most of his life in a monastery, so his travels in Varisia and beyond have really challenged some of his assumptions. He does still refer to the Ulfen as "straw-headed barbarians," and makes ear jokes at Shalelu, but nobody at the table finds any of that offensive.
So basically what pennywit said.
This is what it boils down to. Well said!
But the same process is true in a lot of other cultural forms too - look at all misogynistic and racist characters and portrayals in popular TV shows, where the creator can always go on the defense with "but it's the character who's sexist/chooses to act in a stereotypical way!", completely ignoring that the creator themself created the character and made all the choices for it.Wait, so it's racist if you write a story with racist characters in it? I don't buy that.
On-topic: The game includes racism and sexism already. Upthread folks have pointed out that dwarves hate orcs, etc. There are also differences within species over culture. For instance, Korvosans hate Shoanti and vice versa. This same fact sometimes holds true even within ethnic groups: settled Ustalavic Varisians dislike itinerant Varisian Sczarni. And the way the Ustalavic Kellids are portrayed is kind of racist against them in a Hills Have Eyes kind of way. The salient point of the cultural differences that give a game world verisimilitude is that they are differences, and people from very different cultures often have a hard time understanding each other.
I think the bright line should be drawn at, don't be a jerk. OK, if your Shoanti tribesman is racist against Korvosans and orcs, fine. But don't be a jerk to the player who's playing a Korvosan. Trade jibes if you want, but keep it in the spirit of fun, and don't stop the game with it.
Case in point: in Jade Regent, I'm playing a pretty xenophobic Tian-Min samurai. He spent most of his life in a monastery, so his travels in Varisia and beyond have really challenged some of his assumptions. He does still refer to the Ulfen as "straw-headed barbarians," and makes ear jokes at Shalelu, but nobody at the table finds any of that offensive.
So basically what pennywit said.
so when you play your jade regent PC does he work with the group? i assume so:) i don't mind the racism and misogyny in the system (it makes it more realistic and less disney-ish) its when they zero in on those two aspects and create problems within the structure of the adventure that i take issue. i love that Paizo didn't gloss over those when creating Golarion as they do exist (especially back in the day).
all great arguments everyone:)| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Case in point: in Jade Regent, I'm playing a pretty xenophobic Tian-Min samurai. He spent most of his life in a monastery, so his travels in Varisia and beyond have really challenged some of his assumptions. He does still refer to the Ulfen as "straw-headed barbarians," and makes ear jokes at Shalelu, but nobody at the table finds any of that offensive.
And this is another great point about racist/sexist characters: Having the character grow past these flaws during the course of the game can make for some really great RP.
I play in a group where all the characters are ex slaves of one kind or another. The original players in the group all had characters that were slaves to the drow for 10 years before breaking out.
We all have good alignments but we all despise the drow with a murderous passion and have constant alignment issues whenever we meet any on the surface (our GM loves her surface going good aligned drow). But it makes for great RP and has been a focal point for several characters who have realised that their hate of drow may be making them as bad as the drow in certain ways for example.
i have lots of experience with history, just because the game is set in olden times (take your pick Golarion has them all!) doesn't mean people have to act like they did then, its a game not 1468 (or any other year you pick).
i get your point, well said, its just that Pathfinder isn't meant to be a HISTORICAL game, its a FANTASY game based on certain parts of history and just because the House of Thrune owns slave or Absalom condones it doesn't make it right
As I said, not defending it, but if it's part of said setting (Golarion) which has a lot of that stuff going on from slave owning devil worshipers to tree hugging druids to paladins that try to redeem anyone they come across. I don't see any reason to get mad at the players for having characters who want to be played that way. They just need to understand that those attitudes don't always work in the different areas they adventure to and they will have some hard times when dealing with other people who are just as xenophobic or intolerant as they are towards them. Social settings will definitely be a challenge, good luck with your diplomacy rolls!
