Orcs- Problematic, Or Just Poorly Written?

If you're a gamer on any social media right now, then you've no doubt seen the firestorms surrounding the Why Orcs Are Problematic post that's been going around. On one side of the argument you have players shouting, "We know, we've been saying this for years!" and on the other side of it you have players rolling their eyes and shouting back, "Orcs aren't even real, Jesus Christ not everything is racist!"

Artist's depiction of the comments section.

The problem here is that the argument is often couched in black-and-white, binary terms. Either orcs are problematic, or they're not. However, there's a lot going on beneath the surface, and a lot to think about. Not just in gaming in general, but also in terms of the fiction we draw on, the stories we tell, and the attitudes that are often baked-in with the games we consume.

So if you're looking for a deeper dive beyond the two options presented above (or if you're confused and looking for context) hopefully this Monday's post will help you out a bit.

But if that's not really your bag, well, my latest Critical Hits module from TPK just dropped this weekend, so you could go check out The Ghosts of Sorrow Marsh instead!

Seriously, go give it some love!

First Things First, What is an Orc?

Most of us already know the answer, so go ahead and say it with me! Orcs, as a creation of J.R.R. Tolkien were inherently evil humanoid creatures who served the dark lord and made up the ranks of his foot soldiers. They were corrupted, wicked, and they made up the muscle of the threat our heroes had to face.

Check out so far?

In their original incarnation, the orcs were symbolic as much as they were an actual threat to be dealt with. They were also monolithic; the orcs were a hoard, and there was no real, important difference between them. Some might be bigger, some might be meaner, some might be more skilled, but orcs were generally painted with a pretty broad brush. Which, one might argue, was one part of the initial problem.

The Depictions (And Evolution) of Orcs

Elements of this mythology maintained in Dungeons and Dragons' early days. Orcs were repulsive creatures who were brutal, violent, disorganized, and they typically worshiped/were bound to a dark god who demanded slaughter, sacrifice, and debased acts. While I would argue that maintaining a monolithic culture, and not giving orcs a great deal of depth were issues in the writing, the other issues actually came from their art in the early days.

And speaking of problematic art...

As was mentioned in the article, orcs were often depicted bearing weapons and armor inspired by non-European nations of the real world. Now, this was definitely fantasy, and there was no one issue of an orc carrying a kukri or wearing mirror armor that was a problem individually... it was the trend. It was the broad overall pattern that drew the battle lines in purely visual terms. Orcs were universally savage, brutal, and they carried weapons that bore a striking resemblance to India, China, Mongolia, and the Middle East. The heroes were drawing on the aesthetics and inspiration of Western European heroes, and so we have what might literally look like caricatures of East v. West.

Was that intentional? No, probably not. Just as Tolkien didn't state in his books that orcs were supposed to be based on any particular ethnicity or to represent any one group (though he did state in his letters he was drawing on specific ethnicities to make them seem more foreign to his projected European readers), the initial intent was probably not to say Europe good, non-Europe bad. Doesn't mean that's not how it came across, though.

Things got more problematic when orcs stopped just being corrupted evil beings and were given free will and choice. The creation of half-orcs (and eventually of orcs becoming PCs) meant that monsters who had once been entirely used for plot devices now had to become a varied and organic part of the world. But as we saw in Volo's Guide, as mentioned in the original article, there is still a clinging to the idea that all orcs are brutish, savage, and incapable of true empathy and understanding. They're always, at their core, monsters by their very nature. Inhuman. Other.

This becomes really problematic when you look at orcs as a big picture under those circumstances. Because if they can have children with humans, that raises questions of agency, of decisions, and of stereotyping. What was once a generic plot-filler threat is now an entire category made up of individuals who by the lore can be, do, and become what they want the same as any other character. Yet they're still treated as savage, backward, and lesser at the same time. That's frustrating for players who want to be orcs, but it also continues the trend of maintaining that problematic message.

Our Fiction Inherits Baggage (Whether Like It Or Not)

 I grew up reading pulp fiction, and there is a breathtaking amount of racism and sexism in those stories. A lot of it was a product of its time, but many among us forget that the stories and tropes of that time didn't just get uprooted and replaced with shiny, new stuff that nixed the problematic descriptions. Many of these elements endured and maintained, until we didn't see them as products of prejudiced attitudes; they were just the way these stories were told.

