Reconnecting the Dots: A Response to the King of Average about Frosthaven | Good Trouble

[@libreysoberana3823]

I've been watching a lot of your videos since coming over from Qüackalope (Español) and I think this is definitely one of my favorites. Wonderful presentation of ideas and solutions. I appreciate your presence in this space. ¡Mucho éxito, hermano! ¡Pa'lante! 🇵🇷 El azul de la bandera es azul cielo ;)

[@yellowmeeplereads]

23:13 is when it hit me. I played through the Gloomhaven campaign and did not notice any harmful cultural references (as person of colour in North America with little knowledge of indigenous culture). I read through Kickstarter update 80 with moderate encouragement on designers wanting to make their game better by their yard stick, without noticing any offensive generalization in the last sentence. But hey! In both cases, if enough people are connecting those dots (as you said) and are hurt by it, in both cases it should be corrected/clarified to make for a more welcoming environment.

[@ShelfStories]

Yep! Passionate people on all sides are prone to their own associations, depending on their upbringing. It's worth the effort to show empathy, get to know those associations, and avoid the worst ones.

[@Soccer67]

I guess my question, when discussing people that claim to be 'hurt' by such portrayals or references, is whether that feeling of hurt is organic/innate or conversely whether it is borne of outside influences/inputs. Sources that have encouraged those people to more consciously be looking for those instances that could, if looked at in a certain light be considered 'hurtful.' In other words, have these instances always been hurtful to those people irrespective of outside inputs, or are they only now being seen in far more instances because these people have been taught/'educated' to see those instances as 'hurtful' even though they very likely didn't see them that way before.

[@ShelfStories]

@@Soccer67 This is an amazing question that deserves its own video. Thank you very much for asking it. I'd say some moderate folks feel that culturally sensitive folks have been "indoctrinated" into thinking this way. Into seeing harm where there is no harm. I absolutely, 100% agree that this is an issue. If someone tells me that red M&Ms are racist, I am absolutely going to question why they are making that association. There are ways to address problems that only present new problems. It's like a pendulum. For a long time, the pendulum was swung way, way towards silencing folks who saw harm, telling them their associations were not valid. Aunt Jemima was ALWAYS a problem. Blackface was ALWAYS a problem. Essentialized races in D&D and other fantasy fiction were ALWAYS a problem. Now we're speaking up about it. Has the pendulum swung too far the other way? I am willing to hear that argument. If anything, I want to find a middle ground. I wouldn't want to go back to the way things were.

[@jacobstein5678]

This is such a great conversation. Love the whole good trouble series. This highlights how we can have real learning through conversation moving forward. Thank you

[@beornthebear9023]

Thanks for a thoughtful video like always. Lots of great points made made here with kindness that hopefully will be received as such.

[@tracybenbrook3507]

Thank you for this - it was much needed.

[@hmuzza3166]

King of Average sent me here. Great to see respectful engagement. Nicely done.

[@ShelfStories]

I try my best.

[@soapmonkey5205]

Thanks for this! I’m glad someone responded to KoA’s video.

[@ACosmonaut]

Thank you, as always, Jason for your perspective.

[@spot7006]

Thanks for this. I saw KoA's video and immediately felt like there was a disconnect between what was said in the update and what was heard. The one sentence in the Frosthaven update that was problematic ("We've already...") could have been left out altogether and the update would have likely landed differently. It would've been enough to say what was already stated about getting a refund if you disagree. That sentence initially didn't sound problematic to me, but your points about connecting the dots and making associations helped me to see how easily it could be misinterpreted. As an aside, you may want to reconsider using the word you chose around 36:40 to mean underpowered characters.

[@ShelfStories]

Very fair! That is causal ableism that I have heard around the table. Thank you for pointing it out. I will make a note in the vid notes.

[@knighthawk3749]

I am not so sure that certain individuals would not have found another sentence to pick on. They always do. Case in point, tan suit. So kerfuffle was about the message while pretending to be about the messenger.

[@BeyondSolitaire]

Thanks for this! I have absolutely played RPGs and felt like I had to choose between my character's race and class, and it always bothered me, but I never quite made the full connection. Sometimes you just have to hear someone talk things through until they click.

[@ShelfStories]

Down with essentialized racial stats! Background, ancestry, upbringing wins!

[@darkroomzen]

You consistently give some of the most well spoken, well informed, and thoughtful remarks on gaming culture. Thanks Jason.

[@ShelfStories]

That means a lot, my friend. Thank you!

[@marioabadfernandezdelacigo8893]

I LOVE watching your videos. They are full of wisdom, tolerance, and thoughtful criticism. I'm really happy to see that things are changing, slowly but changing. Thank you for this.

[@ShelfStories]

Thank you very much!

[@01hornsfan]

Jason, I'm glad you tackle these issues. Until I started watching your videos, I wasn't aware of any relationship between real life concerns about race and human relations AND the game I see on the table. Your videos have been quite enlightening and your presentation style is refreshing. To me, you have established yourself as a voice worth listening to in this area of the hobby and I absolutely hope you don't stop making Good Trouble videos...even the ones in your car! They are "must watch" videos for me.

[@ShelfStories]

Just getting started :)

[@RoomandBoardReviews]

THANK YOU. 100% This is the video I was hoping for. I wanted to post my own video response to KoA, because while I appreciate his stance of "don't be a jerk", leaders in the industry, like Isaac, need to continue to step forward and pave the way towards inclusivity and diversity in gaming - and be aware of these icky co-opted micro aggressions. But also as another white youtuber, I felt like this would be better heard from a POC and I didn't want to make a response and feel like I was trying to boost my SEO off the backs of real world harm (plus while I have been educating myself, I don't think I'm able to address people's white fragility in as understanding and clear a way as you have in this video haha). Absolutely love your discussion on this, I think you break this down so well and hopefully will help those who don't understand what's wrong see other people's point of view. Really looking forward to going through your archives and watching more of this series.

[@ShelfStories]

Thanks for feeling like it was important to speak up, but being mindful about method. Hopefully this isn't the last time we interact!

[@RoomandBoardReviews]

@@ShelfStories Absolutely. I rarely end up hitting the notifications bell, but smashed it here, haha. I think what you're doing here is so valuable and looking forward to amplifying it in whatever way I can.

[@josephpilkus1127]

Hello, Jason! Great episode...thank you so very much for what you do !

[@raortiz73]

Awesome presentation. I think the greater topic Isaac was presenting was lost based on the awkwardly worded phrase about the refund. I love how you break that down. The same way many jumped to a certain association when it wasn't said in the KS update is the same way many of us jump to a certain association with the way characters are presented in games. Don't deny us our intuition. Well argued.

[@ShelfStories]

I really appreciate that you were able to follow that part of the argument. I always worry whether I'm communicating a point clearly. Thank you for engaging.

[@TabletopHaven]

I appreciate you man. Thanks for everything you do.

[@ShelfStories]

I appreciate you too! It matters that you were kind enough to leave a comment. Helps me make more.

[@robinrising9929]

Koa made the same line of criticism about putting an inch of cloth on the cover of tiny epic dungeon to cover up some cleavage, and changing the other character from adventuring in a thong to pants. This seems to be less about making a point and more a push back against positive representation across the board from his channel because of the way it makes him feel

[@vedantapioneers]

Thank you so very much Jason! This piece, along with the rest of your “Good Trouble” series, is absolutely incredible. I thank you so much for continual education. You are actively making a difference in our community and I deeply appreciate it.

