One Crappy RPG for Kids
Last Sunday I ran a game of Kids, Castles, & Caves for my family. This is a very simple RPG that focuses on delivering a simple fantasy setting with rules that a young child can understand. It only uses a d6, and character classes and races are inseparable. It has a feel that is very similar to Basic D&D.
I have two issues with the game. The first is a matter of taste. The artwork is just plain bad. My eight year old daughter looked at the cover of children in the roles of a halfling, knight, and fairy and promptly declared “They look freaky!” She is right. They do look freaky, but that is forgivable because the cover has a childlike quality to it. It fits with the intention of the game.
The inside artwork though is this 3D computer model crap that so many publishers go with in order to make a product cheap. Not inexpensive, but cheap. I appreciate inexpensive, but I do not like cheap and there is a difference. I would have loved to have seen drawings done by kids for the artwork. A wizard sketched in crayon, or a dragon done in marker would have really captured the essence of the game. Instead it has these crappy and soulless 3D models.
But the part of the game that really irks me is that there is character a class/race for fairies. Fairies are small, can fly with their wings, turn invisible at will, and will not fight but instead put monsters to sleep with their magic wands. Awesome! Not all of the PC classes/races are about the use of violence as their sole means for defeating monsters! As a parent I really like that.
There is just one catch: Fairies can only be girls. Now there is no rule that says fairies can only be played by girls, but that is not what bothers me about this description. What bothers me about it is that it creates an association between one’s sex and one’s role. My little ones (one girl and one boy) are being told by this game that girls do not fight. To a certain extent they are being told that girls use trickery and deceit in order to deal with conflicts based upon the powers of the fairies.
That is bullshit!
Maybe I am just getting old, but this is the kind of crap that makes me want to keep my daughter away from RPGs. No way am I running the game with that rule! In fact, I am making it a point to have strong warrior women and feminine caretaker men in the gameworld. You can bet your ass that there will be boy fairies in the game, and I will not tolerate any cheap shots at that statement if you are inclined to comment on it in that way.
Granted the game only costs me five dollars for the PDF, but I cannot recommend this game to parents. It is poorly done, and in my opinion sexist. A good editor and a revision would salvage it, and I hope that the publisher looks at the overall product with a keen eye towards improving it. The game is very simple and easy for kids to learn, but that does not mean that kids should learn the unintended lessons it teaches: Cut corners on your work by doing things cheap, and girls should not fight.
Ugh!
I would like to play devil’s advocate.
One of the main themes in traditional fantasy RPGs, aside from sexism, is racism. Elves and Dwarves don’t like each other and a Half-elf will find it difficult to fit in with both sides of their lineage. In most versions of D&D, Rangers get specific bonuses or abilities based on their hate when dealing with a specific race. So along side your chain mail bikini wearing warriors and your female only fairies, you are thrown into the thick of another heavy subject as well.
I would also argue that slavery is peppered throughout fantasy RPGs, but I’m not here to argue.
Neither am I advocating sexism, racism or slavery, but I feel it shouldn’t be ignored.
I personally would not take these elements out of the game for my kids. If anything it’s an opportunity to teach them about these issues; a chance to shape how they treat others and deal with these subjects, rather than shelter them, before they are tossed to the wolves of life.
No matter what your age and whether you play RPGs or not, these themes are going to be in your face. One can choose to look the other way or deal with it head on.
In this case, your online review of the product as being inferior seems to be your best course of action, second to getting your money back. Also, your simple fix of male fairies makes perfect sense.
I’m not sure I would emphasize the extreme opposite of certain roles, since the three girls that I Dungeon Master for are quite cutthroat without needing to be prompted. Strong warrior women, indeed.
To wrap this up, I realize your comment about keeping your kids away from RPGs was most likely said in anger towards the product, it’s just that the remark felt like you were channeling Pat Pulling.
I do hope that you continue to pass the torch of role playing and perhaps use it as an opportunity to teach them, rather than take the game away because you think it’s bad.
Re: fairies are for girls only – what a strange (and bad) design choice. Are there any boy-only classes?
@burnedfx: There is a big difference between having elements of racism, sexism, and oppression such as slavery in a fantasy gameworld and encouraging children to play racists, sexists, and oppressors such as slavers. This game does the latter and not the first.
Traditional fantasy having dwarves and elves disliking each other was usually a literary device for the heroes to overcome, not to emulate. Rangers getting bonuses for attacking certain types of monsters is arguably not racism, because in traditional RPGs they were monsters and not “I’m actually a misunderstood potential PC race.” The traditional RPG treated monsters like an opposing species. Going with the logic presented in your comment cobras and mongooses are racists. They are not. They are competing species. Huge difference.
Pat Pulling? Wow! Did you make a leap in association there! Having written about RPGs for years now, won awards, and being published as a contributing author for two very well received RPG products I obviously endorse RPGs. Plus in this article I never said that RPGs were harmful (which is the basis of Pulling’s lunacy).
One crappy RPG did not make me throw my hands up and say “What about the children??? We have to protect the children!!!” It made me write this, and it made me change the material. My children are still going to be exposed to RPGs.