Bob Chipman explained it particularly well using the trope of The Lost City.

For those who didn't watch it, the trope of The Lost City has its roots deep in European colonialism to Africa. Explorers would find these ancient ruins, and they would be flabbergasted that something like this could be found in Africa. They turned themselves inside out trying to explain it, ignoring the obvious that perhaps they were built by the ancestors of the people who still lived there. Nonsense! Black people could never comprehend the skill or ability it would take to build a castle, ridiculous!

And as Bob points out, that trope kept coming back over the generations. It existed in the time of the pulps, and early adventure fiction, it showed up in Indiana Jones, it was latched onto by games like Tomb Raider and Uncharted... it's a part of so many stories it would take a huge list to lay them all out.

Does that make all the stories who used this trope racist simply because they have their roots in a colonialist view? No, it doesn't. But it is important to hold these stories at arm's length, and ask what part of the original ancestor has survived and thrived in the current example, and how it was able to make it all the way into the modern incarnation. And, perhaps, what to do to fix it so that baggage doesn't weigh on the narrative.

For those looking for a real-world example, The Liberal Redneck Manifesto talks about the battle flag of northern Virginia... what a lot of people immediately think of as the Confederate flag. It was flown in a losing war, and then it was resurrected as a symbol of hate by organizations like the KKK, and by segregationists who wanted to cow and frighten black people. The flag became a symbol of several Southern musicians as well, and it was adopted by many who saw it as a rebel icon... the problem was that it still held all those older, more awful connotations for black people, and other ethnic minorities. So even if someone wears that flag because it's something waved around by a musician they like, or it's something they associate with family and good times at home, it's important to recognize that there's more to its legacy than the parts you've seen and know. You have to look at all of it, and at what message it sends to other people.

Oh, So Now It's Racist To Have Orcs as Bad Guys?

This is probably the dumbest thing I've seen come out of this conversation, so I'm going to address it here. It is not racist to have orcs as bad guys in your game. It's not racist to play an orc character. The issue arises when people ignore the history of how orcs have been depicted (and the real-life cultures often associated with them through their art, cultural trademarks, etc.), and when they don't put in the work of actually developing orcs in their settings.

There is no replacement for hard work.

As an example, I'm going to turn to Paizo's Golarion setting. When most people think of orcs in this world, they tend to think of the orc hold of Belkzen. This nation is a loose confederation of warring tribes who worship harsh and brutal gods, who value strength, and who were the foot soldiers of a powerful lich king who sought to conquer the world a handful of generations ago. They are, in a very real sense, one of the best takes I've seen on Tolkien's orcs as an organic part of a setting.

However, they are one of dozens of different settlements around the world, and each of them has their own unique culture, background, history, and feel in the context of the setting. The settlement of Averaka is a hard-working fishing village on a northern coast. Orcs and half-orcs in the Mwangi Expanse are often valued for their strength and durability, and they often hold important positions in tribes. Orcs in the deserts form their own familial groups, trading and intermarrying with others. Orcs and half-orcs have a wide variety of traits players and DMs can pick to customize them to a given area, but more importantly the lore of the setting makes it clear that attitudes, styles of society, etc. are a product of their history in a given area, rather than some in-born sameness that all orcs share.

That's the level of work it takes to make a sentient race a real, breathing part of a world and setting, and all of that has to carry through to how they're treated in the world as well. If a settlement is being raided by orcs, ask why, and build that into the adventure. Are they a war band who can't find a master, and they would rather take from the farmers than lay down their swords? Are they starving and pushed out to the edge of the badlands, so they have to steal in order to live? Is there a disagreement over the terms of a peace treaty, or are they mercenaries whose services have been bought by a bigger NPC with a hidden agenda? Is this a land-bound group of pirates looking to get back on the river, but they need the resources to repair their ship?

All of those are workable, and they add extra depth and meaning, allowing orcs to stand on their own as characters instead of as caricatures.

Lastly, Consider The Problematic Core of Many Adventures

Now, I know we're talking about orcs here, but this is something that Mark T. Hrisho brought up on his blog and I think it's a point worth adding to the discussion. Because a lot of our fantasy RPGs have another piece of baggage that has colored many of our monstrous races; mainly that if a given area of the map doesn't have people who look like our party living in it, then it doesn't really qualify as settled or explored territory. It is, instead, the edge of the known world, and the last edge of real civilization beyond which lives only darkness, and savagery.

