Betabackers: Are racial bonuses important?

[Dark_Ansem]

 

@Luckmann I think the subrace bonuses in Elder Scrolls are symptomatic of racism at Bethsoft.

 

No it isn't. They wanted the different races to play differently; people's game design choices are rarely made with sociological concepts in mind. Those things often affect the plot, but not mechanics. That's my opinion on that. I know you said you wouldn't talk anymore about this on the thread, but I can't help responding to it.

 

 

D&D had them too, and they were amazing!

[Namutree]

 

 

@Luckmann I think the subrace bonuses in Elder Scrolls are symptomatic of racism at Bethsoft.

 

No it isn't. They wanted the different races to play differently; people's game design choices are rarely made with sociological concepts in mind. Those things often affect the plot, but not mechanics. That's my opinion on that. I know you said you wouldn't talk anymore about this on the thread, but I can't help responding to it.

 

 

D&D had them too, and they were amazing!

 

I'm not really a fan of racial bonuses as they tend to shoehorn you into certain classes. I just don't think they were implemented because of racism.

[PrimeJunta]

Symptomatic of racism, not because of racism. Not the same thing.

 

Still an interesting topic, and still not something to pursue ITT.

[Namutree]

Symptomatic of racism, not because of racism. Not the same thing.

 

Still an interesting topic, and still not something to pursue ITT.

If you start a thread about the issue; I'll check it out.

[PrimeJunta]

Nah. I'd rather discuss games. Not here to educate anybody.

[Namutree]

Nah. I'd rather discuss games. Not here to educate anybody.

Reasonable.

[Kid Presentable]

Do they use the word "subrace" or "ethnic group" when refering to diffrent groups Humans in PoE? What does it say in the Character Creator?

The term "subrace" feels kind of... I don't know...
Someone could say "the Humans in PoE are not like homo sapiens living on earth, they are just as made up as Orlans, yada yada yada..", but Humans in PoE are definitely analogous with real humans. That's why they call them "Humans".

The same can be said for the "menfolk" of Elder Scrolls, that's why it gets (I know people hate this word, sorry) problematic when you start handing out bonuses in "athletics" to the race with dark complexion, voiced by african american voice actors. The more out of their way Bethesta went (they've definitely eased up on it in later games) to make Redguards "analogous" with  african americans (the choice of voice actors, the accents), the more they invited this kind of criticism. The Redguards got a bit of makeover in Skyrim (new accents etc). For the better? I don't know honestly. Maybe?

Elves and dwarves are usually implied to be of a different species, which is why, at least for me, that feels like it's on less shaky ground. Creating different subgroups of "elves" with specific inherent attributes feels pretty safe, while creating subgroups of "humans" can invoke some unsettling associations.

It hits too close to home, basically. It's just easier to avoid it, just like most rpgs avoid having gender affecting your character's attributes.

Hrmm.. I just derailed my own thread. Well done, off to bed!

[Lord Wafflebum]

Supporting communism in games is un-American and bad. Capitalist democracy for all. Don't mess with Texas.

[Namutree]

Supporting communism in games is un-American and bad. Capitalist democracy for all. Don't mess with Texas.

I never even noticed any anti-communist bias. I never played Dragonfall though.

[Lord Wafflebum]

I don't personally know. I prefer my reactions to be based on purely anecdotal evidence and then assume any/all comments are criticisms of the good ol' US of A even if there isn't the slightest hint that may be the case. I then violently lash out, assuming Obama has new allies in his war to take away my guns and Christmas. It ultimately culminates in me getting another credit card to max out buying guns and ammunition, because that's the American way.

[DigitalCrack]

Supporting communism in games is un-American and bad. Capitalist democracy for all. Don't mess with Texas.

The idea of communism isn't intrinsically evil, its more so that it just doesn't work.  too much of the concept requires Ideal circumstances to remain consistent over time which is why it inevitably ends in corruption or never truly get implemented correctly in the first place.  Its biggest problem is it leaves no room for the fact that people are human and despite our best efforts people will never be unified on a level required for the concept to "work".

[Lord Wafflebum]

 

Supporting communism in games is un-American and bad. Capitalist democracy for all. Don't mess with Texas.