My group is pretty good about things like this and we use these as opportunities to role play and delve into characters a bit deeper. If they treat NPC's like garbage, they will be treated like garbage. Their party members will frown at them and tell them to shut up, etc. They are basically playing characters with flaws in my group. We do use the drawbacks system from Ult Camp and 3.5 flaws to give our characters more depth. It makes things interesting.
its all good i don't know how to make things bold so have to SHOUT:) to make them stand out, i didn't think you were defending it, just wanted to further my point. sorry for the yelling just an issue of computer ineptitude:)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I remember back in 3.5, I played a womanizing barbarian named Oolok, alongside a female wizard. He ended up having a much deeper respect for her as the adventures went by, sired a child with her, and towards the end, when we fought Orcus and everyone but Oolok died, he decapitated Orcus, took the demon lord's throne and dedicated each and every war campaign in her honor. Even erected statues of her on every layer of the Abyss that he took over.
Point is, 1 dimensional hatred for a character is boring and an issue. But, if you can have your character grow beyond that, I feel that's better overall.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Case in point: in Jade Regent, I'm playing a pretty xenophobic Tian-Min samurai. He spent most of his life in a monastery, so his travels in Varisia and beyond have really challenged some of his assumptions. He does still refer to the Ulfen as "straw-headed barbarians," and makes ear jokes at Shalelu, but nobody at the table finds any of that offensive.And this is another great point about racist/sexist characters: Having the character grow past these flaws during the course of the game can make for some really great RP.
I play in a group where all the characters are ex slaves of one kind or another. The original players in the group all had characters that were slaves to the drow for 10 years before breaking out.
We all have good alignments but we all despise the drow with a murderous passion and have constant alignment issues whenever we meet any on the surface (our GM loves her surface going good aligned drow). But it makes for great RP and has been a focal point for several characters who have realised that their hate of drow may be making them as bad as the drow in certain ways for example.
i agree one hundred percent! when wulfgar was captured by bruenor in the crystal shard he was a racist misogynist. but after 8 years of living with them and interacting with drizzt and cat tie-brie he was, for the most part able to move past them and made for a really compelling character and added to the book. personal growth is a part of human nature, its when their is no growth that it becomes tiresome.
so when you play your jade regent PC does he work with the group? i assume so:) i don't mind the racism and misogyny in the system (it makes it more realistic and less disney-ish) its when they zero in on those two aspects and create problems within the structure of the adventure that i take issue. i love that Paizo didn't gloss over those when creating Golarion as they do exist (especially back in the day).
Just on a side note, disney is generally full of both racism and sexism. They just don't problematize it at all, so there never is a conflict about it in their movies which makes it less obvious. All the characters in the movies just accept the racism and sexism. If you're interested in reading more I strongly recommend this blog.
i agree one hundred percent! when wulfgar was captured by bruenor in the crystal shard he was a racist misogynist. but after 8 years of living with them and interacting with drizzt and cat tie-brie he was, for the most part able to move past them and made for a really compelling character and added to the book. personal growth is a part of human nature, its when their is no growth that it becomes tiresome.
And this is another great point about racist/sexist characters: Having the character grow past these flaws during the course of the game can make for some really great RP.*snip*
Agreed fully, just want to add that _a lot_ is in the framing. When writing a novel you have more or less complete control of the framing, when in an RPG group you don't so it's even more important to be careful about how you go about these things.
I remember back in 3.5, I played a womanizing barbarian named Oolok, alongside a female wizard. He ended up having a much deeper respect for her as the adventures went by, sired a child with her, and towards the end, when we fought Orcus and everyone but Oolok died, he decapitated Orcus, took the demon lord's throne and dedicated each and every war campaign in her honor. Even erected statues of her on every layer of the Abyss that he took over.
Point is, 1 dimensional hatred for a character is boring and an issue. But, if you can have your character grow beyond that, I feel that's better overall.