Helmets on, I hear comments coming!

How many adventures have you played in tabletop RPGs, or even in video games, where you took on quests to "clear out" local monster infestations in the area? Caverns full of goblins, hills teeming with kobolds, mountaintop ogres, or the ever-present roving bands of orcs? If you've been in the hobby any length of time, you can probably think of several games that started you off this way.

And I'm not the first one to point out that in these scenarios we're basically barging into these creatures' homes, killing their families, and taking their stuff.

Even if it's not a job to kill a certain number of non-humans, these scenarios are often painted as, "protecting the light from the darkness of the savage lands," or something similar. Which basically states that none of the cultures of the other beings who call this region home, from the lizard men, to the catfolk, to the gnolls, are "real" people. They're just savages. Monsters. Little better than animals, and often not even worth as much XP.

Am I saying that fantasy RPGs who use this framework purposefully set out to be some kind of subliminal argument for the ideas of Manifest Destiny, or declarations in favor of colonialism? No. However, messages exist in fiction whether they're intended or not. Just like how early Disney princesses being damsels in distress wasn't likely intended to send the message to young girls that they had no agency and should wait to be rescued, but it can be argued that message is present regardless of the intention.

"Problematic" isn't a term reserved only for racial slurs and misogynist rants; it means that we need to look at the history of something, the messages within it, and how it came to be what it is. We need to be intellectually curious, honest with the history, and we need to understand that just because someone didn't intend something to send the wrong message, say the wrong thing, or to smuggle in an offensive attitude, that doesn't mean it didn't happen. Because it's only by looking these elements full in the face that we can make the games we love better, deeper, more complex, and in the end, less problematic.

And like I said in It's Okay To Admit There Are Problems in Your Hobby, you can like something problematic without being problematic by association. But we should all seek to be intellectually curious about these issues, and to remember that just because it may not affect us personally, that doesn't mean it's somehow not a real issue.

Like, Follow, and Stay in Touch!

That's all for this week's Moon Pope Monday!

Again, for more of my work, check out my Vocal archive, and stop by the YouTube channel Dungeon Keeper Radio. Or if you'd prefer to read some of my books, like my sword and sorcery novel Crier's Knife or my latest short story collection The Rejects, then head over to My Amazon Author Page!

To stay on top of all my latest releases, follow me on Facebook, Tumblr, Twitter, and now Pinterest as well! To support my work, consider Buying Me a Ko-Fi, or heading to The Literary Mercenary's Patreon page to become a regular, monthly patron. That one helps ensure you get more Improved Initiative, and it means you'll get my regular, monthly giveaways as a bonus!

How Hitchens' Razor Can Simplify Gaming Discussions

If you've been gaming for a while, you've no doubt heard some really heated conversations over games. Not just regarding rules and mechanics, but also over the minutiae of the setting and the flavor of different abilities. Everything from whether a certain spell actually provokes attacks of opportunity, to whether or not elves can have beards or not has become a hill that at least one gamer (sometimes several) have opted to die on in my presence alone.

There is something that I've found which helps cut through these arguments, and reach meaningful understanding and compromise, however. It's a mystical artifact known by few that's referred to as Hitchens' Razor.

Which you can get at Tee Spring, for those who care.

What is Hitchens' Razor, Exactly?

As you can see on the shirt, the simple premise of Hitchens' Razor is That which can be asserted without evidence may be dismissed without evidence.

This will save you more time in arguments in general, but in gaming arguments it can be a metaphorical life saver. Because embracing this concept makes it clear that unless someone can point out something that backs up their belief or opinion (whether it's how much damage a snowstorm inflicts, or what accent the dwarven language has), then it isn't a fact, and they can't demand it be treated as such.

It's not the first time I've made such a case...

This was basically the same advice I gave in Table Attorneys Vs. Rules Lawyers: How To Be Fair Without Bogging Down Your Game. In short, if someone wants to make an assertion (especially if it's from a player to the DM), then they need to have a piece of text that backs them up on it. Whether it's showing that a spell doesn't require somatic gestures to cast, or pointing out that elves come in all shapes and colors (many of them weird, wild, and otherworldly), pointing out the relevant section in the book makes a pretty solid argument. Same as you would when using case law to explain to a judge why your particular move should be honored by the court, rather than overruled by the bench.

