Games Day: Star Wars, West End Games, & What If

West End Games are know for two things. Going bankrupt during what was meant to be the Golden Age of Role-Playing Games* and for the Star Wars Role-Playing Game, which they alone had a LucasArts approved license** for.

*I mean, that's debatable, you'd probably say that the late 1990s (and West End Games went bankrupt in 1998) marked the end of the 'Golden Age' as computer games had gone from niche interest to mainstream (although not totally acceptable yet). And more than a few companies proved that they had not an idea how to change their approach in the wake of such a major shift in gamer's interests.

**Now this might seem massive, but I can't really remember any 'fandom menace,' such as there is nowadays for the various different IP franchises, at the time for anything Star Wars or not. Trekkies notwithstanding, but their devotion was at the time seen as risible and ridiculous, whereas similar behaviour today is seemingly encouraged.

I'm thinking about this old game from my youth because I'm having another burst of enthusiasm about running a game. As mentioned before, I've been thinking 'What If' about the sequel trilogy of Star Wars films. I'd love to be able to make something as great as the following three videos by the excellent Belated Media (Michael Barryte), but I'm not going to be able to knock-up three quality videos any time soon, if ever (videos at the end and highly recommended).

So, why the West Games version of Star Wars? After all there have been several licensed versions of the game, Fantasy Flight Games' current table-top version, and a Wizards of the Coast version that resembles the D&D d20 system that came out after West End Games. However, as I've said before there was a certain punk DIY spirit that I like about these older games, in that you are given a basic set of rules that you can reapply to whatever else you create in your game. Whereas, even without looking at the FF version of the game, I know that their setup will be a totally modular product. You want the new rebel trooper? You have to buy the miniature and the character card, RRP $20.99. The benefit of the older West End Games version is that most of these old books now exist only as PDFs online, as the copyright has lapsed, and even if you don't want all of these (I'll maybe get one or two but don't need much more than the full rules) the game is developed in a way that creating your own worlds, aliens and stories is positively encouraged with only the basic rules. Further to this (possibly, most importantly) is the simplicity of the basic rules such that most ideas could be accommodated in straight-forward fashion. As opposed to overly complex rules and a reliance on 'special kit' (i.e. dice with fancy colours and icons) rather than simple six sided dice and easy to follow rules.

My 'What If' and the impetus for (potentially) running a game is [STAR WARS SPOILERS] because at a point in Rian Johnson's otherwise crushingly mediocre 'Star Wars: Episode VIII - The Last Jedi' there is setup the possibility that the status quo will be destroyed and the rather closed world of Star Wars will be torn open and irrevocably changed. This possibility was in itself thrilling and by far my favourite scene in any of the SW films, however, the capitulation of this and the subsequent total failure to really follow through and achieve anything of note in terms of character development or world building (albeit this might be a bit harsh) ended up making me dislike this film more than any of the others in the 'Sequel Trilogy' (and I'm really not a fan of Jar Jar Abrams either, so this is quite an achievement by Rian Johnson).

In the original scene having tricked his former master Snoke and subsequently bisected him with Rey's lightsaber, Kylo Ren and Rey then fight Snoke's praetorian guard in an excellent action scene. At the end of the scene Kylo Ren offers Rey his hand in a parallel to Darth Vader offering Luke Skywalker his hand in ESB, both are offers to "rule the galaxy together." However, as the throne room scene in Last Jedi was instead setup similarly to the throne room scene in ROTJ in which Darth Vader betrays and kills Emperor Palpatine to save his son Luke, so I had hoped that this was Ben Solo overthrowing the Dark side influence of Snoke to save the woman he loved, Rey, but instead it becomes some point about not believing in the survival of an ideology (or something).

In the Last Jedi both Luke and Kylo Ren talk about "killing the past" but ultimately it is the past that kills The Last Jedi, in that the attempt to free the plot from the choke hold narrative of Jedi v. Sith, or Light v. Dark, or indeed the childishly simple Good v. Evil, is shown to be inescapable. The film ends with the status quo totally restored and the attempted 'rebellions' of Kylo/Ben and Luke have been shown to fail. In the end Luke realises that the Jedi were great goodies after all and Kylo thinks that being super evil is instead a brilliant idea (until the next film when something lesser makes him finally kick the 'evil habit' for good).