[@AlperAslan1980]

Jason, thank you so much. I’m facing „everyday racism“ and being careful about what we say and how we behave is the only cure. What I mean by „everyday racism“ is quite simple. Racism that you cannot see clearly. It’s not that obvious. It is inbetween the lines we speak. It is in the subtle questions we ask. It’s about how we’re pronouncing words. And so on. The kind of racism that comes as a joke. „I just said that for fun! Don’t be too serious!“ I’m tired of that. And I love you for what you are bringing to our attention. I love board games for 35 years now. Never thought about racism (or anything similar) in board games until I realized what the Tokens in „Puerto Rico“ symbolise. And then I realised how full of gaming world is with prejudice and stigmata… It’s time to talk. And not take these things for granted. Thank you so much. I’m a huge fan!

[@ShelfStories]

People find what you are talking about threatening. Like we’re using it as a strategy to take control, take everyone’s fun. I’m glad I have more voices with me, saying this is serious and let’s work out some solutions. Thank you.

[@rontalkstabletop]

Good video. On a personal note, when I tell people I went to the University of Michigan I don't know how many times that statement was followed up with asking if I played football there. All the time by a white person. Like that's the only reason the big black guy can go to University of Michigan. I got an electrical engineering degree there by the way. I don't think people take the time to really think about what they're saying or asking.

[@ShelfStories]

Yes yes yes. This is exactly the kind of thing I had in mind. If this video makes one person rethinks and learns to avoid that kind of association, I am a happy man. Thank you very much for consistently engaging, my friend. I really appreciate it.

[@sador42]

@@ShelfStories I made this exact mistake once myself, a black person I worked with when I was younger told me he had 5 kids, and I said (ignorantly) "you could have your own basketball team", and they way he looked at me, wow, he educated me so much, and others I worked with at the time did as well. Sometimes us white folk need to be talked to :)

[@morganmollwing2273]

@@sador42 If he had one more kid, you could have said hockey team?

[@chopblocker89]

Honest question, why do you believe these people think that football is the ONLY reason you could attend University? Do you think they would ask a large white man the same question? I think there's bias on both ends, and we need to work on both ends!

[@chopblocker89]

@13:00 the issue is, in favor of KoAs argument, "harmful" is extremely loose and subjective and we are in a culture where too many things are "harmful" (Most people use racist, homophobic, etc .). Dr. Seuss is an easy example. I don't completely disagree with Isaacs update, but KoA is reading it the same way you read into the Vermin's data points. I don't even think "crude knives and bows" is a data point for Native Americans....it's a data point for primitive civilizations.

[@Halibut86]

I appreciate the respectful dialogue, and your sharing of personal stories. I would normally gloss over this type of video. This is how you have a real discussion, not by attacking people (alienating people/groups) or speaking in platitudes and generalizations. While I disagree with your main argument, I'm glad I listened to get some perspective. Fantasy creatures are not translations of real life. I like the vermlings cause they're cool, quick, unique, and maybe a bit dangerous with their gnarly teeth. There is absolutely no avoiding certain creatures being more powerful at certain things. You wouldn't expect a rat to lift a giant boulder, but it may be an everyday occurrence for a sentient rock. These are just strict physical differences that are plain to see. When you start drawing real-world parallels along with negative stereotypes, You are the one that's being harmful. It's one step away from conspiracy theory. Isaac is not a professional writer, and it shows in the original Gloomhaven. The narrative is one of the weakest parts of the whole package. They're simply his most creative ideas for player avatars. Most of which have to be bipeds to be relatable to the average player. You can actually already see some tweaks coming, with the new playable creatures (Lurker, Algox, Unfettered) which are non-humanoid and can't realistically have racial parallels pulled for them. The bad: Official Post pushing an agenda of race, bias, virtue signaling. Drawing attention to a non-issue for Gloomhaven and putting Frosthaven in a negative light. Especially suggesting people should cancel their preorders is a direct attack on the game's own community; I personally backed this game for its gameplay and would never consider cancelling despite the creator's personal views. Please realize that these are not issues for the vast majority of players. We love the game, we want more players, we want to be welcoming to all gamers. The good: More eyes on the narrative can only improve it. You can already feel more compelling elements in Jaws. Controversial posts generate free advertisement.

[@ShelfStories]

“I like Vermlings because they’re cool, quick, and unique, and maybe a bit dangerous with their gnarly teeth”. That’s cool. You’re probably looking at them from the point of view of their player characters. They’re cool to play. I am looking at their fluff, because I’m that type of gamer who inhales all the fluff. I can assure you, the word “cute” does not appear in the description of Vermling society. Associating the practice of perceiving negative stereotypes in fantasy to conspiracy theory - as you say, one step away - is not respectful of the different people that will play at a table. You see what you see, “cuteness”. I see what I see, an appropriation of the “savage” stereotype. We’re both right. Isaac, as the writer, acknowledges that he has accomplished the feat of putting dots together so we, as different people, see the things we both see. Good! Any worthwhile art SHOULD evoke different reactions from different people, reactions which will draw from real world experience. How boring would it be if we all saw the same things? He wants to rearrange the dots so 1) I don’t see a negative parallel as much, and 2) we both see something even cooler. It’s good. Don’t worry- we won’t take your stuff away ;)

[@melissajankowski1809]

Another thought provoking discussion! I learned something here about essentialism and what to consider if you create cultures in a fantasy world. I like how you parse out the points of discussion. It reminds me that it is important to fully receive a person’s perspective before making up my mind about them and their opinion. In fact, even leaving space open to change my feelings about them. Sometimes it is easy to hold a snap judgment on someone because you’ve already made up your mind before they even speak based on assumptions. I’m looking forward to the next video where you talk with KoA and checking out the other panel discussion that included Jeremy and OFPG.

[@ajurban2010]

Great example with the Orc example and your example would make the game different and more interesting. After a while one gets bored with the standard statistics which forces you to be a type of character with the limits that can't be adjusted.

[@ostbear9687]