The human mind is a barely-functioning biological computer that's full of glitches, errors, and crossed wires. It's one reason that eyewitness testimony is actually one of the least reliable forms of evidence you can have in a courtroom, despite it being treated with such importance. And more often than not when we clearly remember something we're actually recalling text from a different game, or filling in the rules for a completely different setting (the common argument of, "Well, Tolkien said this is how it works," when playing games not set in Middle Earth for example).

So if you can't point to the relevant rule in a book, or you can't find the section that supports your statement, re-consider whether this is an argument you want to make. Because if you assert that something works one way, there's no reason for anyone else to accept that's true if you didn't bring the receipts.

Like, Follow, and Stay in Touch!

That's all for this week's Moon Pope Monday. Hopefully you found this suggestions useful!

For more of my work, check out my Vocal archive, and stop by the YouTube channel Dungeon Keeper Radio. Or if you'd prefer to read some of my books, like my sword and sorcery novel Crier's Knife or my latest short story collection The Rejects, then head over to My Amazon Author Page!

To stay on top of all my latest releases, follow me on Facebook, Tumblr, Twitter, and now Pinterest as well! To support my work, consider Buying Me a Ko-Fi, or heading to The Literary Mercenary's Patreon page to become a regular, monthly patron. That one helps ensure you get more Improved Initiative, and it means you'll get my regular, monthly giveaways as a bonus!

All Games Are Inherently Political

Of all the phrases I've grown to hate over my years of gaming, there is one in particular that makes me sigh. It is a phrase that lets me know I'm in for a long, and often frustrating discussion. And, many times, it's a phrase that lets me know that this person is not someone I'd enjoy having at my table.

What's that phrase, you ask?

"Get your politics out of my game!"

Pictured: The kind of character this protester often plays, perhaps missing the irony.

The problem here, for those who are wondering, is that there is no such thing as a non-political RPG. Roleplaying games, by their very nature, have messages in them. Those messages convey meaning, establish themes, and generally speaking are what provide the context for the story we're all telling, here.

Because of that, all games are inherently political in some way, shape, or form. And I'd take that one step further to say that most forms of art (especially things we geeks love like movies, comics, sci-fi and fantasy novels, etc.) are also inherently political.

Do You Remember Stan's Soapbox?

Though it will likely cause all of us pain, I'd like to talk about Stan Lee for a minute. Because while we can argue about the man versus the persona, and the nature of an artist and their legacies, one thing that Stan made very clear was that he and many of the artists he worked with at Marvel were sending very clear, direct messages with the stories they told. From Spider-Man's lessons on power and responsibility, to the X-Men's civil rights metaphor, to Black Panther beating the holy hell out of a white-clad hate group, Marvel's stories were not shy about their politics.

And for people who missed it, or who thought they might have been accidental, there was the handy little feature of Stan's Soapbox.

No gray areas, no miscommunication.

Stan Lee, and other creators, felt that these messages were important enough that they needed to be spelled out in plain English once the story about super-powered men and women in Lycra costumes was over. Because, at the end of the day, they had things they wanted you to take away when you closed the rear cover of that comic book.

That tradition hasn't stopped with the modern iterations of Marvel's comics and films, by the by. Captain Marvel is one of the biggest successes they've had in a while, and the story it tells is about a woman who breaks free from a controlling relationship filled with lies and gaslighting to embrace who she really is. Something with a lot of parallels to Jessica Jones, I'd add. Guardians of The Galaxy tells a story of the importance of personal connection to others like yourself, showing that being adopted (even under odd or unusual circumstances) doesn't make you any less of a family. And, of course, Captain America: The Winter Soldier came out pretty heavily against a surveillance/police state.

Just for a few examples.

But What Does This Have To Do With Gaming?

You can pick up practically any play, any novel, and any game, and find messages like this lurking just under the skin. All you need to do is look at who the heroes are, who the villains are, and what the conflict is over. Are ugly creatures viewed as inherently monstrous and deserving of death, or do we find that orcs, goblins, ogres, and others have a vibrant culture and drive to survive past all the war paint and skulls? Is racism seen as tolerable as long as it's against elves or gnomes, or is that prejudice used to clearly mark someone who is backwards at best, and a villain at worst? Is enchantment seen as an appropriate, non-lethal way to end a conflict, or is its ability to violate someone's mind and consent seen as an art practiced only by the wicked?

Do traditional paladins define what is unquestionably good just by existing?