And because I care about teaching my children to do the right thing, I’m going to point out to them what is wrong with the content of an RPG (or any product) and explain why. I don’t throw my kids to the wolves. I teach them to slay the wolves at their door.
@Mark Cunningham: Nope, and if there were I do not know if that would be a good thing either. This seems to be one of those situations where the designers put their nostalgia for “old school” RPGs before their intended customers, and the product suffered because of that choice.
Oh I agree, having boys-only classes would be just as bad as the existing girls-only fairy class. I was curious about the unconscious bias of the designer. I’ve seen enough Barbie and Disney movies to see good male fairy characters, but at the same time, Disney got some bad rep by not allowing male fairy characters in their online MMO and instead added a different race for male characters…
@Patrick Benson: I completely agree about the difference you’ve stated. My original comments were not suggesting that kids learn by being the racist sexist slavers, which is a leap in association as well.
I also agree with the point about the themes being a literary device. Why are there no male fairies? Where did they all go? Something is afoot and the PCs must find out!
You make the analogy of a mongoose and cobra and also suggest a Ranger’s ability is not racism. I could see that angle, but RPG tradition dictates their hunted foes were orcs and giants, who everyone might call “Monsters.” Perhaps the orcs are misunderstood or these large humanoids just aren’t treated right by the “little people” out of fear. They can’t all be evil, just like not all humans are good.
Everyone may call them monsters, but I think there is a story there as well, based on people judging them by their greenskin or towering presence.
Again, I agree that there is a huge difference when you are comparing them to animal predators and prey, but I don’t believe it’s a fair comparison. After all, wouldn’t a racist want you to believe that their hate is just directed at “barbaric animals,” so it’s okay and just like nature?
Okay, here is where I would like to be more clear. The above statement is not suggesting you’re a racist. Also, when I was originally reading your remark about how you may be “getting old” and that crap like this makes you want to keep your daughter away from RPGs, I did think of Pat Pulling.
Yes, she was a misguided lunatic. Although, I am sure she meant well from her heart and wasn’t looking to ruin someones day.
Along those lines, I was not foolishly believing you were banning RPGs from your daughter in a “Protect the Children!” fashion.
To emphasize, I didn’t confuse her lunancy with your remark. None of this was an attack on you. I didn’t need a laundry list of credentials and even if you didn’t have the history you bring up, I never once got the impression that you were a horrible parent or worse, the reincarnation of Pat about to revive the organization BADD!
I did check out the “About this site” section before commenting. One of the focuses of this blog, as stated there, is ranting, letting off steam and “Why so serious?”
I simply don’t know you, aside from what you have written on this post, and was responding to that.
I’m not backtracking here just because you’re presenting your resume, if anything, I chalked it up to you being very upset about the garbage you purchased and even stated such. It’s one of the focuses you state in the about section, right?
If anything, your comment sparked a lot of thoughts in my head and prompted me to comment on your post.
@burnedfx: Regarding how serious I am here, trust me when I say I am not losing any sleep over any of this. When I write something here though I’m going to respond, and I’m going to defend my positions because otherwise there was no fucking point in stating them.
Not taking this blog too seriously is my way of saying that site is not a business. It is personal, and therefore I’m not trying to build a huge following. I’m being me. Not everyone is going to like me, and I am cool with that. I don’t like everyone. That is just plain old human nature. We still can co-exist.
Regarding orcs and giants being people – well that is a modern RPG concept and not a traditional one IMO. The traditional concept is that they are humanoid monsters. They eat humans and enslave them. They are a competing species. Racism is about humans hating humans. Competing species are not, and by definition cannot be, racists.
So are you going by the traditional RPG approach (example being that all orcs are evil, not perceived, but innately born evil), or the modern RPG approach (an orc can be good)? The original monster manuals assigned alignments to entire species, and that was that.
I as a parent do not want my kids playing the Kids, Castles, & Caves game as written. The reason is because my children are still at an age where they are susceptible to suggestions. Their brains are that way for a reason, which is to encouraging rapid learning. This evolutionary advantage also has an unintended consequence, which is that a child may not be able to keep crap out (such as false memories created by unethical counselors hired by the prosecutors during the infamous McMartin witch hunt of the 80s). It is my job to make sure the crap doesn’t hit them during the crucial years of development, and my comments about this game are aimed at the crap in it and not RPGs in general.
@Patrick Benson: I didn’t think you were losing any sleep, but I do feel that my comments have unintentionally hit a nerve.
I do appreciate the conversation, but was never interested in upsetting you.
All of last week I was reading random blogs in regards to “Teach Your Kids To Game” week and the title of your post on the RPG Alliance feed caught my attention. The post inspired thoughts and who better to share them with than the person who sparked them?
I think we will just have to disagree with our definition of racism, since we are both philosophically decided what racism really means in a fantasy world full of elves and dwarves who hate each other and whether a Ranger is just a racist in disguise or a hunter of evil creatures.