11:30 - Sure, he didn't explicitly say that, but there isn't really a lot of difference between "[not] co-opting real-world terms or ideas that may be harmful to players." and "Frosthaven will not have culture derived from the real world, or that you can draw parallels to." But whatever... 13:56 - This criticism feels AMAZINGLY disingenuous. The very first Vermling that you're likely introduced to doesn't look like a shaman, or is in a field surrounded by trees. The very first one is in a box with a brain on it, and they're clearly telepathic. I hate it when creators try to pick and choose, so this bothered me immediately. And then the parallels; Again, really critical, the first Vermling you meet is a psychic rat that is depicted as living in the sewers. And the text "...weak-willed - easily controlled by more powerful races with the right combination of pandering and intimidation" isn't a commentary on my people... It's a commentary on -- wait for it -- rats. Because, that's how you train rats. So if for some reason you go to a blog (??? Why not the starting card?) for info, you'll see that text about them being "scavengers" and that they will "eat the flesh of the dead." Wanna guess what creature does that? I'll give you a hint, it's the one the Vermlings look like... 18:30 - Yeah. One of those things is dealing with the repercussions of prejudice if you have a Vermling in your party. A fantastic lesson I got to teach my half brother. 22:00 - Seeing meaning is fine. We absolutely do all do it. But what you're talking about here easily becomes that bland thing you insist you're not doing. 24:00 - And this for me is where the video really falls apart. I was not happy about the disingenuous thing, but whatever. But now you're saying you didn't make the association... Except at the beginning of the video you did make the association and you agreed with KoA... So were you pandering at 6:00 or 24:00? 24:50 - Yeah. There are things I don't want to be triggered by. I was abused emotionally and physically as a child by people in authority over me. It's not my favorite thing to have brought up. But it does get brought up. A lot. In comics, videogames, books, movies, you name it. And you know what? It should be. We need to talk about these things. We need to have these conversations. *I* need to have these conversations. And yeah, it is triggering... But y'know what? That's life. And this right here? This is what we're worried about. Because as much as you're saying it's not going to get watered down... It kinda seems like you're talking about watering it down. 26:00 - Like... say, rats? Living in sewers? 26:34 - Woops. The Visigoths were originally a migratory people. They also had a history with the Romans where treaties were made and broken at convenience, or as means to take advantage of the Visigoths... Any of this sounding familiar? But even if it didn't... You see the trouble there, right? Now anyone who can trace their lineage back could just as easily -- and with merit -- take offense. 28:00 - ... I feel like you haven't played the game. Like, no spoilers, buuuut this is almost ripped from Gloomhaven. 30:40 - Except Isaac LITERALLY made that parallel. That's not even a "connecting dots" thing. He literally said that and literally made those comparisons. 33:40 - Ugh, this is a whole thing. Making accessible but also vibrant worlds is hard. It's really hard. It's especially hard within the context of board games. Guys like me? I will endlessly read the backstory of basically anything. I watched and read every single "pre-op" clip from Metal-Gear: Twin Snakes Easily 10 hours. Why? Because I'm a huge dork. My wife and my sister-in-law? Fuck no. We can barely get them to sit down and Gloomhaven without them being on their phones. It's a huge problem. And there are players across the spectrum like this. So whatever game you make, it has to be accessible to both the uber dorks (me) and the kind-of paying attention (wife). So yes, you use generalizations. But -- and this is important -- my wife isn't rampantly stupid. She KNOWS not every single character from a given race is exactly the same. She knows that, I know that, heck, I'm sure you know that too. I understand that generalizations aren't great, and I understand it's lazy story-telling... But they're accessible, and they work. And the best part? You can turn them on their head. Something Gloomhaven did expertly several times. 35:50 - So, to preface this, I hate this ridiculous apples to oranges comparison but whatever... If you love orcs, and you love orc wizards, but you REALLLLLY want that -2 gone? Then you talk to the DM and make adjustments. The thing is, for D&D, a big part of that game is the campaigns you can purchase. And those campaigns follow a collective story... And in that collective story Orcs are brutish fighters who fight. And that's good to know that, because if you're about to fight an orc, it's good to give your players a base hint. "We're fighting orcs? K that's going to mean serious damage up close and personal, so let's see if we can keep a distance barrier between us." 36:40 - Gimp is a derogatory term used to describe someone with a physical disability. But I digress. Yes, there will always be people who are like this. No matter what. My BIL plays at 100% full optimization and nothing else. You bring a Half-Orc Wizard? He's going to roll his eyes. Halfling Barbarian? He's going to roll his eyes. Teifling Monk? Eyes. They roll. That pressure doesn't come from the game though, that comes from players who see the game in terms of stat optimization. I'm playing a Dragonborn Rogue/Ranger with a Heavy Crossbow... And you know what? I'm killing it. None of my racial stats lend themselves to a traditional rogue... but the other day I killed a paladin 5 levels above me because my high strength made using my athletics skill a breeze and I was able to get to a high perch where I couldn't be touched and I could just make pot shots allllll day long. Different races/species do things better than others. Leopards are better over short distances than tigers. Bears are stronger than wolves. Owls are more stealthy than Hippos. This is how differences play out. It isn't lazy or racist or *sigh* racial essentialism. It's just the biology of the world that's been created. Are there people who break those molds in that system? You bet... But I can't imagine you didn't already know that. 37:00 - How is it not more compelling to say you played an Orc wizard who defied the odds and broke boundaries of what the race is generally capable of? 37:40 - You. Just. Did. Tell. Those. Stories. Like, while you're saying you can't tell those stories? You were literally showing artwork from people who are clearly telling those stories. There was nothing stopping them from making an Orc Sorcerer/Wizard/Whatever and a lithe orc fu- I mean bard, so what's stopping you? 38:00 - Maybe you've just had bad DMs? Because, I've run games and sat in campaigns that have done this exact thing, using RAW btw. Right now I'm playing a campaign with an Orc bard who plays a magic lute (it's weird you went immediately to intellectually bankrupt on drums) but also cleaves heads with his axe like a champ. "Once again, Gloomhaven is not racist; it has racial essentializing which is bad." Shelf Stories... please explain this to me, because that seems like a distinction without a difference. You're talking about how bad racial essentializing is. You swapped out "black" for "Orc" drawing a direct connection... So... if Racial essentializing is racist -- as you illustrated -- how is Gloomhaven not racist by doing that? 43:10 - lolwut? So... How is setting up stories where people are now defined entirely by how they grew up truly any better? We're trading racial essentialism for a cast system now? How is that any better? Thanks for the video. I've got a lot to think about, and I appreciate being educated on this subject. Would love responses to any of this if you have the time.

[@ShelfStories]

Thank you for watching the video and taking careful notes. Seems like a lot of my points hit some nerves for you. It's honestly a bit much for me to go through in the KZbin comments, given that I feel that I've addressed many of these concerns elsewhere, here in the comments. I can only offer the overall interpretive key that I want more games, not less. I want cooler games, not bland games. If someone wants to kill little Inox babies in their FH games, they can go for it and that option will be there. The proof will be when Frosthaven actually lands. I have confidence that Isaac will craft a narrative that will serve multiple audiences.

[@zwara81]

great video! thanks. wanna thank you for time and work you put into videos

[@bayne6210]

Fantastic video, and a great examination.

[@CarlosRodriguez-ez3ls]

Thank you Jason for all you do! Keep making me think. 🤔

[@jaredemery6189]

Thanks for this reply to KOA. I watched his video and actually agreed with a lot of what he said, but your critical analysis of his reply has actually clarified a lot for me and I feel that I have better understood what Isaac is saying. I didn't get it before. This is a great explanation. Thanks for the video. I appreciate it.

[@ShelfStories]

I appreciate you giving an alternate perspective a chance. Thank you!

[@ophirgonen1772]

Thank you for taking the time to explain Isaac's point of view. Gave me something to think about!

[@IceWater7227]

Dude! Thanks for the 'Ancestry and Culture' DnD supplement recommendation! It's blowing my mind a little... A game I've been running for over 3 years is winding to a close and I will 100% be using this for my next game. Thanks again!

[@ShelfStories]

It's really good! I'm hoping to have the authors on my show relatively soon.

[@natew.7951]

Thank you for doing this video.

[@ShelfStories]

You're welcome! I got a notification in one of my other videos that you wanted me to do this. KZbin locked me out of responding, but I was going to let you know that I was way ahead of you on making a video :).

[@natew.7951]

@@ShelfStories yeah, I laughed to myself when I saw that. I included a link to KOAs video which is probably why KZbin blocked it. Then I get a notification about this video and I was happy.

[@ShelfStories]

@@natew.7951 Ah ok. I block incoming links. Too many bots linking porn!

[@terriblegames]

about a third of the way through here - maybe worth mentioning since you posit that the 2nd half was more against "wokeness" the original title card and title of the video was "WOKEhaven" and was later changed. Just food for thought.

[@ShelfStories]

I considered mentioning that. However, I think the idea was that the video was posted in the original title, but then changed in response to feedback and not just an intentional troll. I am willing to take that at face value. If a further discussion happens, I will certainly ask about it.

[@TheKingofAverage]

I have appologized (and am again) for the mistake, drove home the very next day when I saw rumblings of it causing issue over my lunch break from work to change it. My entire video is a call for kindness to those who haven't done anything wrong and to hope that the industry is not afraid to touch on culture, religion or anything else and instead feel empowered to tackle tough subjects in a mature way to help start a push forward (was always in the title) our little culture around this industry for positive change. Only 13 minutes into the video so I apologize if I'm tackling something already said, just happened to scroll down and saw this so wanted to clarify here (and everywhere I see it) that I am sorry and meant nothing by it. It never matched the actual content of the video which calls for a harder push on cultural issues like race than even what Isaac is doing. Sadly it upset a lot of people that brought in some nasty baggage from others that have used to term and that was not intended. Again sorry about that!