The idea of communism isn't intrinsically evil, its more so that it just doesn't work.  too much of the concept requires Ideal circumstances to remain consistent over time which is why it inevitably ends in corruption or never truly get implemented correctly in the first place.  Its biggest problem is it leaves no room for the fact that people are human and despite our best efforts people will never be unified on a level required for the concept to "work".

 

Pinko commie. I'm calling the FBI.

[DigitalCrack]

 

 

Supporting communism in games is un-American and bad. Capitalist democracy for all. Don't mess with Texas.

The idea of communism isn't intrinsically evil, its more so that it just doesn't work.  too much of the concept requires Ideal circumstances to remain consistent over time which is why it inevitably ends in corruption or never truly get implemented correctly in the first place.  Its biggest problem is it leaves no room for the fact that people are human and despite our best efforts people will never be unified on a level required for the concept to "work".

 

Pinko commie. I'm calling the FBI.

 

Haha ok, although I resent being called commie considering I am definitely for capitalism.  I just believe in seeing things for what they are instead of having a black and white opinion.  Plenty of evil people have used communism as a guise for their deeds but that doesn't mean the concept was designed to be evil even if it that is the inevitable end result due to human nature.

[Lord Wafflebum]

Advocating for having perspective on different, viable viewpoints? I smell sedition.

[DigitalCrack]

 

My point that I was going to make was that it's impossible to say, because since you seem to be asking somewhat from a powergaming standpoint, it really depends on how much of a powergamer you are. And if you truly want to min-max, of course race is going to matter a lot.

 

Mechanically, the difference isn't huge in v392 (except for the overvaluing of Accuracy, which is granted by Perception) but if you are the type that wants to pinch that last drop out of the system to get the best of the best of your given concept, then yeah, it's going to matter exactly as much as you want it to.

 

To get back to the actual topic...  This ^ answers the question of importance.

[Namutree]

I don't personally know. I prefer my reactions to be based on purely anecdotal evidence and then assume any/all comments are criticisms of the good ol' US of A even if there isn't the slightest hint that may be the case. I then violently lash out, assuming Obama has new allies in his war to take away my guns and Christmas. It ultimately culminates in me getting another credit card to max out buying guns and ammunition, because that's the American way.

What are you talking about? Taking on debt is very much frowned upon in conservative circles.

[Lord Wafflebum]

Only if you don't pay it back and freeload off the government.

[PrimeJunta]

 

Supporting communism in games is un-American and bad. Capitalist democracy for all. Don't mess with Texas.

I never even noticed any anti-communist bias. I never played Dragonfall though.

 

You encounter a orkish Communist policlub calling themselves the Arbeiters. Turns out they're just a bunch of thugs spouting vaguely Marxist dialog lines. You can express sympathy for them but the dialog lines read like whoever wrote them had a manager standing behind their back going "Write them! Write them or you'll never work in this town again!"

 

It's striking how different their portrayal is from the F-state anarchists. It's quite clear where their sympathies lie.

 

Which is perfectly fine of course. But a game based on Iain M. Banks's, China Miéville's or Ken MacLeod's unabashedly Communist ideas would be very cool too, and not only because my politics tilt more that way.

[DigitalCrack]

 

 

Supporting communism in games is un-American and bad. Capitalist democracy for all. Don't mess with Texas.

I never even noticed any anti-communist bias. I never played Dragonfall though.

 

You encounter a orkish Communist policlub calling themselves the Arbeiters. Turns out they're just a bunch of thugs spouting vaguely Marxist dialog lines. You can express sympathy for them but the dialog lines read like whoever wrote them had a manager standing behind their back going "Write them! Write them or you'll never work in this town again!"

 

It's striking how different their portrayal is from the F-state anarchists. It's quite clear where their sympathies lie.

 

Which is perfectly fine of course. But a game based on Iain M. Banks's, China Miéville's or Ken MacLeod's unabashedly Communist ideas would be very cool too, and not only because my politics tilt more that way.