Hey you get it!! exactly the point i was making, curse my keyboard deficient fingers!! well said:) love your story by the way sound like an awesome time!
so when you play your jade regent PC does he work with the group? i assume so:) i don't mind the racism and misogyny in the system (it makes it more realistic and less disney-ish) its when they zero in on those two aspects and create problems within the structure of the adventure that i take issue. i love that Paizo didn't gloss over those when creating Golarion as they do exist (especially back in the day).Just on a side note, disney is generally full of both racism and sexism. They just don't problematize it at all, so there never is a conflict about it in their movies which makes it less obvious. All the characters in the movies just accept the racism and sexism.
i know, my favorite episode of family guy is when they go to alternate reality and they go to the disney world and its all happy smiley good times until mort stops by and thing get ...dark. good point, i was just trying to convey the happy smiley-esque aspect and disney was the only example i could think of then.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Are you confusing racist and misogynistic Players with PCs? And misogynistic with Chivalrous?
If by chivalrous you mean the actual historical system of knights and so forth, that was explicitly a misogynistic system. If you mean a more modern sort of thing like holding doors for women, giving women a seat on the bus, etc, it's still misogynistic because it sets women apart as requiring special assistance and treatment.
in my weekday group.
my Plushie bard "Zipper" as the party Gadgeteer named her/it, is an equal opportunity homicidal maniac, whom especially hates old gnomes.
Zipper has to roll a DC 30 will save to resist the urge to kill old gnomes, DC 40 if the old gnome is male.
"Zipper hate Gnomes, Zipper think gnomes are Epitome of Evil, Zipper think gnomes should be extinct, Zipper kill every last Gnome Zipper see. Zipper see no difference between Halfling, Gnome or Moogle. Zipper see 3 confused species of Gnome whom deserve torture in the abyss for their sins."
and Zipper, is a chaotic evil Gnomicidal Plush doll animated by the soul of a slain chaotic evil homicidal angel.
the Homicidal Maniac Flaw was chosen for the 2 extra feats and because a Plushie that hated gnomes, sounded so fun.
Zipper is more Androgynistic, but racist against Gnomes.
And how does that work out if another player wants to play a gnome? Or if there are gnome NPC that need to be dealt with less violently.
I can kind of see the fun in it for some short, silly games.On the other hand in anything more serious, as a GM, I'd shoot that character down as soon as I got to "homicidal maniac". And be very careful about vetting other characters from you, depending on how well I knew your style before seeing that character.
that is a long term silly group to be exact.
last week.
our party half fire elemental human samurai 2/fighter 2/monk 2, "Bullet" Hibiki, was fighting a Giant named Sagat, but due to blocked and repressed memories, he instead saw a large sized rubber ducky with an eye patch. in fact, the fig, was a large sized rubber ducky with an eyepatch
when Zipper busted out of the cabinet and accidentally slew an NPCed ex PC Gnomish druid in one lucky critical hit, and proceeded to walk over the gnomes corpse.
the party yelled "demon" and the puppeteer was throwing needles, the PC troll transformed into Orochimaru, grew wings, and flew off
then the group decided to work with Zipper because they were too busy killing each other to notice that Sagat was still up and fighting. Orochimaru dissapeared. after collaberration, giant dies with a party wounded by each other.
towards the end of the fight, a naked gadgeteer clad in nothing but a kevlar vest, bursts out of a rock he was sleeping under and tries to stop the Orochimaru guy, before he decides to collaborate with Zipper and the party, because Sagat just "needs to die" because the plushie needs to satiate her bloodthirsty urges by consuming the giant's flesh to feed her clinically crazy plush hunger.
Tuesday/Wednesday Tony has such crazy shenanigans going on in his campaigns. his games are very silly and involve more IC horseplay than actual plot. hell, we no longer have a single good nor gnomish PC at all. the neutral good gnomish druid was killed when Zipper burst out of a magically reinforced cabinet with critical hits on sunder checks.
it isn't my usual player style. it's just a bit of sillyness in a silly campaign.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Iija, i agree about your argument in regards to novels vs group adventures. wulfgar was just the first example that popped into my head:)
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Better question: what is up with all those NPCs who refuse to make my PC a sammich? Not to mention those NPCs with their half-breed bastard children who refuse to learn Common. If you ask me, they should all be put in a boat and sent back to where they came from.