[@abihuynh]

@@TheKingofAverage “my entire video is a call for kindness” ... you really can’t see what harm your response has caused? Just looking at your comments should show you the kind of culture you’re promoting. People congratulating are the same who are dismissive of there being any issue of representation and actively sealioning arguments about inclusivity.

[@Tsotanga2]

Excellent commentary Jason. And so many interesting conversations (from many perspectives) in the comments below. I encourage everyone to take a look at some of the back-and-forths to explore some really interesting ideas and maybe Jason can dig deeper in some later videos! The 'Group vs Individual' axis seems to run parallel to the 'racial essentialism' discussion. Many stories in fiction begin with the messy stereotypical descriptions of unfamiliar places and peoples. It's only as the plot progresses through the adventure that the players are immersed in the localities of those once-unfamiliar people. The veil lifts as the group descriptions often disintegrate under our close and intimate knowledge of individuals within that once-mysterious 'othered' group. This is such a critical piece of the puzzle because it takes us through the very real and human journey of overcoming our anxiety via our exploration of new and wonderfully different cultures. It's also important to recognize that this journey is HARD. You stumble into awkward situations with insensitive turns of phrase and unjustified assumptions. It is quite difficult to responsibly guide people through the morass of often-ugly cultural clashes in real life, not to mention packaging it in a board game mechanism. Developing game pathing that carefully provides you with both reasonable AND flawed options is a kind of insanely tall order, especially for something on the narrative scale of Gloom/Frosthaven. There will continue to be missed opportunities, but the attempt to improve is what we should strive towards. Stereotypes can be useful rapid storytelling tools, but they are too often clumsy filler for lazy worldbuilding. If we can find ways to describe cultures through the individuals that inhabit them, we create depth, agency, and richness that might help us avoid the pitfalls of allegory.

[@ShelfStories]

Very very well said. There is literally a time and place for everything. Nothing will be removed. As I say in the video, you can even keep racially motivated hatred, as that really animates some folks. The racists in fiction see stereotypes and create conflict. The audience should have access to see more.

[@DeusMelium]

Really interesting and thought provoking video, thank you. On an unrelated note, not sure if it’s my streaming but the audio and visual seemed slightly out of sync that started getting really pronounced around the 38min mark.

[@ShelfStories]

It was multiple videos that I strung together. Some lost the syncing, some were fine. I’m happy enough with the final result, though.

[@pixyfrog]

I like your argument and the way you develop it. I am still concerned that we put a lot on Board Game designers. Few board game designers have the means of hiring a consultant to make sure they have not inadvertently layered some dots that, somewhere in the vastness of our human cultural fabrics (which goes beyond USA), could resonate offensively. We do not want a world where game creator "play it safe" by staying within the harbor provided by the setting of a Marvel or Disney commercial IP. This being said, great video, I have learned a couple of concepts I was unfamiliar with.

[@ShelfStories]

Board game designers operate under a ton of constraints already. They are very much bound by product size and componentry. They are largely bound to certain theme and settings They are bound by deadlines. The act of creation within our capitalist system necessarily involves working within the constraints and making the best possible product out of it. Truly creative and driven people figure out how to do it. Audience receptivity should be an additional constraint. In reality, audience receptivity is already there - try making a non-Cthulhu or vampire horror game for the mass market. Culture is become a more obvious thing to consider as more diverse people enter the hobby. Truly creative people can work within the constraints and make products that appeal to a really broad base. It is untrue that "someone will always be offended", as some other commenters have said. There's a bunch of persistent dot clusters (i.e., colonization) that keep happening over and over again. Switch those out for more inclusive stuff, and the problems will diminish a lot.

[@cheaney1000]

One curiosity point for me is when you talk about the modifiers/traits in D&D. Do you feel this should apply to all kinds of modifiers/traits or only personality ones. Taking Gloomhaven as an example, the Inox could be intelligent, civilised, etc. but physiologically the weakest Inox would still always be stronger than a different vermling given their size difference so if it was D&D they would have a base strength modifier. Just like Orcs might keep their menacing appearance due to the perception from everyone else in the world? Or is stuff like this still limiting and harmful?

[@ShelfStories]

I would still like to see characters stats be granted by upbringing and background, not by race. In real life, you could have humans under 5" who are physically stronger than someone over 6" due to how they train, take care of themselves, etc. Appearance is highly, highly culturally dependent. They only appear menacing to certain races (ie, humans). That could be reflected in a background stat of -2 diplomacy with humans, much more accurately than a global, racial -2 cha or a Menacing property. My goal in all of this is not to take any stats away, but just understand them differently. As Dr. Eugene Marshall said in another episode, you can still play the elfiest elf who ever elfed in your campaign. I think it would benefit everyone to simply reimagine where "elfiness" comes from. They get pointy ears from their biology, but most everything else of substance should come from culture, rather than race.

[@cheaney1000]

Ah yes, I can see how the small change in perception with just the menacing example can totally change the framing of it but not the game play.

[@ShelfStories]

@@cheaney1000 Thanks for engaging with the content! I’m happy to answer any other questions.

[@StormWildSpace]

New to your channel. You have my sub! Brilliantly said, you voiced a lot of my thoughts on this in a much better way.

[@ShelfStories]

I appreciate that. Thank you!

[@mongoose33333]

I just want to compliment Jason for not only what he talked about but how he talked about it. The comments section reflects this environment and I also want to compliment those contributing to the conversation and for the respectful way they are doing it. This discussion has been one of the most enlightening discussions I have heard on race full stop due to the respectful way it was presented and discussed. While I don't agree with some points, I learned a lot (and appreciate Jason's time and effort to engage in the comments section).

[@ShelfStories]

I appreciate that. Thank you for the compliment!

[@bartonalfredstone]

I'm teach in a high school setting and use board games as a way to interact with students and teach lessons. I'm very interested in your articulation on "co-opt" (i'm 14 min into the video). How would you respond to someone who would say that according to your view of "co-opting" something anyone who feels like they personally disapprove or are hurt by the way someone is representing their culture or ethnicity could cry foul? Is this not giving a cancel hammer to anyone who doesn't like something about a game/movie/book.etc. and wield it by claiming that they have been "co-opted"? Really appreciate this conversation and how you are engaging it by the way. Just trying to think through the implications of what you are saying.

[@ShelfStories]

It's a great question! I would make as hard a distinction as I could between "personally disapprove" and "are hurt". I think actors on both sides consider those as closely related, but they're really not. The former is highly personal, while the latter speaks to the kind of culture and community we want to live in. "I don't like it" should not be a reason for an artist to change direction in their piece, if they believe in what they are making. However, "are hurt" refers to the reinforcement of a harmful stereotype - in this case, the garbage eating, vermin-like Native savage. Now we need to be more thoughtful. Did the author mean to trigger that association for certain people? Was there a point to it? Is it essential to his art? If Gloomhaven was an exploration in our ideas of culture, then we could argue back and forth. However, Gloomhaven is not that - it a game where I play cards and slay monsters. No point is served by leaving those dots together. In that case, the invitation is to rearrange the dots so you don't trigger that association (i.e., give a real reason why the Vermlings are the way they are, or try to portray their society in a richer way), then move on. It all rests on that distinction, though, and the different senses of "feelings" - are we talking preferences, or actual felt trauma by people in the society?

[@davidautinify]

thank you so much for making this video.

[@ShelfStories]

You're so welcome!