The film could have been The Last War, which rather than resulting in the actual end of war would have resulted in something more realistic with the fracturing of various parties along differing ideological perspectives. Then the black and white division of the galaxy would be replaced with a much more messy and believable situation, were someone cannot be said to be 'good' or 'evil' simply by their uniform. In my 'What If' then when Kylo Ren makes his offer to Rey, rather than losing her voice and power that she has held up until that point, then mutely resisting, causing the lightsaber to explode and allowing her to escape from the First Order's capital ship somehow. Instead, Rey makes Ben a counter offer, she states that she would take his hand if offered by Ben and not Kylo. She then goes on to explain that Kylo Ren is already dead, he died when he rightly betrayed Snoke knowing that he was evil and that his way was foolish. Indeed, that perpetuating this endless cycle of Jedi/Sith conflict will do nothing but damage the galaxy and that they can instead show the potential of another way.

With Kylo, now Ben Solo, joining Rey we could imagine some on both sides (both the First Order and the Resistance) wanting to join these new figureheads and others wanting to oppose them. For example, some would see Kylo Ren's murder of his father as unforgivable, whether he was being influenced by Snoke or not. Those enslaved by the First Order would see this as an opportunity for freedom and might not all agree on how they will exercise this freedom. The fallen New Republic might attempt to reform, with some opposed to retrying a twice failed system of government and etc. Mostly I see General Armitage Hux futilely attempting to hold control of the crumbling First Order, much like the squabbling of Alexander's generals in the aftermath of his death.

We'll see...

http://www.starwarstimeline.net/Westendgames.htm

Games Day: Championship Manager 01/02

I'm having to talk about this here because otherwise I will drive JJ and my friends and colleagues up the wall about it, which is incidentally the main motivation behind this blog anyway.

That is, to have a space where I can 'talk out' ideas and concerns that would become an irritation in other ways. So, if in reading this you find your eyes glazing over, have no fear as this is typically the reaction I get when boring people about my activities and interest in the Championship Manager series of computer games. So, after that exciting introduction, let me now talk about...

Championship Manager 01/02

Championship Manager 01/02 (henceforth CM0102) is possibly my favourite computer game of all time. I might love the Baldur's Gate series (and will talk about those games in connection with my RPG past some other time, possibly if I replay the games) and the Fallout games (they became something totally different since Bethesda took over, but New Vegas is a great game) but I sincerely think that I've spent more hours playing CM0102 than any other game.

A brief look at screenshots of the game shouldn't fill you will much/any excitement, unless you are thrilled by a good spreadsheet (and why not?), but therein belies the hook of the game. It's not the flashy graphics or exciting and different gameplay that gets you, all of these things can become usual and then passé reasonably quickly after all, but it's the core structure of the game that speaks to me and apparently many others. That is, the joy of organising!

I mean, I am a Librarian, with a background in academic philosophy, so this really shouldn't come as much of a surprise to anyone, but I find a great pleasure in organising a 'perfect' team of players and the tactics of the team. Obviously, this is never quite realised as there's always something going wrong and something to win. Much like football itself, it's never truly 'over' and permanently 'won'.

The benefit of this game rather isn't it's completeness, but rather the gaps that require imagination to fill. Unlike later versions that have 2D and 3D representations of the live game, this version is only text highlights and although there are images, they are rather a collection of stock backgrounds rather than individual specific portraits or actual locations and so forth. These people and places are all 'described' in the brief abstract way that the game uses, with special events being rare and not allowing a great deal of interaction with. Again, this is something that later versions alter, with newer games having endless press briefings and interviews, as well as player management and more realistic world football developments.

Although these changes would, you'd assume, make the game more engaging, instead for me it makes the game seem more a slog and constant 'clicking through' of meaningless menus. Certainly having seen people play FM19 (the latest Football Manager game) this is how they seem to find these additions. CM0102 allows you to play through entire seasons in a few evenings.

So the choice lies whether you prefer story or detail, minutiae or narrative, whether football itself represents a social story or a strategic competition.

