Would a kind of "socially utopianist idealist fantasy" setting...

Would a kind of "socially utopianist idealist fantasy" setting, in the vein of similar science fiction settings like Mindjammer, Sufficiently Advanced, Freemarket or Eclipse Phase, work?

Other urls found in this thread:


>thinly veiled /pol/ thread
Go to fucking hell, by which I mean your goddamn containment board, shitheel.

The lack of a dagger in his other hand triggers the part of my brain responsible for forcing an image of fencing created almost entirely by cinema

It's not any more /pol/ than any of the traditional games mentioned.

Not even him, but get the fuck out

Why aren't Mindjammer or Freemarket threads considered /pol/? They're essentially impossible to discuss without bringing up political ideologies.

Literally no, they have robots for the work.

Magic beats robots for that

>thinly veiled /pol/ thread
So, in other words, Ancap science fiction? The kind where "if you don't like [thing], get off my planet" is a realistic statement?

That's literally Blue Rose, you know. It's not brilliant but it's far less shitty than it's been made out to be. Check it out.

There's a difference between a utopian community and a utopia. The former can make for a really fun setting while the latter is boring and preachy. America in particular has a rich history of weirdoes going out and founding a little commune based on their personal social politics, and then it all either collapses humorously or turns into something really dark.

>Eclipse Phase

Honestly I was surprised when Trials in Tainted Space went with this route.

>Galaxy economy runs on the concept of "planet rushes" held every few decades.
>Corps drilling and abusing newly found planet's resources.
>Corps making making first contact pretty much boil down to "how much money will you make us? As either slaves or walking designer gene bags.
>Corps starting semi uncanny vally cults behind specific, mandatory, gene mod therapies.
>Corps think its cheaper to just crash two planets together than pay for the population's transportation and colonization to a new homeworld.
>Corps forcibly stop WW2 level civilization from their own nuclear halocaust in order to collect samples of local flora and fauna.
>You play as an heir to a megacorp, and are pretty much a royal celebrity with your own fan holonet-blogs about you.

Pretty interesting for a porn game.


People complaining about thinly veiled /pol/ threads in threads unrelated to /pol/ in an attempt to discredit people who genuinely believe that /pol/ is a bad influence on Veeky Forums and Veeky Forums as a whole.

Also, Eclipse Phase is not utopian, just post-singularity.

Not the setting as a whole, but a few of the societies described in it are pretty much designated Good Guy factions representing what the writers think of as "good" and which the reader is very clearly meant to empathize with (conversely, you got the cartoonishly evil Jovians standing for everything the writers don't).


Oh, and forgot my favorite bit.

>Your race can't become actually recognized citizens unless you can prove you are 1. Sentiant and non violent, and 2. Have technology, skills, or genes that are seen as economically desirable.

Pretty much. Once you peel off the fetish aspects (and mind you, it touches the vast majority of my fetishes) places like New Texas are HORRIFICALLY creepy. Like, this is some literally fucked up dystopia right there.

> you got the cartoonishly evil Jovians standing for everything the writers
> implying Jovians aren't just cartoonishly evil everywhere

There's just something about Jupiter that turns people into colossal asshats.

There's something about the letter J. I just realized the cartoonishly evil "strawmen of politics the designated good guy faction disagrees with" in Blue Rose is called "Jarzon".

Beats Veeky Forumss "Jewish minotaurs".

>something cartoonishly evil about the letter J

>>Corps starting semi uncanny vally cults behind specific, mandatory, gene mod therapies.
What's this, New Texas?

>Martian Successor Nadesico

Jehovah's Witnesses? Jesuits? Jesus? Jamaicans?

In fairness, Jamaicans are pretty shifty.

Blue Rose is what happens when you're too cheap to get the rights to Valdemar so you just write a crappy fanfic setting where you create giant fields of strawmen then pat yourself on the back for being deep and nuanced.

Did you actually read the book, or did you go "eww feminists" and decide it's bad like 99.9% of the board? Honest question.

Yeah, New Texas weirded me out. Was kind of surprised it was played so straight and wholesome. Was getting Mormonism vibes out the yahoo.

>Milk is good
>Milk is life

I read about how the world started out as 'The Grey', and then immediately split into The Light, which is always awesomely good, and The Dark, which is always horribly bad. (It's been like a year, so forgive me if I forget the actual names.) It then told me about a country that is always backwards and patriarchal and awful, that might as well have been called 'the land where everyone thinks like my dad'. There was also a magical deer who serves as ultimate arbiter of right and wrong, a scepter that can see the purity of your soul, and - oh yeah! - a box in the adventuring section that talked about how proud they were that they created a setting where everything's not cut-and-dry good and evil, even though that's exactly what they did. As I said - it reads like they really wanted to recreate Valdemar, but had no fucking clue how to do it right.
Haven't tried reading the newer book; maybe the writing's better. But given that they fucked over people who were running the game for them at Gen Con, plus my initial bad impression, it's not high on my to-do list.