[@carolyamate]

Hi Jason! Thanks for another great video. I do have a question/wonderment about this discussion... I completely agree with you in the begining of the video and KoA that Isaac chose a poor way to phrase his last statement (the generalization one). However... I am curious about the opinions and motivations on why people were upset/disappointed with Isaac's decision to hire a cultural consultant. From my point of view, we only have to gain from this. And it's not like it will cost us more... (Maybe time? But that's normal with KS, and most KS will wait if the game will be better, right?) So, I would be interested to hear this side, because I'm honestly surprised. What's your thoughts on that? I understand you can't speak for anyone, obviously, but I'm just confused/curious, especially because excluding Isaac's last statement, I think he was very reasonable, sensible and clear explaining why he made that decision. Thanks again!

[@ShelfStories]

Thanks for engaging! The reason why people got so mad at the cultural consultant is one word - safe. Isaac wants to make his world “safe” for gamers. To progressive folks like me, my associations are with cleaning up the lore. That was the intended effect. To a more moderate type, “safety” means there will be fewer tough moral choices. Some people just want to kill Inox babies, and they don’t want that choice taken away from them. Isaac needs to do a better job with explaining that the story will still be thick and rich with moral fraughtness, but will remove easy stereotypes (ie, Inox babies that have parents and are different from one another, not just a bunch of brutes).

[@Richard-sy1ej]

So as someone who read Isaac's post and went "yeah, overall sounds like a good idea", I actually have some significant misgivings about the particular consultant that he hired. I followed the link Isaac provided to the consultants (I assume) blog, and I was struck by some fairly opinionated positions, and attempts to back those positions up with anecdotal evidence rather than facts. I found a significant disconnect between the position that he was taking and the reasons for taking that position, and moreover, he wasn't able to build up towards his conclusion in a logical fashion to lay the building blocks to support his final position. Furthermore, on a number of occasions he didn't explicitly state a position on an individual situation, merely implied one, and on more than one occasion also implied that his viewpoint was the only correct/moral position, and that the other person/thing in his anecdotes was most definitely discriminatory because it didn't agree with his implied position. That's simply not something I can get behind. Honestly, if Isaac had hired Jason, I'd have a significantly more positive view on Isaac's actions, because to me, the devil is truly in the details, and to me, that's not something that the consultant he hired appears to manage well.

[@carolyamate]

@@ShelfStories thank you so much for the response! I guess you did touch on this when you talked about making the narrative bland, etc. I don't get it still... Isaac talks about making LESS generalizations and stereotypes, so to me that implies more complexity, diversity, nuance... In other words, a richer world. I think it's strange that people immediately make these assumptions (in this case, that by making it more culturally aware will have a less interesting story). I hope Isaac addresses this in the next update.

[@carolyamate]

@@Richard-sy1ej hi Richard! Thanks for your post. I must admit I haven't read anything about the consultant, so I'm glad you pointed that out. I'll make sure to get more familiar with his work, because you made valid points. I'm guilty of sometimes "not doing my homework".

[@ShelfStories]

@@Richard-sy1ej Ultimately, a cultural consultant is more of an editor than a writer. On tomorrow's show, Isaac will hop on to describe how the consultant was able to ask a question, which prompted Isaac himself to engage in a rewrite of some fluff with which he was more satisfied. If we make the writer think, we've done our jobs.

[@BillySpenc]

Great video! I think the change can only make frost haven better, make the world and characters more interesting.

[@kerryanne]

I hope so, I am all for this movement. I hope the zeal to fix matches the zeal to stay creative. The community college in our town is renamed from Lord Fairfax to something else...all new suggestions are as bland as can be. They sound like rest homes. Red Bud Community College, Shady Tree Community College. Ugh. Stupid new names.

[@anonymouse8953]

Thank You so much for this video. I was confused and surprised by the safehaven video and i hope KoA takes some time to rethink his statement. Greetings from Munich.

[@falen1839]

Thank you for this video. I really value your discussions of association and racial essentialism.

[@redwindmill]

Thank you for being so thoughtful. You got a new subscriber. I would consider myself one of the "middle" people that get turned off due to the aggressive, flighty labeling commonly associated with this conversation. It's so jarring to see those labels thrown around casually.

[@ShelfStories]

None of that in my space, I can assure you. Thank you for giving me a chance.

[@jonatan2969]

As a moderate european caucassian person i really liked this video. It was so much more nuanced than the arguments i have seen in the local board game groups. Where most were very harsh against KoA. I loved the vermling example and the fact that you actually wanted to discuss solutions is something i can never get people to do when discussing otherwise. The vermling example actually made me think in another way which was great. The only part where you lose me a bit is on the part of Racial Essentialising, but i think that is because of the difference in views on fantasy races. I see fantasy races more like 2 intelligent species (so i compare them more to if animals were intelligent), and therefore i also like the term species better than the term race. If we use gloomhaven as an example, most of the time i would expect a Savvas to be more Sturdy than a vermling. One is made of Rocks and is twice the size of the other guy. Thats not because of upbringing or culture, but because of biology. A mouse will never get as strong or tough as an elephant no matter how hard it tries. Now comes the part which i heard you give an example with your orc wizard. Maybe the Vermling gets a magic item that gives it incredible strength, maybe it learns a spell, maybe something completely different. And will be able to surprise people as vermlings are generally seen as less sturdy than Savvas "since they are". But in that case the vermling is an outlier of its species not the general specifications of its species. Another example from the same. In the Gloomhaven universe it is described how Savvas are created. This is the same for Savvas no matter their culture, where they are from and so on. But this could lead to universe spanding conflicts where Savvas for example does not get the same Maternity rights as other species, as they are not "with children" as many of the other species. So to sum up i loved a lot of your points, and i actually can now follow the hurtfulness argument of the Racial Essentialising more, however the argument about bad storytelling i actually dont buy :)

[@ilyapetoukhov]

Wow, great work and thank you for this great example of respectfully engaging with each other on this sensitive but so important topic!

[@kerryanne]

Thanks for this thoughtful video. I enjoy your take and your conversation. It is painful work to take a look at our buried assumptions and hidden knee jerk bias. The only way to get beyond needlessly hurting folks over stupid things is to take a look at our stories and our tropes. I know this is so stupid, but here is one story. At work we decorated for the holidays. My team was international. I said, let's do Christmas Around the World. I consider myself a smart, sensitive person. My co-worker said, I don't celebrate Christmas, we did not celebrate it growing up in Vietnam. I sat there like a dummy with my jaw open--I was like what? how can this be? Um. I feel so embarrassed writing it. for me, I get stuck in my experience and the only thing that helps me is a) traveling or b) a wide group of friends that feel okay talking about their experiences. It is not easy. I absolutely do this work and am glad if anyone takes the time to lay it out. It is exhausting for others to have to break stuff down for folks like me over and over again. I'm SO glad that we have a career path like diversity consultant so folks can get paid for this. I made huge progress this past year...again, I consider myself smart and sensitive and the work I have done in the past 12 months shows that we have far to go as a country. At least my boys won't spend 50 years stuck where I was in 2020. I made changes as a mom. Sorry to write a book here. You are great.

[@ShelfStories]

No worries. Thank you for sharing your experiences.

[@ShakeyBox]

Thank you for this. :)

[@matslarsson6919]

I feel sometimes you have to be an expert on social and cultural issues to navigate this hobby (and modern society in general). It is exhausting. Easy to see how most people take shortcuts when they think and talk about these things. Thank you for not taking shortcuts, Jason.

[@ShelfStories]

Empathy and a willingness to share the power to make things will also do.

[@sador42]

Dude! You used the cover picture from Death's album Leprosy! I love that record, but that was not an ORC, that was supposed to represent someone with Leprosy. Anyway, I was not expecting to see that in the video and thought that was cool!