Scratch that. Really, it's all NPCs who are a problem. If they're not stealing xp while they're supposed to be carrying a torch, they're taking my PC's money while I'm trying to purchase equipment to save the flippin' world. All they are is walking bags of xp and loot, and until they learn their place, they should STFU before I stabinate them.
Zipper has no gender, and hates gnomes, especially old gnomes, male gnomes, and old male gnomes, the 3 criteria the deceased druid fit. but the party wanted that druid dead anyway.
i wouldn't play Zipper in a more serious campaign. but it is more of an akward meetup between buddies who graduated the same highschool engaging in ridiculous fun.
The key, I suppose, is whether or not the person is actually just roleplaying a douchebag, or if he really IS a douchebag and is projecting that onto the game table, via his character, and then whether or not it disrupts the game.
I have generally felt that extremist personalities (anything that includes 'always', 'never', 'every') are a bad thing in a game, because it creates blocks; you can't compromise, because you're stuck on that one THING. There's a difference between 'I dislike elves and would rather not associate with them if I have a choice, and will be growly and complainy if I do' and 'I hate elves and kill them on sight, every last one of them'.
Frankly, most groups I've played in would ditch such a character ICly.
Just to respond to something, Disney WAS racist in some of the older movies. I'm pretty sure they've come a long way to be more sensitive to minorities and different groups.
Sometimes, sometimes not. There's a _lot_ of whitewashing going on (see bleakening the skin on the PoC princess merchandise, casting a white guy as native protagonist etc), a lot of stereotyping etc. They also tend to have animals with PoC voice actors or accents be bad guys or stupid (a very obvious example being the hyenas from the lion king, though that movie is beginning to get old). There are some decent representations too, but not that much.
is there like an icon that can be put on some threads that sort of looks like a small representation of a tire fire or is that not an offered software feature
There comes a point where you are reading WAY to into the things to look for something racist. The fact whoopi goldberg, who really is an idiot, is someone who happens to be black and played a bad guy is not racist. Moufasa was played by James earl jones...a black guy. Pretty sure scar was a white guy.
Looking at a single case it's easy to write it off as coincidence and "reading way to much into something", but it's not only who's the voice actor but also things like accent and how they are framed (the hyenas speak AAVE and latin@ slang). Voice actor is part of it but not the whole. But it was just an obvious example, there's swaths of more - and that's the thing. It's not so much about "is this single character racist?" which will sometimes be a yes and sometimes a maybe and sometimes a no, but it's when you look at the larger picture.
Lady and the Tramp (the Siamese twins) Pretty racist.
Note that basically the same thing (siamese cat coded as chinese) is in the Aristocats too.
The only recent example I can think of that isn't racist but is whitewashing the truth is Pocohantas.
Oh, pocahontas has loads of racism in it, even apart from portraying the europeans and the natives as "equal offenders" which is itself perpetuating racism. There's also issues with sexism and disney's so common portrayal of flamboyant/"posh" men as evil (again see Scar, or Jafar, or several others). Google is your friend, and again, the blog linked above is great. While it focuses on issues of sexism, it also contains a lot about race.
thanks everyone, all great points! you certainly all convinced me its a run of bad luck, i will check in with my friendly game store if i join another group (or even these boards) and NOT play with former co-workers again:)
i'm glad its just an individual problem and isn't wide spread:) my fears have been allayed this thread can die now:) which i will recommend. thanks to everyone you guys RULE!!! love the pathfinder message boards:)
can a moderator please close it down:) thanks!
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
LOL, what an interesting thread. I particularly loved the "liberals can't be sexist" comment.