Now this last point might simply be me stretching a metaphor beyond breaking point (it is) but there is still something in that I believe. Namely how we differently interact with games, with art, with life. There isn't a right way, but we seemingly allow more space for personal differences in how we attach ourselves (how we care-for) to these games than we do the more 'important' things like politics. That is, "oh you like X? That's interesting, I like Y which is different from X, but I can see why you'd like it" or "oh you like X? That's interesting, I like Y which is different from X, tell me why you like it as I do not." These sorts of conversations are more likely when talking about games and almost impossible when discussing politics online. Although, perhaps the more vital component is the latter, 'online', than the subject itself (although I contend that this plays a significant part also, as it holds an implicit assumption about the 'value' of the subject).

Do I now tell you about some of my games? How I took Gornik Zabrze from mid-table obscurity in the Polish league (with a maximum of 5 non-Polish players per team) to becoming Champions of Europe within four years? How I took tiny Hoffenheim from the German Regionals to becoming the dominant force in Germany and Europe, a 'career' game that has run for over ten in-game years, and has also seen me parachute into the EPL to save a relegation threatened Chelsea? How I took Welsh minnows Swansea from the bottom of Division 3 into the EPL with superstars such as Roy Keane, Zidane, and Patrick Kluivert playing for them before an in-game bug caused the entire game to be lost? These are just my most recent games.

Maybe some other time... But I think that, like describing one's dreams to another, that they are never quite as interested for *you* as they were for *me*. Perhaps instead a few screenshots of some OMG moments from those games...

Czech Republic v Paraguay World Cup 2010 Final

It's hard to think of anything less likely

Apart from this perhaps

Games Day: LeCraft - Fantasy Combat

Almost all RPGs are focused entirely upon combat, even the ones were there is an attempt to develop internal politics and other non-violent means of conflict resolution, still the inevitable fighting mechanic forms the central core of the game and must be detailed. As these are games and as players are conditioned to play to win, so the swiftest resolution is always with combat and a few dice rolls, "bang bang, you're dead"... "but I built my character with debating skills"... "my character has an M14 rifle and shoots your character in the brain stem. Game over."

Perhaps it's simply the fact that RPGs have developed from war games, perhaps it's the way we play games, perhaps it's our violent natures.

In any case I can imagine that a game or story that did not involve either actual violence (action) or the threat of violence (horror) to be dismissed as 'boring' or 'not realistic'. Let's be clear though, my game/story world is not a passifist utopia.

However.

Not to remove the reality of violence, instead as a story mechanic it's use should not be without danger or consequence, the use of violence is rarely a solution, as it merely creates the potential for other worse situations. The cycle of violence, revenge, permanent injury, the loss of one's identity to that of a corrupt 'other place' (cf. Lynch). Much like magick is this world's literal depiction of the corruption of power, of influence, so that violence here should also be extreme with the possibility of perma-death (what other kind should we think of?), of physical damage (although fixable by magick, this too lends itself to risk), or of mental-spiritual damage, leading to becoming feral, a lesser animalistic being. 

That is, if we consider violence as an animal instict and therefore basic or innate, should it be feared or controlled or denied or embraced?

 Perhaps something we should watch for is the trivilising of this attitude, or the domestication or even the gamification of violence. This is because it can help manufacture the idea that this is what we really are. It makes the assumption through it's repeated use in games and stories that violence is basic is innate is true to what we are. The argument of its inescapability meaning that we must embrace this lust for violence, but this sadistic pleasure in causing pain, in 'getting back', in solution (because surely when they are all dead there can be no more problems), is a social construct, it is the argument of authoritarianism, of Fascism, of the sociopath.

The animal does not love violence.

Innate does not mean always, it is appropriate only with the context. The hawk does not kill without 'reason'.

So, this isn't to disparage those that enjoy the combat aspect of their games. Indeed, as I said, it's obviously a key component for most games for a reason. Might I suggest that it is because it is more directly emotive and more easily generalisable for a wider audience. What I wish to develop is that idea of combat in games being more than just a few 'exciting' dice rolls, I want it to be something that players are actually apprehensive of.

In stories this 'realism' of combat can be described to convey the physicality, the danger, and so forth, but it is unlikely the writer will be as literally descriptive as players in a role-playing game. Indeed, the 'shot-for-shot' description of a conflict from a rpg into a story would be incredibly dull. However, something a rpg can convey is complex multitude of instant decisions that one might make during a fight (albeit they think over these choices for far longer and can strategise).