 

Its seems people who work in every facet of game development have very strong political leanings and it definitely comes out through the game.  Its typically not hard to tell what the political stance is of the guy in charge of a particular game's development... or at the very least, Ideals that are important to them.

[Lord Wafflebum]

I'm still waiting for a game that explores multiple political perspectives, and showcasing them all as reasonable (at least on the surface). However, further into the game it's shown that they're really all quite terrible and most agendas are motivated by the personal gain of those that lead them.

 

I suspect that would get overly complex, tho...

[PrimeJunta]

I have a work-in-progress homebrew PnP game which is overtly political. It's more hard-sci-fi than Shadowrun but has more fantasy elements than Cyberpunk 2020, and throws in some New Weird and New Space Opera elements as well.

 

Edit: It may not present all of them as reasonable, but I did make the Khilafah (Caliphate) and the Union of Democratic Workers' Collectives the two most obviously successful systems...

Edited January 21, 2015 by PrimeJunta

[Luckmann]

I'm still waiting for a game that explores multiple political perspectives, and showcasing them all as reasonable (at least on the surface). However, further into the game it's shown that they're really all quite terrible and most agendas are motivated by the personal gain of those that lead them.

 

I suspect that would get overly complex, tho...

 

The problem with such a thing is that most people are largely ignorant about politics other than at a glance. Trying to explain fascism to a democrat is often comparable to explaining weather to a goldfish. You say "corporativism" and goldfish goes "what". People want a nice place to pin things on their two-dimensional board, and real politics doesn't actually let you do that; propaganda does it for illustrative purposes within democracy, but that's really just part of the problem.

 

A game like that would be amazing, but don't hold your breath for it. Political concepts are abstracted almost by necessity, and if you break the actual ideologies up into the sea of issues, you're really not dealing with ideologies anymore, but individuals and individual issues that you can glue together as you see fit.

 

Regrettably, the most politically interesting game in recent memory has to be Bioshock, which is sad because Bioshock is actually not that good of a game. But it did explore the idea of political objectivism in an interesting (and largely reasonable way; objectivism really is that insane) package; the Bioshock 2 counterpoint of runaway collectivism - as much as I hate it - while not inappropriate, was banal and hamfisted by comparison, likely because it was created as a counterpoint, not because the developers had any deep insight or interest in the concept itself, or a real drive to explore the issues.

Edited January 21, 2015 by Luckmann

[archangel979]

 

 

Supporting communism in games is un-American and bad. Capitalist democracy for all. Don't mess with Texas.

I never even noticed any anti-communist bias. I never played Dragonfall though.

 

You encounter a orkish Communist policlub calling themselves the Arbeiters. Turns out they're just a bunch of thugs spouting vaguely Marxist dialog lines. You can express sympathy for them but the dialog lines read like whoever wrote them had a manager standing behind their back going "Write them! Write them or you'll never work in this town again!"

 

It's striking how different their portrayal is from the F-state anarchists. It's quite clear where their sympathies lie.

 

Which is perfectly fine of course. But a game based on Iain M. Banks's, China Miéville's or Ken MacLeod's unabashedly Communist ideas would be very cool too, and not only because my politics tilt more that way.

 

Communism is outdated and not needed. Communism we all talk about was a system that was supposed to protect workers from factory owners. Today robots do most of the work and average people need socialism, not communism. Anarchy is often considered very positive only because it was never tested in a bigger and more complex society. Personally I don't see it working as humans are too selfish.

[PrimeJunta]

That's... actually not Communism. More like syndicalism maybe. 

 

There are many different Communisms really, but there is one thing all of them have in common: the abolition of private property, either as an ideal or as a practice. Some go all the way, others -- notably Marxism-Leninism and most of its variants -- only want to abolish private ownership of means of production. Some pull back even further, abolishing private ownership of the 'commanding heights' of the economy (heavy industry, finance, essential infrastructure). From there on out the line between Communism, socialism, 'market socialism,' and plain ol' more-or-less-welfare-state late capitalist polities gets increasingly blurry, as even rabidly pro-free-market countries like the U. S. of A have significant amounts of socialized infrastructure (the interstate freeway system, defense, public schools, etc. -- the US even spends more public money on healthcare than most other advanced countries, only it seems to disappear somewhere so they don't see much return on that investment, go figure). 