[@ShelfStories]

Bingo! I always associated it with a Revenant Orc. Shows you where my mind goes :).

[@Melvin7727]

"In our climate, people are hyper sensitive to being called racists." Important to note, this is because so many people actually do call people racists for trivial infractions everyday.

[@darkandsolo2507]

And it must be noted than many people are indeed racist, and that’s why they get that label. And many times those trivial infractions are only “trivial” to racist but serious to those who experience those “infractions.”. But I do get your point @Kyle Mills

[@SteveOw0]

Thanks for the thoughtful, gracious, and respectful video. I saw KoA's video before watching yours, and I mostly agree with him. But I appreciate your acknowledging his points that you agree with, and the manner in which you disagreed with him. Even though I don't share your perspective, you did a great job of explaining your views. Our society needs more dialog like this.

[@anotherdimension6053]

Great video.

[@pencilpauli9442]

So late to this party that the cans and bottles have been recycled and turned into parts of an electric car. lol Great words as always, thanks Jason. They always make me think about my own behaviour and how I can keep trying to be better. Gotta rewire this faulty old brain of mine! lol Don't feel I can add to anything you articulated so well. Shock! PoC can do a good English! I didn't know I could facepalm and laugh at the same time until you recounted your wife's tale! lol But I have to be reminded that long time ago I was overtly racist. Luckily I went to a college that had students from all over the world as well as British PoC. They were some of the most beautiful people I have ever had the privilege to call friends. Didn't cure me of my "whiteness" but it was a valuable lesson, and I could no longer judge an entire people based on outmoded stereotypes. For the past 30 years, due to where I live, I have had no personal contact with any BIPoC (Black, Indigenous, People of Colour) people, but I still forget that is a life long experience for many White folks. If all you have is the media representation of minorities, and maybe the proverbial "Black friend", it's easier to see why there are so many problems around the issue of race. FWIW, I typed an allusion to Stranger Things, as an example of how being inclusive doesn't make for an uninteresting story. But had to check up on the Black friend I thought they had who didn't exist. (Been a while since I watched, and only the first two seasons) Turns out the Black character was added in Season 4 and his background story was that he was an excellent basketball player. So, yeah, that scuppered my analogy! 🤣

[@Jsleezy_2000]

I’m glad you addressed this topic. It is so important and definitely requires some patience and eagerness to reach a better understanding. Great video!!

[@JanKowalski-gr9ey]

But You all know that it is just tactical game with very little story behind it?

[@ignitedxblaze]

The suggestion on tackling race/tribe wars seems to be a good middle ground, hope Issac gets it.

[@shevarash0158]

I don't think Isaac misspoke in the original update. I'm supposed to believe he's a top tier game designer that came up with all of gloomhaven then sent out that update without re-reading it or having someone else read it. He has a set belief and that's what he wrote. It was only after the fact when he was called out that he came out with that faux apology because people were pulling out. And don't even get me started on the censorship I highly doubt all the posts that were removed from kickstarter were "hateful". It all boils down to Isaac's true colors came through and he didn't want to lose half his customers he disrespected.

[@ShelfStories]

People’s true colors emerge over the long term. Let’s see what happens when Frosthaven lands - how people receive it, what kind of fun people have, etc.

[@jonathanw3199]

I must admit came here expecting to full on disagree with you as I did have worries when the Frosthaven announcement came through both with the tone and the possible implications , however you made some really great points that were well thought out and presented, and gave new ways to look at the announcement. I think the statement about the worry about the changes making a bland game is one of my primary concern, as I am truly not sure how you find ways to make a story that no one can find a way to associate in a bad way with a current culture as it often seems that people dig and dig and dig till they make those associations for better or worse. I hope Frosthaven proves me wrong in that and it has a wonderful deep story, only time well tell. However I do want to say thank you for a great video that seems to invite people to really think about their views on both sides of the spectrum.

[@ShelfStories]

Thank you for stopping by. I do my best. The left certainly has a stereotype that we just hunt for trouble. I'm trying to show that we're not (all) like that. I'm not going to yell that Red M&Ms are racist ;). There are certain things that are beyond the pale, though, like "x race = genetically savage and ignorant". That will get a response from us every time. My point is that it doesn't have to be that way. The goal is not to make a "safe" story. I don't want that, either. The goal is to avoid *unintentional* harm. Fiction should, indeed, evoke emotions, should make us happy, piss us off, etc. Frosthaven should allow us to kill Inox babies, if we choose. I think it's possible to do so without, for example, sloppy references to "savage" races. It's simply not necessary. Rest assured, the story will be better. The best way to combat stereotypes in games is to make people and cultures more three dimensional. That's exactly what we're getting. Isaac could have said that better :).

[@jonathanw3199]

@@ShelfStories The internet in general can be such a hard place to say just about anything, because you can not read body language and you cant quickly or easily know the intent of a message and it is awful easy to quickly jump to conclusions that are based on things that were never intended. I think often this happens on both sides of many issues and people are so quick to jump on the offence we lose the ability to actually find out what the thoughts are of the person who voiced or wrote the original thought are. It is a great thing to have people and places that work to show views for what they are not what they could be at their worse.

[@EricWoning]

Hey there, - long time no comment! First of all: great video. Second: sorry for the long respings Re: KOA: Some things you probably are right in, but some things also might just have been 'after reading the initial part thinking something was going to be the case and then just not reading things accurately' (afraid that happens to me all the time). I initially was on KOA's side of things. But you do make a strong case - I don't agree with everything (Primarily because I think you still look at it from a very US centric view - which again is super understandable)... but the big thing is: you deserve as much fun at the gaming table as I do. That argument, to me, is the most important one. If things such as what you said in Gloomhaven inhibits you - then we need to find a way that works. Period. And I agree with the ability to make great stories still exist though I still think that the story of the Orc overcoming the elements in essentialist Orc would make as good a story - but then... you feeling better about it when it's not essential: then its better. My ONLY gripe is that essentialism lets you more easily tell these aforementioned stories because of shorthand - it's way more difficult to explain that perceptions of X are like Y because of Z and it feeling true than just saying it's like x. So I expect there is going to be either way more explanation as to why situations are the way they are OR just less believable stories (Storytelling in games is often quite patchy.) essentialism

[@EricWoning]

My words got cut off by YT because I'm so long winded.... sorry. Where it says 'essentialism' it should have said: The other thing is that after becoming a father I have swung from being 90% Nurture to 50/50 Nurture/Nature. Though essentialism is WAAAAAY too sweeping - it does let you tell the story of how the nature was x but the nurture made for y. I'm not entirely sure how you would be able to convey this in short format - because that is the problem... we're not writing books - we're writing a couple of words on cards... which makes that it might be difficult to convey this. But if that's the price to pay for everyone feeling happier in the hobby - then I'm more than willing to pay that. Thanks for making the time to make this video. Really good stuff.

[@ShelfStories]

@@EricWoning Thanks for sharing your thoughts! I'm more 85/15 nurture/ nature. Probably more, who knows. If a sentient species in fantasy has claws, darkvision, a scaly hide, or other physical adaptations to help them adopt to their own environment, I'm cool with that. Survival in an environment seems pretty "essential." Beyond that, I get skeptical that we can truly present something as "racial" when it is probably highly affected by culture.

[@EricWoning]

@@ShelfStories - 100% I just meant that when my son began to interact with us he did that in a wholly different way than both my wife & I. Same with how he 'is' right now. (He's 6... So still less influence from outside like in teen years.) Has 0 to do with race. 100% agree. Just that race in games is an easy way of characterising when space is (very) limited to communicate inherent way specific characters are. (But again- happy to dit h that).