Dice-rolling mediated by additional factors (skill, environment, equipment) does a reasonable job of depicting the potential randomness of violent confrontation, but due to the gamifying of the event this introduces a level of agency and control to the situation that is inauthentic.

Simply put, it is not random or final enough. The only time I can recall something 'real' occuring in a rpg was the old-style D&D that I first played aged twelve. At first level your character had 1D4 of hit points if a thief or a magic-user. Most basic weapons and animals do 1D6 damage (arrows, clubs, spears and short swords) meaning that you have a reasonably high likelihood of dying in one hit. Even fighters, whose whole class focus is fairly obvious, only start with 1D8 of hit points (although this can modified up to +3 with bonuses), which means that several good hits will kill pretty much every first level character. Also, despite resurrection being possible in D&D this comes with a gold value (hurray for fantasy capitalism, there is no escape) meaning that again first level or low level characters can not afford it and must offer their services for repayment (useful as a plot hook, often exploited).

However, unfortunately, if your characters survive long enough they get to the point were this one-hit-kill possiblity is utterly removed, indeed, at high levels a single player character can overpower entire armies. Note: There is the possibility of high-level spells killing, 'disintegrating', characters but by this point characters are normally able to raise the dead themselves. Making death not the end, but instead a minor and temporary inconvenience.

Games Day: LeCraft - Humans in Fantasy (Additional)

It occurred to me that in my previous post I could have said something more descriptive about the humans in my setting; what they look like, what they believe, how they vary, what makes them distinctive as  a species, where (or when) they have come from, and many other specifying things. Without giving you, the reader, this information I feel it becomes too easy for us to fall back on the idea that we are dealing with something like a direct transposition of Earth to ‘Fantasy Setting X’ (I’ll keep this as a backup name for my world). 

This is something that I’m keen to avoid, but realise that I’ll have to provide something like a map or guide book for my setting in order to get the ‘feeling’ of the place over. I’ll add a link to a pinterest board of landscapes that evoke my image of the world’s look, and I’ll also add a link to a youtube playlist with some appropriate ‘mood’ music. These will be added to as often as I can manage, so keep checking back.

Link1 (YouTube)

Link2 (Pinterest)

Before I go into more about humanity in the LeCraft setting, I’d like to list a selection of descriptive paragraphs about humans from several other fantasy RPGs, with a view to showing how we (that is, how humans) are most often portrayed in fantasy settings:

13^th Age

As in most recent fantasy games, we like using humans of various ethnicities and styles. Some map to cultures in the game world, while others are part of the magical mixing pot.

Anima - Beyond Fantasy

Race here does not refer to ethnicity, but rather to a true supernatural species with attributes distinct from ours. The world of Anima is predominantly human …

Dungeons & Dragons 5^th edition

There is no typical human. An individual can stand from 5 feet to a little over 6 feet tall and weigh from 125 to 250 pounds. Human skin shades range from nearly black to very pale, and hair colors from black to blond (curly, kinky, or straight); males might sport facial hair that is sparse or thick.

Humans are the most adaptable and ambitious people among the common races. They have widely varying tastes, morals, and customs in the many different lands where they have settled.

The material culture and physical characteristics of humans can change wildly from region to region. In the Forgotten Realms, for example, the cl0thing, architecture, cuisine, music, and literature are different…

In the Forgotten Realms, nine human ethnic groups are widely recognized…

Fantasy Craft

You’re a human, standing 5 ft. to 6 ft. tall and weighing between 100 to 250 lbs. Your hair, eyes, skin tone, and other physical features vary as much as your culture, which spreads quickly and borrows heavily from all others. You’re extremely inquisitive, trading ideas like most trade supplies, and adopting customs and terms from friends and foes alike. You’re also wildly ambitious, your culture making in-roads everywhere, sometimes through diplomacy, often through conquest. For all these reasons your appearance, demeanor, society, laws, religion, accumulated knowledge, and even language may be completely different from those of other humans, even your neighbors. Unlike other races, it is this very difference that defines you as a species. As a relatively short-lived breed, you view life as an adventure, an undiscovered country to explore and command. You blaze new trails every day, sampling and savoring every experience as a great treasure, and with every step you shape your own unique destiny. You haven’t the time or the patience for your brother’s means and aims, though sometimes you accept those of your father; you’re his legacy, after all, and how else will he be remembered? You make your own friends and enemies and cherish both as part of what makes you special.