All of those messages, and many more, are coded into our games. Even if we're not thinking about them. And, generally speaking, players will accept those political points without question. Even defending them virtuously in-game, if they're heroes. Yet for some reason they'll suddenly roll their eyes if, say, a game includes the message of, "Being gay is all right," or, "Humans come in multiple ethnicities, and confining them to imaginary borders on a map makes no sense in a world where immigration is a reality."

Sure, those are political messages in a game. However, it's no more political than the belief that those with magic should be the ruling faction of a nation, or that chattel slavery is wrong and should be smashed at every opportunity. All of these things are inherently political (and dare we say it, moral and philosophical) points that show up in our games, and that's been true since the first dice were ever rolled in an RPG.

Don't Duck The Subject

If you disagree with a particular message in a game, that's fine. I'd even go so far as to say that's great. However, simply demanding that people keep politics out of a game doesn't help, because it would mean staring at a blank piece of paper. Instead, explain why you feel this particular political statement should be kept out of a game, or why you feel it should be altered in some way for the game to better fit your desires as a player.

We do this all the damn time. Sometimes a DM will do it by making certain creatures inherently evil and corrupt, so that slaying them is always a righteous act rather than a callous case of murder. Or players will make it clear that they feel violence is not the answer to problems by always trying to use Diplomacy or Intimidate before actually drawing their weapons. So if you feel that a certain issue doesn't belong in an RPG, you should feel free to say which issue, and why you feel that way.

But just saying, "Ugh, why is everything so political now?" does nothing but make other people think you haven't been wearing your critical thinking hat this whole time.

Speaking of Messages...

As a brief aside, I wanted to let all you fine folks out there know that I recently put together my first gaming supplement with High Level Games! It's a supplement for Werewolf the Apocalypse titled 100 Get of Fenris Kinfolk. And since we're talking about messages in our games and art, I thought I'd provide everyone a sneak preview of the message I wanted to send with this piece by giving you the description of the first NPC in this list.

Sigurd “Ziggy” Bowers: A towering black man whose roots are just starting to go gray, Zig runs one of the most successful outlaw tattoo parlors in upstate New York. His whole life, Zig was pushed to use his size and strength to its best possible end, making him a fiercely competitive boxer, and a champion weightlifter on the amateur circuit. Mostly retired from competition, he’s been known to throw down when provoked. While he sports a great deal of ink, those who see him in his working vest can’t miss the prominent runes across his chest that read, “Fuck Off Nazi Scum.”

That's all for this week's Moon Pope Monday installment! Hopefully it gave folks plenty of things to talk about.

For more of my work, check out my Vocal and Gamers archives, as well as the YouTube channel Dungeon Keeper Radio! Or, if you're more interested in books like my sword and sorcery novel Crier's Knife, head over to My Amazon Author Page instead.

To stay on top of all my latest releases, you can follow me on Facebook, Tumblr, Twitter, and now on Pinterest, too. To help support me consider Buying Me A Ko-Fi, or heading over to The Literary Mercenary's Patreon page to become a regular, monthly patron! If you do that, you'll be able to get in my regular, monthly giveaways as well as knowing you're doing your part to help keep this blog going.

No One Is Accusing You Of Having "Wrong Bad Fun"

The Internet is chock full of advice when it comes to roleplaying games. Whether you're looking for rules combinations, character conversions, guides, clarifications, or just suggestions for creating atmosphere, or getting into character, you can find it out there. Regardless of the system you're playing, or the kind of tone you're going for, you're bound to find at least a few bloggers, vloggers, and industry voices you agree with. You're also likely to find several you disagree with. It is, in fact, likely for you to find a lot of people you disagree rather strongly with. Which is why, this Monday, I'd like to remind everyone out there of the silent mantra when it comes to reading RPG blogs, watching channels, reading articles, or just talking in forums and on social media.

Now, repeat after the Goat of Silliness...

The mantra goes something like this. "If I don't agree with this content, then clearly it's not meant for me, or my game."

That's it. Just a simple, silent sentiment that we should always tack to any article we disagree with when it comes to gaming.

RPGs Are Not A Zero Sum Game

I bring this up because I spend a lot of time online talking about RPGs. Whether I'm promoting my own blog posts, or those of a fellow creator, or just answering questions or joining discussions, I spend several hours a day up to my elbows talking about my favorite games. And, as anyone who spends time on social media knows, there are bound to be disagreements. Sometimes it's over a rules interpretation, and other times it's over whether or not a certain class is bound to certain styles of play. Sometimes it's just asking if something is technically possible, according to the game rules.

