Quote:
|
Originally Posted by crimfan
It certainly depends on how this is handled, of course, but at first blush this is the sort of thing that often gets people's hackles up.
|
I agree. I am not saying it shouldn't be a source of "hackle" raising. Simply that many people seem to miss what I believe causes this reaction.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by crimfan
Also to naysayers I'll note that if you file off the semi-controversial social issues, this is *exactly* the sort of thing that appears in many fantasy settings today. Most of them are simply de-sexualized.
|
I disagree. Many fantasy settings have a sense of good but few actual have a manifestation to the extent of BR. I guess Star Wars is close but few other settings do.
The sexual elements in BR are massively over-emphasised in most criticisms. The topic takes up no more than a few paragraphs in the book, but seems to generate pages of criticism
The thing in BR that causes the reaction is that it equates goodness with New Age concepts that not everyone agrees with in the real world.
Most fantasy settings use medieval/historical concepts (that are often offensive to modern sensibilities). However, people find it easy to enjoy these settings without feeling that by doing so they are somehow approving those concepts. Blue Rose on the other hand is a fantasy setting that draws on contemporary concepts. In comparison, people feel that by enjoying the game they are agreeing with the philosophies contained therein. I personally see this as an unnecesary distinction to make and a rather limited view in a hobby which revolves around pretending to be other people in different places. People should be more able to recognise their own personal views as distinct and secure from those presented in games that they play.