Pathfinder

Humans possess exceptional drive and a great capacity to endure and expand, and as such are currently the dominant race in the world. Their empires and nations are vast, sprawling things, and the citizens of these societies carve names for themselves with the strength of their sword arms and the power of their spells. Humanity is best characterized by its tumultuousness and diversity, and human cultures run the gamut from savage but honorable tribes to decadent, devil-worshiping noble families in the most cosmopolitan cities. Human curiosity and ambition often triumph over their predilection for a sedentary lifestyle, and many leave their homes to explore the innumerable forgotten corners of the world or lead mighty armies to conquer their neighbors, simply because they can. Physical Description: The physical characteristics of humans are as varied as the world’s climes. From the dark-skinned tribesmen of the southern continents to the pale and barbaric raiders of the northern lands, humans possess a wide variety of skin colors, body types, and facial features. Generally speaking, humans’ skin color assumes a darker hue the closer to the equator they live.

Savage Worlds

Humans in most settings should get the usual benefit — one free Edge of their choice. This option reflects their versatility and adaptability compared to other races. If you like more variety, you might also give humans abilities based on culture rather than race.

True20

This is the default background for True20 heroes in a game using backgrounds. Human heroes may have cultural backgrounds in addition to their racial background to provide additional depth and options for the players.

***

The paragraphs above all the give the typical descriptions of humans in contemporary fantasy games. Firstly, note that most make an effort to capture the ‘diversity’ of humanity. This is, of course, handled in different ways in some games. For example, although D&D goes to great, expansive and unnecessary lengths to describe all the differing ways in which people can physically appear (something we’re hopefully well aware of already, but it also highlights, I suppose, that all these ethnic differences are also carried over to the D&D Forgotten Realms setting. So, no “we’re all white Vikings” settings for you, unless you do that anyway…). However, in the longer print version of the human description in D&D they also describe the numerous different Forgotten Realms ‘ethnicities’ of humans, which can be easily mapped to ethnicities of our own world without much difficulty. Quite what the point of all these descriptions is when it is hand-waved into “just play humans as the ethnicity you’re most comfortable with, i.e. your own” is beyond me. There’s a great deal of descriptive ‘fluff’ (especially from D&D) with it all amounting to pretty much what the 13^th Age description says, “[s]ome map to cultures in the game world, while others are part of the magical mixing pot.” Needless to say then, I have purposely set out with the idea of humanity being of the second category, that is, of an entirely different ‘ethnicity’ than anything we might see on earth and that the whole species thinks of itself as one (albeit residing in different city-states).

Second, I think the descriptions also give a strong indication why it is that other fantasy ‘races’ all end up being rather one-note, because the idea of a diverse, versatile, and adaptive species is pretty given as the human’s shtick. This is due to the fact that it’s actually quite hard to sum up an entire species in terms of these sorts of characteristics. If we were to think about any of the descriptions given about the usual fantasy races, these could also be applied to a general appraisal of humanity. The industry and stubbornness of dwarves, the wisdom and detachment of elves, the connection to nature and warmth of hobbits, the conniving cowardly nature of goblins, the ferocious warlike animalism of orcs, and so forth. All of these can apply to an aspect of humanity, but rather than allow diversity in these other fantasy species we’re left instead with simplistic archetypes, which is understandable in terms of basic gameplay, but at the level of role-playing it seems rather dull. (At the level of story-telling it’s almost monstrous…)

So, rather than limit what a particular species can be, I intend to provide the psychological perspectives and stereotypes of each of the fantasy species on LeCraft, both from the internal angle of the species and as they are seen by others. I also think that rather than the fantasy concept of the different ‘races’ being basically humanoid but with specific racial characters, I will employ what could be thought of as the science-fiction approach, where differences in species are regarded as a result of a specific outcome of an imagined evolutionary process of a physiologically different species from humans. Iain M. Banks’s ‘Culture’ novels are a good example of this.

i.e. Not this

Now, I’m trying to envisage a world wherein humans have lived alongside varied alien species for some time and they have all (as species if not as individuals or groups) made a commitment to work with each other, rather than develop separately, because as this is an alien world for the majority and it is a hostile world at that, the reason need not be much more than basic survival. Further to that, working together to learn what magick is, how they can escape from this place (if, indeed, that is possible), and what purpose they are there for. Remember that, as I’ve previously said, time manipulation magick is somehow blocked and further to this that each species historic records are not fully know to them (the R’thexe seem to have some deep understanding of this but they are too confusingly obtuse to properly explain their knowledge).

