Re - Another national LARPs recent changes to races, in the name of OOG sensitivity...

Status
Not open for further replies.
BillHolmbladJr

BillHolmbladJr

Newbie
So... Another national game has made steps to change some of their IG race presentations to better address modern sensibilities to OOG race stereotyping.

My question is - when do we get to see Alliance address these same issues nationally?
 
Change moves at a pace that is glacial at best in the Alliance. We've been discussing the racial sensitivity of Gypsies in particular here on the boards for several years, but it's up to the Owners as a whole to make changes to the game at a national level, and that is not a quick or easy process.

Chat with your owner, they may be able to tell you if something is already in progress.
 
There is also usually a Rules Symposium the week of the National Event, as it is a good time to get multiple owners in the same place and discuss things face to face, so it would likely be a good idea to wait until after it and see if anything comes of it.
 
So, just as a point, the thread that was brought up about the previous discussion is now nearly a year old.

Anti-ziganism is not new anywhere in the world, and the widespread acceptance of inappropriateness of playing a Real World Race (or something that represents a real world race) is also not new. There's been an increase in awareness of it among white people over the last few decades (and especially since 2013—3 years ago—due to pressure on the Washington football team), but it is by no means a new discussion (let's not confuse when white people became aware of it with when the protests began on Native mascotization, which has been going on since at least the 1960s).

We may be moving at a glacial pace and we've been told to be "patient" but it is not a trivial point that we have named that race using what is frequently considered to be an ethnic slur (of one of the most persecuted groups in the world, no less) and it is within our power, as an organization, to change it. I'm not sure why being the one of the last major organizations to get that memo—after NERO even, of all groups—can be considered anything other than a point for serious self reflection.

We are mostly not Rromani. We are mostly of dominant groups relative to the Rromani. It seems like, even removing the cultural elements and the other items that could be changed or the possibilities for replacement, it should not be hard to Do The Right Thing™ and just change the name so that it is not representative of a slur applied to a real world marginalized group. We can fix the other issues later—and there are other issues—but this is something that could be fixed quickly and trivially.

It just seems like a minimum standard.
 
Last edited:
Muir said:
We've been discussing the racial sensitivity of Gypsies in particular here on the boards for several years, but it's up to the Owners as a whole to make changes to the game at a national level, and that is not a quick or easy process.

Chat with your owner, they may be able to tell you if something is already in progress.
Click to expand...

Emphasis mine. NERO is not run by committee. It's owned by one guy with near unilateral power. He can make those changes quickly. Alliance's strength is also a weakness. The Owners must vote for it for anything to change in a National level. I know on a chapter basis things can be done, San Francisco for example calling someone a Gypsy or Barbarian is an slur. Whereas they have local names that are more understanding.

Talk with your owner about these options, and having the Owners make the changes to the rules systems as quickly as possible. I personally agree that the name should be changed, and the races potentially reworked. I've advocated for that for a couple of years now. I strongly urge you to speak with your player rep, and put these issues on the forefront of your chapter owner concerns.
 
To add a few more cents, when I look at this issue, the following comes to mind:

1. What does it say about us as an organization that we use a racial slur as a name for a fantasy race and persist in doing so for years (decades) after it becomes clear that this is the case?

2. What does it say about us that said fantasy race is modeled on a real world race that is alive today and actively persecuted? One that I presume we don't as a national organization donate money to?

3. What does it say about us that we don't change at least as much as the name when it would take a matter of minutes to make the announcement and update the relevant documents?

4. What does it say about us that our solution to that problem is to say "well the [largely not Rrom] chapter owners can decide if it is a racial slur locally"?

5. What does it say about all of us that, knowing that we are using a slur for the name of a race and discussing that matter for years, that we continue to support having it in our games by not changing it?

I get that we are a distributed organization, I get that change can take time. I also think that when you have a situation where there is so clearly a Right Answer™ and a Right Thing To Do™ it is time for some serious self reflection if our excuse for not doing the right thing is "it takes a long time for owners to come to a consensus on anything."

We aren't talking about a matter of figuring out the problems of racial essentialism in LARP, solving world peace, figuring out how detailed one should be on a described search, or determining whether it is better to call damage on every swing. I would hope that this would be a relatively straightforward and noncontroversial matter.
 
That last announcement on the issue stated the name will be changing. Not that they're thinking out it, but that it's happening. They're probably just waiting to do it all at once with the race packet change, since the racial play also appears to be changing.

And, frankly, I think that's a good thing. This isn't the Washington Redskins here. Just changing the name wouldn't change the fundamentally incorrect way the race is played, so that also needs to go.
 
I just think it would be neat and brand-bolstering so to speak to also take the opportunity to make more of what Alliance presents by making what is old-hat, racist, and a pastiche of things come long ago out of the medeival high-fantasy genre, into something standalone unique, more interesting and more creatively fullfilling for the future.

So if changes are coming that are more than a name change, thats nothing but good news far as im concerned.
 
Hi Players,
A year has passed since I spoke in regards to this problem. We are moving in the correct direction, and are trying our best to make sure that there is more than 'just a name change' to reflect the best step forward in a progressive world.

That world is ever changing. I don't doubt that there will be a future time where other races that are played in our game are held under the same scrutiny. Alliance is making conscious decisions to put our best foot forward for this, and it my hope that we continue to do so into the future.

As other individuals have stated on this thread; this is not a single and unilateral decision. Nor is it a 'one vote and done.' It includes:

- Having the initial change approved.
- Formulate a group to create new content.
- Give them time to actually -create- that content (no one in Alliance is a paid employee, and all of us are fully aware that real life and real jobs come first.)
- Review that content with owners and CEO alike (sometimes multiple times to make sure changes are things people approve of). This includes an acceptance vote.
- Come up with a content plan in order to roll out the new race. (As opposed to being suddenly dropped into our world for no reason, leading to player unrest about how their beloved PC is now -suddenly- something else.)