 

In a world where real soon now 1% of the population will own more than the other 99% put together, calling that ideal "outdated and not needed" is a bit... premature I would say.

 

Edit: BTW I'm well within that global 1% myself. It's still wrong, as almost all of it is due to happenstance. You can check your ranking here.

Edited January 21, 2015 by PrimeJunta

[Luckmann]

 

 

 

Supporting communism in games is un-American and bad. Capitalist democracy for all. Don't mess with Texas.

I never even noticed any anti-communist bias. I never played Dragonfall though.

 

You encounter a orkish Communist policlub calling themselves the Arbeiters. Turns out they're just a bunch of thugs spouting vaguely Marxist dialog lines. You can express sympathy for them but the dialog lines read like whoever wrote them had a manager standing behind their back going "Write them! Write them or you'll never work in this town again!"

 

It's striking how different their portrayal is from the F-state anarchists. It's quite clear where their sympathies lie.

 

Which is perfectly fine of course. But a game based on Iain M. Banks's, China Miéville's or Ken MacLeod's unabashedly Communist ideas would be very cool too, and not only because my politics tilt more that way.

 

Communism is outdated and not needed. Communism we all talk about was a system that was supposed to protect workers from factory owners. Today robots do most of the work and average people need socialism, not communism. Anarchy is often considered very positive only because it was never tested in a bigger and more complex society. Personally I don't see it working as humans are too selfish.

 

 

Most people wouldn't know the difference between socialism and communism, equating both to marxism; this hilariously also includes most socialists.

 

That said, I don't think that anarchism fails due to selfishness. In fact, most reports have noted that people, when not forced and when the need exists, are in fact very altruistic and unselfish, sometimes almost to the point of absurdity. Most libertarians in fact use that as an argument against socialized welfare, and it's a fairly good argument. Now, I'm not a libertarian, and I think that society in general is too complex (especially at present) in order for that to work - people interestingly often aren't "socialized" enough to take advantage of of that particular dream scenario, although there's an argument in there somewhere that that is in part due to socialized welfare making it possible to be cut off from society and still be alive.. but.. I digress.

 

My point that I was trying to make was that while people have the possibility to be tremendously unselfish, there is also overwhelming evidence that we are fundamentally tribal in more ways than one, meaning we prioritize based on our tribe. This is not conducive to large-scale anarchism, and as the tribe expands, it will naturally develop pronounced hierarchies (rather than implied hierarchies that exists in every single tribe-like population).

 

I would even argue that we constantly live in philosophical anarchy - there is nothing actively preventing me from stealing or murdering, should I so desire - but have already opted out of living in a political anarchy because we as social creatures naturally create hierarchies and authorities. The nature of which are of hot debate.

 

I see the foremost goal of politics to be to create an ideology founded in science and biology, emphasizing the creation of social structures in tune with what humans are (and not necessarily humans as a whole; this could be unique depending on any amount of biological factors individual to population) rather than what we want them to be. We should look at politics as a science rather than a collection of baseless opinions. Big plus if we can do it without ruining the planet.

 

[...]

 

In a world where real soon now 1% of the population will own more than the other 99% put together, calling that ideal "outdated and not needed" is a bit... premature I would say.

The ideal of collectivism and communism has nothing to do with the 1%. Abolishing the 1%, shooting the bankers and dismantling fractional reserve banking and usery has nothing to do with abolishing private property, redistribute the means of production, or social engineering and (dys)functional egalitarianism.

 

Communism clashes with reality, because it espouses the ideals of the fundamentally surreal, disconnected from reality, and despite it's altruistic propaganda, is ultimately anti-human. It seeks to almost create a mythic perfect human through social engineering and dogma, yet this man eludes the ideologue, taunting him to perform ever-more depraved acts in the interest of social justice.

 

There are far better ways to abolish the 1%, and it's not even that hard to do, under any system. It is just that capitalism as an overall system really has no interest in it, and would only really replace the current fatcats with the next fatcats; much like communism. Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.

Edited January 21, 2015 by Luckmann