What then “are humans like” on LeCraft?

1. Mixed ‘ethnically’ speaking. Some diversity in appearance, but have lost the culture for analysing this minor cosmetic information. To us they would look like a people that have been thoroughly mixed to the point of appearing like being from pretty much everywhere.
2. Physically what divides humanity from other species is the sexual dimorphism that is more pronounced than other species (some of which have more, or less, sexes than humans do).
3. The most pronounced psychological attribute of humanity is seen by other species as being their need for society, for building and maintaining groups. Perhaps ironically, humans are seen as the most diplomatic of the species. Although this is partially for historic reasons.
4. The main flaw of humanity, which can also be a strength, is their tendency towards self-deception, cognitive blindness, or ‘group-think’. The ability to believe something without evidence or even in the face of contradictory facts.

Games Day: LeCraft - Speciesism and Humanity in Fantasy worlds

(So, this was meant to be a shorter piece on the depiction of humans in LeCraft, but I got distracted thinking about how cultural prejudice and stereotypes have lead to various negative portrayals in fantasy games and stories of the 'other'. Along this line, there is an excellent book, "Race and Popular Fantasy Literature: Habits of Whiteness" by Helen Young that writes on the subject much better than I can.)

Remedios Varo, Spiral Transit (1962)

Humans in fantasy are our link into the story world, as extraordinary and fantastical as it might be, even if we later discover that they aren’t like us, that is, perhaps they aren’t related to Earth-based culture at all. It gives us an immediate reference point and way into understanding how ‘we’ might fit into this fictional world were we there.

It seems that there is a distinction in treatment between humans in a Sci-Fi and humans in a fantasy setting that requires some detailing.

In science fiction, humanity is often more universal, that is, with their expansion into the galaxy older cultural distinctions have been left behind. The usual planet-wide cultural groups are not merely mapped out onto the stars (a Chinese planet, a Muslim planet, a Feminist planet) but are instead merged into a “united nations of humanity” or, at least, the Earth government itself with other human colonies; the Moon, Venus, Mars, and so on having their own cultural identities and new social groups. This is often even more the case in a setting with a prevalence of alien species.

Side note: Now, I’m saying species here (and this will continue for the LeCraft setting) because it seems more descriptively correct, but in most other game worlds humans and non-humans are described as races. In a sense neither is incorrect, but considering our contemporary historical usage and understanding of race, as a nineteenth century pseudo-scientific invention, this term seems ridiculous in its use even in a fantasy setting. Additionally, species more strongly denotes something ‘other’ and perhaps unrelated. Indeed, I am keen in my world to design the other sapient species not merely as ‘humanoids’ but as distinct beings themselves.

Humans in a fantasy setting, however, are distinct from the global Sci-Fi treatment of humanity in a manner that can be seen as troubling or surprising. For most settings (certainly in RPG’s) rather than an experimental depiction of what a human society could be like, the standard fantasy setting is of a romanticised European medieval culture, albeit one that is also especially ‘modern’ (anachronistic) and American in theme. When there are ‘other’ human cultures depicted, they tend to be fantastical variations of historic Earth cultures, i.e. Kara-Tur in the D&D Forgotten Realms setting is an Oriental human group, complete with ninja and so forth. Most other cultures get similar treatment, although it tends to be limited in influence to; Vikings, Aztecs, Native Americans, Egyptians and East Asian societies (mostly Japanese). Although contemporary fantasy games often portray non-white characters in rule-book illustrations and some of these are also women that are now dressed in sensible clothing and not the chainmail bikini of old! The tendency of grouping ‘ethnic’ parts of humanity into other lands is also dramatically decreased in the current literature. Thankfully.

No chain-mail bikinis please!