Now, I'm going to make the following statements from the calmest portion of my soap box that I have. Suggesting a certain way to play is not demanding that everyone play that way. Pointing out that a rule works a certain way in the game does not preclude your table from altering that rule when you play the game.

Unless someone specifically says, "this is the only way to play this aspect of the game, and if you do it differently, then you're doing it wrong," then no one is "calling you out" for having "wrong, bad fun."

Play how you want, you mad bastards.

However, if you feel the need to demand that someone else stop telling you how to play the game, and you want to sling a comment about how the, "fun police," have found your thread, take a moment, and repeat the silent mantra to yourself. Then, if you feel so compelled, re-read the thing that upset you, and ask if it is, in fact, demanding that all players play the game in a single way. If it isn't, and is simply pointing out the language of a rule, making a suggestion on how a given class could be run, or stating that at this particular person's table, X, Y, or Z are the order of the day, then scroll on along.

So What's Your Point?

What's the point of this post? To get my fellow gamers, and members of the community, to stop using the accusation of someone calling you out for, "wrong, bad fun," the same way that people with unpopular views will scream about their, "freedom of speech," or about how everyone's so, "politically correct," when the criticism starts rolling their way. Someone telling you that your interpretation of the rules is directly against the game's errata, and thus that you have house-ruled things to be different, is not an attack on you. That's just a statement. Someone pointing out that barbarians can be from big cities, or that wizards don't have to go to universities, isn't accusing you of playing the game incorrectly. They're just pointing out that there are other ways to do things.

You like the way you're doing them? Beautiful! Shine on, and happy trails. But if you're going to get involved in discussions, talk about the issue at hand. Don't just raise a criticism shield and claim someone's trying to censor your fun.

Well, that's all for this week's Moon Pope Monday post. Hopefully you enjoyed what I had to say, and even if you didn't enjoy it, that you still found something worth taking away from this particular post. If you'd like to help support Improved Initiative, then just stop by The Literary Mercenary's Patreon page to toss a few bills in my jar. No pledge is too low, and if you pledge at least $1 a month I have a free book with your name on it! Well, my name is on it, but you get the picture. Lastly, if you haven't followed me on Facebook, Tumblr, or Twitter yet, what's the hold-up?

Why "Appeals to Fun" Are Pointless in RPG Discussions

As folks have noticed, when I'm not talking about RPGs themselves, I tend to talk about how we think about them. The language we use to describe our games, and what themes can expand or contract a game's focus, are some of my favorite topics. In fact, posts like Sexuality Matters in RPGs (And Here's Why) and Calm Down, No One is Taking Your Games Away are some of my most popular articles. So, since it's Monday, I thought I'd take the opportunity to talk about something related to gaming, that isn't gaming itself.

In short, I would like to ask that all of us stop making appeals to fun as a way to try and win an argument, or to end a conversation whenever we're online and trying to score debate points.

Appeals to Fun (And Why They're Useless)

The entire point of playing RPGs is to have fun, and tell a story. If you're not having fun, chances are good you're going to quit playing, or find another game that fulfills your needs. However, an "appeal to fun" is something that shows up in conversations about RPGs, not in the games themselves.

And, since examples work best when illustrating a point, I'll use one for you.

Oh good, I was in danger of getting confused.

Let's say we're on a Facebook group dedicated to Pathfinder. A conversation springs up about mental health in adventurers. They have to face awful dangers, and they're often subjected to terrible stresses. Post-traumatic stress disorder seems like a surefire condition many of them might suffer from, though it's far from the only condition that might crop up. Alcoholism, drug addiction, violent acting out, and other symptoms are also discussed. Other people get in on the conversation, either arguing for or against why certain conditions would or wouldn't affect certain races, or whether or not magical treatment would be effective when it came to mental disorders.

And then, in the midst of discussion around this topic, someone chimes in with, "why are you getting so involved in this? It's a game, forget all of this and just have fun already!"