I posted a more in-depth version of my opinion, but when I checked back ten minutes later, it wasn't on the thread anymore. Weird.
To keep it shorter, I read the original version of BR back in the day. And I swear, I went in wanting to like it. Like I said, it felt like a really boring crappy knockoff of Valdemar that didn't capture anything cool or nuanced about the setting. It was way too cut-and-dry, black-and-white, but they congratulate themselves multiple times in the book about how 'gray' everything is. Maybe the newer version has better writing, but I'm not in any hurry.


One of the very best reviews I've ever seen. Funny that that's so rare, but it's actually honest: it highlights in great detail both the game's flaws and its advantages. It also offers some nice analysis of possible reasons why it's so disliked (namely, that the real big one is likely less about it being "feminist" and more about it being "optimistic". Not all modern roleplayers are grimdark obsessed 40Kfags, but the sheer desperation with which people seem to look for "hints" that this genuinely idealistic setting is actually secretly some kind of fascist dystopia, like they just can't for the life of them accept the *possibility* of a generally upbeat fantasy world, is fascinating)

IMHO, it was just ahead of its time in the negative sense of the word. It came out (huh) too proudly "feminist" and inclusive and liberal back in a time when the RPG community consisted almost entirely of the people who currently occupy OSR threads. If this shit came out nowadays, a lot of it would've been ALL OVER that shit. It could've probably ridden the success waves of Apocalypse World and Fate and what have you.

Not saying it would've been good "politically" or "for the hobby" or whatever, mind you. Just talking from a purely business point of you.

So it's the opposite of grim-derp.

Makes sense, people are just as turned off by the sterilness of such settings as they are by the hopelessness of grimdark settings.

Opps meant to reply to

But this is wrong.

>split into The Light, which is always awesomely good, and The Dark, which is always horribly bad.

Redemption is a huge theme in the setting, right from the creation story (which, as the review in points out, has the "god gone mad who started creating monsters" being ultimately brought back into the Light through an act of compassion and vowing to become better, rather than turning into a Dark Lord of some kind or being banished forever). "The Dark" as a -concept- (or "force") is bad, but any individual aligned with the dark is pretty much treated as "presently misguided". Even the Lich King is given a few sympathetic traits and a human motivation. The only races which are irredeemably evil are basically demons.

>It then told me about a country that is always backwards and patriarchal and awful, that might as well have been called 'the land where everyone thinks like my dad'.

If you actually read the section on it, Jarzon has understandable motives. I won't say they aren't presented as "wrong", but they aren't presented as being evil for the sake of it. They suffered the brunt of the damage from the last great shadow war while Aldis remained fertile and bountiful. They are constantly at war with monsters rising from the swamp. Their lives are harsh and brutal. It really puts things into perspective when you realize they abhor homoesexuals because they're so afraid of GOING EXTINCT they can't afford people to just not want to procreate. They're also noted as being brave, loyal, and valuing their families and homes.


>There was also a magical deer who serves as ultimate arbiter of right and wrong

Completely wrong. The only function the deer fulfills is selecting the next ruler. He doesn't advice them, he doesn't grant them special powers, he doesn't even PROTECT them (theoretically there's nothing stopping the people from patiently waiting for the deer to "select the ruler" then proceeding to ignore the selected and picking their own guy). It's also not infallible, as is evident by the fact that twice before it's made choices so bad the ruler had to be forcefully removed. People simply tend to go with the magic deer's choice because, statistically speaking, it's USUALLY chosen the right person for the job thus far.

Also, the ruler of Aldis isn't all powerful (they just get 2 votes on the ruling council instead of 1, and there are enough other figures in it they can be easily overruled). And the title isn't even hereditary. Really, with the exception of calling their ruler "King/Queen" and having "Nobles" running affairs, Aldis isn't even a proper monarchy. I mean, the "Nobles" are selected from the general population by passing them through tests and what have you. They're more like Chinese Imperial bureaucrats than anything.

>a scepter that can see the purity of your soul

The Blue Rose scepter does make selecting "Nobles" easier - but it has two main drawbacks. First, it only detects Dark allegiance. So yeah, it'd prevent anyone who's baby-eatingly stupidly evil (or a sorcerer, and even then not always) from getting power, but not someone who's weak willed, prone to selfishness or just kind of a jerk. Second, it only works ONCE on a person, ever. Even if you assume all nobles "start out" decent, there's nothing preventing them from slipping down a slope of decadence and corruption later on in their lives.