However, the tropes applied to the non-human ‘races’ seemingly still apply and have changed only a little. With Orcs and Goblins being given slightly more characteristics than simply the mindless evil cannon-fodder, which is mostly down to their availability as playable characters in video games World of Warcraft and things like Elder Scrolls, I would surmise. How these non-human races behaviours are handled can be a mask for other prejudices, for example, how the subject of slavery is dealt with can be especially distasteful and ignorant in the creator/writer’s description of how this fits into their setting. That is to say, that this isn’t something to be considered from our point of view, but is merely descriptive ‘fluff’ or a background ‘flavour’ to their setting. Compare this with unquestioned inclusions of; sexism, racism, religious intolerance, suffering, brutality and torture (I’m looking at you George R.R. Martin) in various fantasy settings as if this is what it was or would be like if we weren’t so civilised. This is the Hobbesian idea, pre-social man, with lives “nasty, brutish, and short” something that we would revert to. This idea of degeneration is eagerly seized upon by post-apocalyptic fiction, incorrectly, I surmise.

Society doesn’t civilise us, if that society has no need for those behaviours. Basically, we are made by the world about us and by our reaction to that environment. Our morality or lack thereof did not self-create in a vacuum. It’s my view that there is no ‘pre-social’ man, much in the same way that there cannot be a true objectivity, but all this is simply to state that the wish-fulfilment of fantasy tropes with the lingering bigotry and hate is not a ‘historically correct’ recreation, rather it is prejudice coated with a “it’s only a game/story” veneer. Stories and games too, can be very effective vehicles for the propagation and continuation of whatever negative bias you, willingly or understandingly or not, endorse. Fantasy ‘monsters’ based on the description of dehumanising stereotypes of non-whites that are linked with colonial prejudice of superiority, also known simply as racism. Fantasy cultures that have a “real basis in history” with their gleeful depictions of rape, torture and brutalising of women and minorities (such as the disabled, LGBT, and so on) that reinforce rather than challenge misogynistic or homophobic behaviours. This is the image of ‘white-washed’ fantasy worlds that is desperately in need of some redevelopment.

Possibly the most egregious example of D&D racism

So, what then of humanity and their depiction in LeCraft?

I have had many thoughts about the origin or arrival of humans on this fantasy world, but ultimately that is not the important factor. It does not affect the story or game whether these humans are meant to be from ‘our’ Earth or elsewhere unless it is to become something significant in narrative terms. The ‘realism’ of humanity being from Lemuria or Aztlán or even Shangri-La is also not needed, it merely provides a distraction, one that is ‘immersion’ spoiling, by taking one ‘out of the game’ to consider the validity of ‘actual’ writings of such-and-such a place.

What I do want to make clear is the relatively peaceful co-existence of humanity with other ‘alien’ species on LeCraft not as an analogy for something like multiculturalism in our contemporary world, but that humanity has a possibility for using reason and a strength for building societal bonds as the key attribute in humanity’s ‘worth’ in a communal future. That, further than that, the perceived ‘distinctions’ amongst humanity are of such little worth in this fantasy world that any concept we might have of race would be so unimportant, so ridiculous even to these people that it is entirely non-existent. For humanity to live alongside other species as equals effectively removes the ‘need’ for an aggressive classificatory description of humanity, sure some would seek to show that there is diversity among their own species, at the very least to explain that, “not all humans are like this!” However, the point is that it’s difficult to worry about skin colour and other differences when you live in a world with elves, dwarves, orcs, goblins, dog-headed people and other stranger, more terrifying things too.

So, rather than depict racist versions of what we (the game dominate culture of whiteness) once thought of ‘other’ humans, the “non-human races” now to be referred to as the “sapient species” will highlight our own failings of; anger, obsession, pride, and so forth. Failings that we all share.

The problem still remains however of how to depict humans in fantasy worlds when we are the depicters. In a sense, this can only be solved by making ‘these’ humans (in LeCraft) also seem ‘other’ than ‘us’ and in a very real sense they are. This depiction of humanity is one completely at ease with their own diversity, with their place in the world, and with a commitment to rationality. So, this is a ‘social-fantasy’ version of humanity, but it will still (as ever) remain the short-hand for what we/I would want. After all, it is fantasy.