The problem with this sort of statement is that, clearly, someone is having fun with this idea. For some players, the idea of having to face serious repercussions for violent lives, and losing limbs and companions along the way, is engaging. It's the sort of thing they think will improve their roleplaying experience. For other players that aspect of the game might be a downer, getting in the way of what they consider to be the fun part of the game (the power fantasy that comes with slaying dragons and fighting gods, for example). Just as some players will dive face first into cosmic horror, or grimdark sci-fi, other players want something uplifting, or even funny, for their game's tone.

Most of the time when someone says, "just go have fun," what they mean is, "go have my kind of fun."

If It's Not Your Game, Walk Away

The definition of fun will change from one person to another. There is no single activity that everyone will enjoy. So if you're the sort of person who likes to relax with a book and your cat, you do you. If your friend likes to get hammered at the bars while belting our karaoke, good for him. But if your friend tries to get you to come along for his kind of fun, and you don't want to, telling you that if you go out with him you'll experience real fun is a massive logical fallacy. Just because you love something, that doesn't mean anyone else shares your opinion.

The sword is so you can fight off the hangover in the morning.

So the next time you're reading a conversation about gaming, and you think the people having this discussion are somehow missing the point, or they're more focused on rules or tone than having fun, remember this; for some people, that is the fun part.

If you don't have anything to actually contribute to the conversation, keep scrolling. Seriously, it will make your life so much easier, and the people who are actively engaged in what they're doing won't have to deal with comments from people who just want to step in, shout, "you're gaming wrong," before they leave again.

As always, I hope you enjoyed this Moon Pope Monday post. If you'd like to help keep Improved Initiative going, then why not drop by The Literary Mercenary's Patreon page? As little as $1 a month will help me keep producing content, and it will get you some sweet swag. Lastly, if you haven't done so yet, why not follow me on Facebook, Tumblr, and Twitter?

The 5 Totally Useless Statements You See In Every RPG Discussion

As a fan of RPGs, there's nothing I love better than sitting down and having a long talk about my favorite games (except, you know, actually playing them). I'll talk about rules, I'll talk about stories, and if I've got a receptive audience I'll even talk about how to subvert the accepted tropes of a given genre to do something unexpected. However, I also spend a lot of time on the Internet, and while I love the RPG community as a whole, I would take it as a huge, personal favor if we could remove these five phrases from our lexicon when it comes time to express our views on the games we love.

Just as a preface, this article is not meant to attack anyone specific. I am not calling out anyone, nor am I demanding that everyone do things my way. Just pointing out some things I've seen over the past few years, and why I think these behaviors are total nonsense.

All right, starting at the top...

#5: Every Table Is Going To Do It Their Own Way

For good, or for ill.

This is one of the first lines people whip out whenever there's a nuanced or controversial subject under discussion. When I first posted Sexuality Matters in Roleplaying Games (And Here's Why), this phrase was legion in the comments sections. It was as if, somehow, hundreds of my fellow gamers had forgotten that I'm just some schmuck on the Internet with a blog and an opinion, and that I have no ability to declare, rule, or mandate that any game out there be played a certain way.

This phrase is appropriate in one context: someone is going on a One, True Way to Game rant, and insisting that anyone who does things in a manner other than this one, prescribed way is playing the game wrong. If that isn't happening, then this phrase serves no purpose except as a placeholder.

Every Table is Going to do it Their Own Way is just like That's What My Character Would Do; a phrase we usually hold up as a shield when someone has made a suggestion, or asked us to re-examine our opinions on an issue. If you have an opinion, state it. Instead of a meaningless, "well, everyone has to make up their own minds," say, "in this situation, I would prefer a game that X's over Y-ing, and here's why."

Don't remind us that everyone has an opinion. We know that already, and you're breaking up the flow of the discussion.

#4: The DM Can Just Change That Rule, If He Wants

Yeah, I can... wait what?

This is another dandelion that sprouts in otherwise verdant lawns. This one typically crops up whenever someone is asking a question about a certain game mechanic, particularly one that falls into a gray area because of wording. Some gamers will insist that a mechanic works one way, and others will point out that because of the wording it could work a different way. Then someone stands up in the middle of the discussion and says, "It works however the DM says it works."

Again, this phrase is inherently true. It is the DM's job to adjudicate the rules, and to interpret them in a way that the table is satisfied with. It is also within the DM's purview to change rules, with the consent of the rest of the table, in order to make the game more enjoyable.