This is not a short process. As you have seen, there have been other changes (the boards included) to bring a more positive environment to our game.

I am happy to say that this particular problem is most of the way through that process, and would like to thank that committee who was a part of putting it together.

For players, it is my request that you hang in there a little longer, and will be seeing changes likely before the end of 2016.

Sincerely,
Alison Buntemeyer
Alliance Chairman
 
If we recognize that it is sufficiently problematic that we are removing it, why not make the following announcement in the meantime, officially and at the national level (not in random comments by officials on the board):

We recognize that we currently have a race that is both based on a caricature and is named after a slur based on a real world group that experiences significant discrimination. We are currently in the process of permanently removing this race from the game and replacing it with something unique and amazing, but the process of putting this together is taking longer than expected. In the meantime, we are changing the name of the race IG from the racial slur to <pretty much anything else> and the name of their ability to <pretty much anything else>. We also ask that all local racial packets be updated to, as best as possible, remove elements drawn from Rrom cultures and that players pick a different IG race with new characters going forward until we get out the full set of changes and can remove the race entirely, due out in late 2016.​

That is by no means perfect. Better would be to just simply outright excise it until the new race can come into game or put a true moratorium in place. It would be, however, a good step and an acknowledgement. We could also prioritize fixing it faster, if we had the will to do so. We could also start taking a hard look at some of the other areas where we are weak, so that in the future we are a little more conscious, aware, and preemptive. We can take it as a wake up call to be better (such as, by way of example, starting to talk about the nature of racial essentialism in LARP, or taking a hard look at cultural elements we've borrowed, or choices in makeup—which was part of the changes done in said other LARP and something we haven't discussed as much here—but again: we can start with something that is small, uncomplicated, and unambiguously the right thing to be doing).

It's easy to say that "these things take time" when we aren't the ones who are impacted.

There should be no question at this point that the word in question is a slur, nor should it be considered new that this word is a slur or that it is problematic. To the degree that it isn't a slur or that Rromani use it, it still isn't appropriate for us to be using it. We may not be able to fix the deeper issues immediately, but why are we sacrificing—for years—doing what could be considered the minimal right thing in exchange for waiting to hypothetically do a better thing with an uncertain date?

What does it say about us?
 
Last edited:
It would say that Alliance is a national organization with hundreds of customers who make use of its product on a regular basis, who ensures that changes are done at a pace that is consistent and well-thought-out, with consideration towards the Owners who make significant investments into the game, and have the right to a say as to how those changes are implemented.

Nothing destroys a LARP organization faster than demonstrating a complete disregard for those who participate in that organization.
 
Ali's comment prior to your most recent is not a "random comment" it is the Alliance Chair responding to you, letting you know what the hold up is.

No one is saying (at least not here or loudly) that the word is ok or that it's not a slur or that we should keep it.

It's not a hypothetical thing, it's a thing that requires more work than you think it does or feel that it should.

It's fine that you have that opinion, but holding that opinion does not give you the right to denigrate and bad mouth the rest of the Alliance playerbase by implying that we aren't doing enough to get this changed in the timeframe that you (who you've said is not even impacted) think is appropriate.

It's a bad thing. It's getting fixed. That's a good thing.
 
Hi friends. I'm Samara, head of the team tasked with rewriting this race. I hear your concerns and I share them, so I wanted to introduce myself and tell you a little bit about the work that's gone into rectifying this problem and moving the game forward in a mindful, progressive way.

I've played the race for over ten years, having started my character knowing little about the real-life people we imitate. Over the years I began to educate myself on Roma history and culture, and in doing so became increasingly uncomfortable with our fantasy race as written. I began to advocate for respectful, nuanced portrayal within our game at the very minimum, through my own PC and through rewriting my chapter's race packet. When rumours started spreading that we might finally change the race (and not just the name) for the better, I jumped at the chance to be a part of the process.

My team's goal was to turn "Gypsies" into a proper Alliance fantasy race, providing Fortannis-relevant background and culture rather than relying on outdated and offensive real-life stereotypes. At the same time, we endeavoured keep the overall essence of the race intact, so those who love playing it may continue to do so in good conscience. After many lengthy brainstorming sessions, we went through the race packet paragraph by paragraph, painstakingly modifying and updating and tweaking and rewriting. We consulted as many outside scholarly sources as we could, to ensure we had considered all possible aspects of the project. The result is a race that is uniquely Fortannis-based and fully integrated into the world, whose gameplay is similar to its predecessor, but more nuanced and inviting an even higher calibre of roleplay. I truly hope you're as proud of it as we are.

The packet is finished and out of my team's hands. In her capacity as Alliance Chair, Alison is doing everything in her power to get this change approved and put into the game in a timely fashion. Change is slow, but steady, and requires continued patience and trust in those hard at work. If you'd like to help us advocate for that change, I urge you to talk to your chapter owner and encourage them to consider an early release date for the packet and mechanical changes. The sooner we can enact this change, the happier we all will be.
 
I was pushing for this change long ago, as many of you know. In fact, I insisted on it, and let the owners know I wanted this change and would not take no for an answer. Fortunately, they agreed with me. :)

But I also don't want to unilaterally make decisions like a dictator. Plus I also hate rules changes that come in spurts. I like all rules changes to come at once, rather than having constant updates that people have to relearn.

So that's why it was taking so long; because we're taking our time on the new rules.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top