I haven't laughed that hard in a long, long, long time.
there is also a portrayal of older women as popular Disney villains too. the queen in Snow White whom envied her daughter, Malificent in Sleeping Beauty, Ursula in Little Mermaid, the evil stepmother in Cinderella. in fact, all of these women impeded the goals of the female protagonists, and 3 of them used magic to create roadblocks. the 4th was not a witch, but she had her own cruel methodsThere's also issues with sexism and disney's so common portrayal of flamboyant/"posh" men as evil (again see Scar, or Jafar, or several others). Google is your friend, and again, the blog linked above is great. While it focuses on issues of sexism, it also contains a lot about race.
- Ursula stealing Ariel's voice, her most appealing canon feature
- Maleficent Cursing princess Aurora to die on her 16th birthday
- the queen giving snow white a poisoned apple with the intent of murder so she could both slaughter the dwarves whom sheltered her, and expand her empire
- the stepmother who forced Cinderella to work as a slave
I think you need to be careful assuming that roleplaying a character is in any way indicative of how a player actually is. Fantasy is filled with racial and cultural tropes "elves are stuck up, dwarves are drunks, barbarians hate magic, everyone hates orcs..." just to name a few. These are often written directly into the game material. Many people try to roleplay "accurately" when it comes to these tropes. That is not say every sexist barbarian character is indicative of a sexist player.
Heh, I would say that people tend to see what they want to see and disregard the rest...
I played a custom race druid character for a long time. She was the magical offspring of a male elf and a dryad, and was raised as a dryad. (Her father disappeared before she ever knew him.)
When she was off studying with the local druid on her way to becoming a druid herself, a gang of humans and goblins invaded her forest, cut down all the trees in her grove, and hauled them away as fuel for their ritual demon-summoning fires.
She had an issue with humans and goblins after that.
She also found axe-wielders frightening and would avoid them or treat them as suspicious characters.
And on top of that, raised entirely among females for most of her life, she was not sure exactly what she thought about males of any "race".
So, did I play a racist or sexist character?
And just to set the record straight, from a biological perspective what is called "race" in Pathfinder is actually more accurately described as "species" in our biological taxonomy. So what some are describing as "racism" should really be more accurately called "speciesism".
LOL, what an interesting thread. I particularly loved the "liberals can't be sexist" comment.
I haven't laughed that hard in a long, long, long time.
Yeah. I actually have a liberal gay friend who I recently learn is against transgendered rights. Was unusual to find that out, but unusually enough, hate as a concept seems to stretch beyond concepts like race, gender, politics, and sexuality. Anyone and everyone is capable of hate, and of love. Let's not forget that :)
Odraude, I am pretty middle of the road politically. I mean ACTUALLY middle of the road, not what people believe is middle of the road. In the old days I'd have described myself as socially liberal and fiscally conservative, when those terms had not been corrupted into uselessness by the polarizing forces in our culture today.
It has been my experience that prejudice and hatred is pretty much everywhere and in every group I've seen. Each group just rationalizes that their version of prejudice and hatred is justified, and that way they can sleep at night in spite of beliefs that curdle my blood.
I finally realized that's just how people are. They are tribal by nature and so long as they feel comfortable in their tribe, they are quite content to heap abuse on the tribes their tribe determines to be subhuman for whatever reason they have contrived.
It's just human nature.
Well, that escalated quickly.
Anyways, Misogynistic/Racist characters are quick and easy backgrounds. They're also easy to role play! However sometimes this comes up badly, and that's when I've had it cause problems. Someone chooses to be racist or sexist, when there are members of the party who fit that, could easily end badly depending on the player.
Its possible to play this entirely without issue, just bringing it up in an awkward fashion, but when the player is actively being aggressive and it cuts into the other player's fun, I feel that's a time I have to step in and talk about it real quick.
Of course, if your player is the one who's sexist/racist(not the character!), then you have a completely different problem that I won't touch with a 10 foot pole if I can help it.