Bringing it up contributes nothing to the conversation, though, unless the person asking the question is somehow unaware of Rule 0, which gives the DM such power. Not only that, but if someone is asking for legitimate input on how a given rule has been run at other people's tables, or if a rule should function with X or Y interpretation, then saying, "just do whatever you want" wastes space, distracts from the conversation, and makes you look vaguely like an NPC yelling out stock lines while the main characters are trying to solve the plot.

#3: This is So Unrealistic!

I know, right? Magical fireballs conjured from the ether should TOTALLY do more damage.

I know that most people who use this phrase when it comes to RPGs don't realize the sheer irony of calling games that allow you to play immortal bloodsucking badasses, demon-tainted barbarians, or wizards who can conjure lightning from thin air unrealistic. But it is. It is not only ironic, but it is ironic in the most painful, eye-rolling, head-desking way.

No, it is not realistic that a gunslinger can reload a musket in a bare few seconds. It is also not realistic that you can use that musket to shoot a necromancer raising an army of the dead to do her bidding. It's also unrealistic that a level 1 fighter can take a critical hit to the face and die, but a level 10 fighter taking that same ax to the bridge of his nose would barely even bleed. It is not a roleplaying game's job to simulate reality as we know it. A roleplaying game's job is to act as a conflict resolution system and storytelling tool.

Note that this is not a, "magic exists, therefore no complaints are valid," argument. Simply that the way physics work in the game world is not bound by the laws of how physics, damage, or chemistry work in the real world. The system for falling damage should be enough to explain that, but sometimes we need to be reminded. Yes, we know that the actual long range of traditional longbows, period crossbows, etc. isn't what it says in the book. We know that rapier fighters can attack faster and more often than someone swinging a greatsword. The book also lets you play as a hulking, tusked brute who can see in the dark. Perspective, people.

#2: It's So Broken!

Assassins... not even once.

There is a trend in video game criticism where some players will use the phrase, "this isn't a real video game," as a way to deride games they personally don't like, or which do not cater to the things they want from a game. The phrase "X is so broken," is essentially that, but with RPGs.

Again, this phrase has its uses, and there are time when it is appropriate. For example, if you begin your post with, "X is so broken," and then go on to explain why you feel it is that way, using examples from the game and pointing out instances where the "broken" thing in question creates real problems, you will be given a pass on my complaint. If you can show that you have a full grasp of what the rules say, and that you have carefully thought through your opinion about why a given ability exists the way it does, then you may have a point that it is not properly balanced. However, if you're just shouting about game mechanics you don't like, then you're not helping anything.

Put another way, if you just want to shout that you don't like a thing, scroll on by.

#1: That's Historically Inaccurate!

Ridiculous! Ducks didn't harness the power of magic till 1582, 200 years after this campaign is set!

This one gets the top honor because it is deep-fried bullshit on a stick on multiple levels. The biggest one, though, is that if you are playing an RPG that takes place anywhere other than the Earth you actually live on with unchanged history from the way things actually happened (which means no secret vampire cabals, no hidden mage sanctums, and no behind-the-scenes war between heaven and hell), this argument is completely irrelevant to the discussion.

Now, the closer your game world is to Earth's actual history, the more these complaints may become valid. However, you cannot argue that the trends in real human history are at all valid when your game is set in another world that has never shared any of its history with the one you live in. Social structures, religion, ideas about freedom, and how the economy works are independent from your experiences in this world as soon as you set foot in Greyhawk, the Forgotten Realms, Golarion, or any of a dozen other settings.

So, before you make the "historically inaccurate" argument, ask yourself the reason why you're making it, and look at the context of the thing you're objecting to. Then ask yourself if the argument you want to make is valid, based on the history of the game world where the campaign in question is happening. If it isn't, then tuck your objection back in the box, and close the lid, because it won't contribute to the conversation being had.

And if someone is having a conversation about how historically inaccurate the pseudo-medieval fantasy RPG world full of wizards and dragons is when compared to the actual history we experienced, just walk on by. Even if it's meant as a joke, there are going to be all kinds of terrible things jumping into this bait-filled swimming pool.

All right, that's all I've got for this Monday. Hope you at least had a few moments of amusement, and that none of my bile splashed on your shoes from up here on my soap box. If you want to make sure you keep up-to-date on my latest posts, follow me on Facebook, Tumblr, and Twitter. If you would like to get into the holiday spirit, you can drop a few dimes in my jar by becoming a patron right here on my Patreon page!