Since it’s a fantasy world, the goblins could be spawned from some sort of black ooze in the underdark or perhaps they are tribal creatures that live in the wild with a wife and kids just protecting their forest from the intruding elves.
I was referencing AD&D in regards to Rangers, but was also being general since there are so many variables, including what the DM says is so in “his world.”
Strictly speaking of D&D, a monster manual might define a creature with a specific alignment, but I’d disagree with “that was that.” Just as you changed the book on the fly to provide male fairies, I’ve always felt that the books are a guideline, not written in stone.
In no way am I saying Kids, Castles & Caves should be given a second chance. If the game is flawed from the start, of course you wouldn’t want to expose your child to such nonsense, especially at an influential age.
Get your money back.
@burnedfx: Dude, you compared a gamer to Pat Pulling in your original statement. Of course you were going to hit a nerve with any gamer who recognizes that name. Not exactly the best way to make a first impression.
Who cares? It isn’t like I’ve never been called worse.
Back to the conversation. Maybe this will help put what I am saying into context.
racism: a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one’s own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
The definition clearly states “various human races” and that distinction is important. What you are describing is speciesism.
specieism: the assigning of different values or rights to beings on the basis of their species membership
Now one can make the argument that while racism is never justified, speciesism can be justified. Such as the milking and butchering of cows. Why? Because there were no cows until humans bred them into existence from their wild ancestors. Same thing with every other domesticated animal. This does not justify cruelty to animals, but does a cow have the same rights as a human being? No. I cannot own a human being, but I can own a cow.
Note: I believe that the humane slaughtering of animals is not cruelty, and is certainly less horrific than the method used by say lions.
Once we get into the fictional concept of other intelligent species occupying the same region as humans you start getting into an entirely more complex situation. What do the other species represent as literary devices? If the author is using them as a way to describe certain aspects of humanity, then I can see how the speciesism as racism argument applies. That giant is attacked for no other reason but because he is a giant, and the ranger is a racist. But if the ranger kills giants on sight because giants like to eat human babies or something else that makes them monstrous then that isn’t racism! That is a literary device for showing how cruel and savage the world is and for establishing what a ranger is (i.e. – the guy who keeps the giants away from the babies).
Regardless, I think it is pretty clear based upon the original ranger rules as I remember them that the designers were not saying “rangers hate certain monsters like racists hate other humans”. I interpret those rules to have been written with the intention of saying “rangers are trained to be specialized to take on certain monsters”. In fact, and I will have to dig out my older D&D books to see if I can find this but I do not remember the word hate being used at all in the original text (I could be wrong on that). Even if it was, I would interpret that meaning hate as in “farmers hate chicken hawks for eating all of the chickens” and not “farmers have an irrational hatred of chicken hawks just because they are chicken hawks.”
@Patrick Benson: My first impression, having not read anything else of yours, was . . this is the kind of crap that makes me want to keep my daughter away from RPGs.
It felt extreme. It was not just Kids, Castles & Caves, but RPGs.
Pat Pulling wasn’t an underhanded remark, it was pointing out the extreme nature of that sentence. . .it’s just that the remark felt like you were channeling Pat Pulling. My feelings weren’t wrong. That’s what I felt and that’s who ran through my mind and I felt the comment was an appropriate response to your statement.
I didn’t need to give you an out by mentioning you were probably just upset; you are clearly angry throughout the article.
And I care, because if I’m going to insult you, I’d like to be in on it!
So, yes, in regards to the fun conversation:
I don’t disagree with those definitions at all, it’s the fact that we are throwing sentient beings that don’t exist into the equation. You’re using a dictionary that was written by humans in a world only filled with humans, who are racist towards each other.
I’ve never played a Star Trek RPG, but if it’s anything like the show I’d imagine the extreme opposite to play out, seek out new intelligent life . . .rather than assuming all orcs are bad, even that one that all the other orcs pick on for being a vegetarian.
It will of course come down to the DM who decides if this orc is a thing, misunderstood, evil with no heart, a plant eating outcast, a combination of other elements, etc
I’m internally groaning at using him as an example, but think Drittz. Drow are chaotic evil according to the MM. Yet, Drittz is chaotic good. I have only played 4e a few times at an Encounters event, but two of the players were playing “good” drow. His legacy changed the face of drow and whether that’s something you may not want for your game or fully embrace in your game, it comes down to the DM and how he presents them.
Personally I like my drow evil and conniving, tricky and deceitful. You might be able to arrange a deal, but they’re not a good race.
Dwarves, elves, half-orcs, these are all are races, not species. Although, before that they were “Classes.”
From AD&D, in regards to the Ranger class, it says humanoid-type creatures of the “giant class”, listed hereafter and then goes on to list bugbears through goblins, kobolds and orcs, etc
They neither call it a race or species and refer to them as a “giant class” twice (The quotes are not mine). This is of course before dwarves and elves were able to choose classes, since they were considered a class.
@burnedfx: Odd coincidence – tomorrow’s scheduled post was written about Star Trek.
[…] do not actually think of dwarves that way, but after a bumpy exchange with Patrick my mind kept going back to the subject of racism in a fantasy world. Looking up more information on […]