[@sador42]

"white empty box of safeness" - lol - that would be disappointing :)

[@dukeskunk]

Technically DD&D got rid of negative stat modifiers in 2008, 4e did not have them. But then when threw out most of the things that 4e changed to make 5th ed more like 3E they put negative stat mods back in.

[@ShelfStories]

Fair point, at least for PC races. Orcs out of the Monster Manual and other splat books weren’t exactly known for their intellect. I’ve had some good conversations with folks in our discord. A lot of people want to keep dumb, monstrous races around. I’m kind of ok with that. However, one big problem is the Half-Orc - the idea that the monstrous races breed with humans. That’s a fraught story that gets ignored, to say the least. For me, if a race has enough sentience to act as a potential source of PCs, I’d really question the extent to which they should be coded as essentialized monsters.

[@Behgork]

I clicked this fast. I like what you do here.

[@ajurban2010]

Sorry another question. Do you think that the pandemic and its impact on people playing more games brings this to the foreground.

[@ShelfStories]

Sort of. I think the Pandemic forced more of us to use social media more, so more people are voicing their concerns about more things quickly. That's for good and for ill, but I'm trying to use it for good as much as I can.

[@ameritrashtalk36]

You always do an amazing job of keeping things personal, local, and immediate. I appreciate the work you put into being respectful and kind. A great conversation as always. ❤️

[@hesy8049]

Great video!

[@hmtkgaming6095]

Can you have a sit down with the admins on BGG? If this video was a typed post on the Frosthaven update thread it would have been removed for being dismissive/disruptive.

[@ShelfStories]

I do not envy the job of BGG moderators. Hard to read intent through a forum post. I think they are looking for buzzwords - woke, SJW, cancel culture - and zeroing in on those. When I talk to people who have been banned/ suspended, that’s usually the citation. They might be catching too many people. That’s part of why I make videos - I want us to learn to talk to one another better

[@hmtkgaming6095]

@@ShelfStories you and I are on the same wavelength. Even if I disagree with someone I still want to learn and understand their point of view.

[@abihuynh]

@@hmtkgaming6095 if Jason posted his thoughts on that thread it would 100% not be removed. It mirrors a lot of the posts that have remained up in terms of how it addresses criticism of the Frosthaven updates. In fact look at King of Average’s comment section and the KS comments and see which side of this inclusivity initiative those people that were banned/deleted from BGG were on. The simple notion is that to move towards more inclusivity we can’t abide by views of intolerance. The cries of “they won’t tolerate my intolerance” won’t work on BGG.

[@abihuynh]

@@hmtkgaming6095 it’s astounding to me that you relate anything said in this video to the vitriol that as been deleted off of BGG.

[@hmtkgaming6095]

@@abihuynh I just scanned the 20 pages of comments on BGG. I found zero positive or neutral references to the KoA video. I did see some negative commentary. This video began with an agreement with part of the KoA video. That agreement, expressed on BGG, would have resulted in the post being deleted. Regarding the moderation policy I would far prefer that the mods hide and not delete posts. By deleting we lose context and points of view. We also end up creating an exclusive rather than inclusive environment. Unless the post is defamatory or otherwise illegal it should be hidden (click to view) rather than deleted. We can disagree on this but now you know my point of view.

[@brycejarrett9211]

I agree with trying to make the races more diverse. The one thing I don’t understand was the part in the middle when you were giving suggestions for the game. It’s ok for all the race hate in the game, just as long as certain lines cannot be drawn. As long as the Conquered people seemed like civilized people it’s ok? Drawing those lines it seems to me that forest dwelling people are lesser beings. To me that is implying that native Americans are less than civilized people. Then why is it ok if the conquered people are Germanic tribes being conquered by Rome? Is it still ok if the lines drawn are to Rome taking over Britain and the Druid’s? I don’t think a culture is any less because of the size and strength of their “civilization”, and implying so is racist right? Just because a culture is nomadic and lives off the land doesn’t mean they are less. I agree 100% with making more tribes/sub-groups in the races. Not all humans should be hating of other races, not all Vermlings should be aggressive etc. They can still be from nomadic tribes and humans can come from a more centralized area. I think we need to understand others cultures and their strengths and understanding that one does not have to be less than another.

[@ShelfStories]

The only “line” I do not want to cross is lack of depth. When presenting a culture, it cannot be two-dimensional. That’s the essence of a stereotype. When we start presenting cultures as living, resisting, and diverse, we’re back on the right track. Like you said, present their strengths, too. I happen to be reading about hunter-gatherer societies right now; it’s a much different picture than our culture. They lived some lessons we have forgotten. I would be all for putting some of that in the fiction.

[@georgemiller9888]

Fantastic video!

[@MrScrawnjuan]

Good video. I agree and disagree with a couple points. Just as a good discussion should. I live in Ontario Canada and my town is roughly 20% aboriginal. I didn't make the vermling association, but I can definitely see how some could

[@ShelfStories]

Thanks. That’s pretty much the point. Not everyone will make the same associations. But some will, and I’m glad you can see how I make those associations more strongly.

[@morganmollwing2273]

Do you know that germanic tribes had shamans to, sapmi still have shamans. Basically people all over the world have hunted with bows, and arrows at one point or another. If Isaac based a "race" in Gloomhaven on native american thats one thing. But if you have a wider historic knowledge you know that those traits has nothing to do with real world human "races" but instead it has to do with cultural developement at how people from other culture look upon them. History is filled with cultures who saw others as savages. Romans vs germanic tribes, muslims vs vikings, christians vs vikings, french vs vikings, brits vs vikings, christians vs muslims, muslims vs christians etc.

[@ShelfStories]

Not denying that humans have always animalized their view of out groups and see the Other as savages. I say that in the video. The issue here is that non-playable Vermlings are actual animalistic savages, according to the written lore. That’s not an association that needs to be there. There are many things that can be done to complexify Vermling society and make it more three dimensional. They can still have a very savage culture overall (the difference between race and culture being the key here). GH can still keep the same core Inter-group tension that makes for, among other things, a fun game. That’s the change I’d like to see.

[@markkabuto]

On the Vermlings, at the end where you talk about a different solution, it's not very on-point to call apes (or 'non-sentient rodents') a 'lower form of life'. Biologically speaking, they've gone through just as much evolutionary history as humans (because we all diverge from a common ancestor population at some point in time), but in a different manner. I was actually thinking you were going to suggest a scenario where the players would encounter (one way or another) a group of Vermlings that are peaceful, and want to try and come to terms with representatives of Frosthaven. Perhaps other Vermlings don't want that, you know, within Vermling tribes there's also going to be members that think a violent counter-attack is the best solution. Maybe this idea isn't thoroughly thought through either, but it should break the stereotype of 'all Vermlings are gutter trash' and thus show that within any faction/city/culture/whatever there's diversity. EDIT: I feel the need to add here (after reading some of the other comments, apparently the Vermling passage resonated with many people) that this passage did swing home to me in a way. I liked Vermlings because they are close to nature. I like nature and hate how human society has a tendency to destroy too much of it. I like the idea of living closer to (and in harmony with) nature. But then, if I choose to be a Vermling in this game, I'm forced to be part of this bloodthirsty race. That's not why I wanted to be a Vermling! I haven't been the victim of harmful racial stereotypes, so for me it's easy to think "Yeah I'll just tag on a little bit of my own story-writing/world-building and say that my specific Vermling isn't a Beast Tyrant but a Beast Shaman". (To be fair, that's what my girlfriend did but hey, she's my girlfriend for a reason, we have similar thoughts on the matter.) But it is, for me, an insightful case study.

[@JJoyceful]

Bravo!

[@LanceGoodthrust_]

Great intro music

[@hmtkgaming6095]

Did you pull the follow up video?

[@ShelfStories]

Yes. I had an idea for an edit to make it even better. It will be back up soon.