>Blue Rose
ok well I've got noting better to do, so someone point me at this and I'll read it, I may even comeback with opinions

But see, that's the thing the review points out: people read fifty pages into the book, see that the setting is generally optimistic rather than full grimderp and immediately throw the book saying it has "no conflict". Hell, even by that point it's ABUNDANTLY CLEAR (and explicitly noted, several times) that even the designated good guy kingdom is:

1. Suffering from no insignificant amount of internal corruption
2. Has an entire criminal syndicate operating within it
3. Has a countryside full of bandits and monsters
4. Sits on the border of the setting's own version of Mordor

It's like saying Star Trek has no conflict because the Federation doesn't look like the Imperium of Mankind. Just because things are GENERALLY GOOD more often than not and most people aren't awful doesn't mean you "can't have conflict", even internal. How many times has the Enterprise had to deal with rogue Federation captains? Black ops units that have gone too far? Power mad admirals? Outlaws?

I know it sounds like I'm shilling the book - I'm really not. I'm defending it because I really don't like it when people form such vehement opinions on a work which they've clearly not read. It irks me. It's fine not to like Blue Rose, it's fine to disagree with the politics it wears on its sleeve, it's even fine to argue the writing is bad and kind of unsubtle (I won't even deny it), but when a game is just so strongly hated and the only arguments ever given against it are stale memes created by people who've read the back of the cover, it's just not fair on the game.

Also, to the list of "problems even within the designated good guy kingdom that are expounded on by around page 50", add:

5. The current Queen has yet to gain the confidence of the entire people and the heir apparent is so butthurt by her having been chosen over him it's very strongly implied he might try something (mind you, due to the setting's focus both on the themes of redemption and humanity, he's given a rather layered personality for such an obvious antagonist: on the one hand, a lot of his dislike of the queen is pure jealousy and frustration she got the throne he always thought he would. On the other hand, it's also clear he's genuinely concerned that she might not have the experience to protect the kingdom and really does honestly think he could do a better job for the sake of the people. He's a "bad guy" in the narrative sense, but he's NOT evil).

Sounds like the same reason people rarely play LoTR rpgs. Sure shits bad, but everythings already kind of taken care of already. There isn't really a chance to be the hero when Gods just kicking back letting his Rube Goldberg machine wipe out evil in the setting.

And if the writing is uninteresting well, why bother?

>Not even him

>Sure shits bad, but everythings already kind of taken care of already.

It's being taken care of by the Sovereigns Finest, which are THE DEFAULT PLAYER CHARACTERS.

Again, the best comparison is Star Trek. This is the setting you should have in mind. The players are the Blue Rose equivalent of Starfleet. They serve an idealistic nation within a generally idealistic setting that nevertheless has its share of problems that the heroes need to solve in order to protect the good status quo. It even has its klingon equivalents in the Kingdom of Jarzon, which, while being ideologically opposed to most of what Aldis stands for, still aren't actually "bad guys" and are commendable and honorable in their own way (and just like the klingons, it's not even all that rare for them to work together, especially when a common external enemy shows up).

>Sure shits bad, but everythings already kind of taken care of already.
The hell did you get that from? The whole point of the exercise was that instead of everything being shit and the PCs being out for themselves, things are mostly good and the PCs are supposed to be motivated to keep them that way.

>Eclipse Phase
Eat shit, fuckface


Don't know about where to find the 2nd ed, unfortunately. The mechanic there isn't all that much better but the setting is expanded significantly and quite a few parts of it are improved. The art is also far better.

2nd ed expands on the inclusiveness angle some more, but most of it's cool. Most prominently they ride the bandwagon for anti-ableism by including an order called "The Silent Knights" composed solely of the deaf and blind, but if you don't think an order of noble, blind swordmasters who compensate by being simply that good with their swords, the problem is with you, not the game.

It's not really surprising. Most fa/tg/uys are probably around 30, meaning they most likely got into genre fiction around a time when cynicism was at a peak and every utopia was either a satire or disguised grimdark. It subconsciously trains you to, when reading the description of a supposed Nice Place, to always look for the hints.

>Mindjammer, Sufficiently Advanced, Freemarket or Eclipse Phase

Notice a common theme here? All of those settings somehow feature technological magic that:

1. Makes society either truly or practically post scarcity (i.e. not actually an infinite amount of goods/energy but enough that it's pretty hard for the average person to ever lack anything)
2. Provides casual immortality for all.
3. Allows for infallible, impersonal yet benevolent AIs to run society.

Which is funny, since they all basically say "Why, anarchism/socialism/libertarianism would work IF YOU ONLY USE [SPACE MAGIC] TO REMOVE THE LOGICAL CONSTRAINTS OF ACTUAL ECONOMIES AND IDEOLOGIES!"

So as long as you change space magic for actual magic making it so everyone is a rich immortal governed by a benevolent god, no reason not.

He's about to grab up his cloak to fence with.

You're really knee-jerk, aren't you? Or are you just trying to shut down discussion of things you don't like? I thought Freemarket and Eclipse Phase are inoffensive.

Me, I prefer grim dystopias where strong men must take charge and re-establish patriarchal values.

Jesus, the setting sounds so saccharine, I'd rather play as a terrorist working for the glory of the dark gods.