[@hmtkgaming6095]

@@ShelfStories I was going to post the following comment on that video but it might make the video better if you cover it in your re-edit. When the must is backed up by accusations that you are a bad person if you do not go along with the ask... That is where people in the middle become angry and defensive. Studies have shown that a little bit of guilt is persuasive but there is a tipping point where use of guilt turns against the persuader and results in a hardening against the ask.

[@ShelfStories]

@@hmtkgaming6095 great way to put it. Thank you.

[@Melvin7727]

You're a very smart guy, insightful, and good job explaining your points. Still, I strongly disagree with your point that the Vermlings are necessarily related to Native Americans. You said "try not to be so literal" as a defense for how you've met the burden of proof for how you're tying them together. Okay, I can go with that. Yet you seem to simultaneously drop that idea (avoiding being so literal) when you suddenly raise a concern of how it is derogatory toward those Native Americans. Further, you seem to express the idea that fantasy based racism is simply dangerous in the real world because it (presumably?) feeds into a real person's real racism. I disagree with this. You provided no basis for this being the case. You have to prove this as a concern for me to be at all concerned. So far, my asusmption is that a fantasy race designed to be inferior has nothing to do with my real life race relations. I separate fiction from reality, in terms of my moral analysis. Totally separate? No. But fiction doesn't dictate my morality. Period. EDIT: You then say "if you don't connect those dots, that's fine. But don't deny me my intuition." That is a totally different take than the initial one where you assumed we as players would be connecting dots to Native Americans. If it's just your thing, and you're not saying it's everyone else's thing, that's fine. I would never wish to deny you your intuition, so I hope I am understood this way. It strongly came off as you making a case for how players at large will perceive it. I see now that you're speaking to your personal experience. That being said, if it is a subjective critique and not an objective one, I truly believe that it's a personal problem that does not really warrant petition for change. I'm not saying that to be harsh. I just believe that petitioning for change should be coming from a place where a certain amount of objectivity can be offered as to how the criticism is valid across multiple levels beyond singular personal experience.

[@ShelfStories]

I speak from cultural experience, like we all do. That sits between personal subjective (one person sees it) and objective (everyone sees it). My particular background is not directly Native American, though I do feel a kinship there (my channel logo being a Taino sun). People with my cultural background - not all, by any means, but more than just me - are more likely to look at the art and lore (ie, the “dots”) for Vermling society and see a stereotype - the bottom feeding, vermin-like savage native. Just seeing the word “savage” puts us in the headspace. Then more dots, and a general nothing-but tone to the depiction, leads us further down the road. The issue is that, for a First Nations person, that stereotype gets thrown in their face every day, either explicitly by racists or implicitly in other media. It sucks. It’s tiring. We want to forget, but consistent societal reminder won’t let us. And then there it is, again, in an activity that is supposed to be an escape. Implicitly, sure, but there. When I and others mentioned it to Isaac, he acknowledged he drew from the early European colonization archetype for the Inox/ Vermling/ Human interaction. The stereotype likely slipped in, unintentionally. That’s not me telling you that - Isaac will tell you. That’s where the author’s empathy kicked in- he doesn’t see it very strongly because it’s not his background. But it matters to him that people (not just me, people) with my background can draw those connections. It’s not an “all red M&Ms are racist” silly scenario; my connections are, at least, understandable. Now Isaac, being a good dude who doesn’t want to bum people out with ideas in his game, says he wants to - not forced to, wants to - make changes. Especially if the “savage” idea here is thoughtless and ultimately inessential to the narrative. There are MANY ways to re-tell the story of the Vermlings in a more three dimensional way that, for example, keep the “savage” as a cultural trait but offers different directions for them as well. Please check out the follow-up to this video for an example of how the great George RR Martin took a similar criticism in the first Game of Thrones and made better fiction out of it. There is no force here. I’m not using some kind of moral victimhood to mandate or force change. Folks who express skepticism almost always express that this process forces, or places limitations, despite repeated assurances that Isaac wants to do this, and feels really good about it. Seems like I’m not the only one reading things into the process :). It’s ok, we’re all humans. I’m happy to continue explore mindsets, meaning-making, etc.

[@Melvin7727]

@@ShelfStories Hey, I greatly appreciate your thoughtful response, just like your video. I think ultimately we will have to agree to disagree on many things. I think a lot of what you're expressing to me, I do agree with, but there are other parts that I don't agree with. I'm not thinking of it as cultural/moral mandate against the creator and it being forced on him to compromise his art. I think it's totally of his own volition, and every bit of it is a genuine and sincere attempt to clean up a messy situation, just as you describe. Even without that "coercion" in the equation, I personally still think the art tends to suffer for it. Not always, and often times it can benefit from it, as you point out. But in this instance for example, I can't see how it will benefit. I'm not saying this to be rude, but the alternative examples you gave in the video of how to depict vermlings, I didn't like them. I felt each of them were a compromise. Others may like it or find it to have improved, I just do not. Thank you for understanding me and taking my arguments in good faith, as I hope I have sufficiently done with yours. At the end of the day, I wish you and everyone else well in these matters. Have a good one, friend!

[@ShelfStories]

@@Melvin7727 this is why I’m not an writer. The examples are only illustrative. Thanks for checking out the video and engaging.

[@RubenPaintsMinis]

How about this for vermling fan fiction? Vermlings ARE rather dumb and are easily manipulated but are actually ok with it. Vermlings are OK with digging through trash and in fact see it as wasteful to even have trash. You could expand this that vermlings make whole villages out of trash and they don’t even call trash, “trash.” Integrate this into the gameplay and make it that they have high poison resistance and have really good mobility because they scale their trash kingdoms on the daily. And there are some smarter vermlings who can explain that the vermlings embody a “the meak will inherit the earth” philosophy. Basically vermlings understand that they are at the bottom of the totem pole and have to live in the sewers but their race will outlive any other kingdom and will happily live in any society’s sewer. This is just my idea but I think it pretty effective at doubling down on what’s established by fictional vermlings and getting further away from any real world native culture. ... Unless someone out where “connects the dots,” in such away that I’m still racist.

[@ShelfStories]

There was almost the beginning of an interesting idea, but then you threw that last line in there. No one is calling anyone a racist. Not on my channel.

[@rogerbartels5690]

It seems to me that you are conflating race and species. The analogy of Orc as Black is less apt than something like Orc as Neanderthalensis. In such an instance, all data point to definite differences between Sapiens and Neanderthalensis in terms of musculature and body size as well as evidence pointing to differences in vision and cerebellum size (among a host of other differences in brain structure and function). And even then, Sapiens and Neanderthalensis are closely related enough to have interbred. When comparing beings as potentially different as Humans, Orcs, Vermlings, etc., you are indeed talking about different species and not anything like modern conceptions of race, no matter how it is referred to in RPGs and board games. It makes me wonder that if the term "race" were removed from the games, would people still have a problem with trait/attribute differences?

[@Richard-sy1ej]

Thanks for the video and your point of view. Much like with KoA's video, I found myself agreeing and disagreeing with different parts of the video. Personally, I don't know *anyone* that drew the Vermlings = Native Americans bow. Maybe it's from not coming from America, but I don't know anyone that took them as being representative of an indigenous people, including a bevy of indigenous people. I agree that personal experience plays a big part of interpretation, and just like some people misinterpret Isaac's words as accusing them of being racist, people equally misinterpret Vermlings as being a racial stand-in for Native Americans. But that's all those things are: misinterpretations. Do I think it's bad that occurred? Yes. Would I like that not to occur? Yes. I do support Isaac's sentiment (and yours) to work towards that. However, what you describe as "racial essentialism", I call "racial stereotypes". There is nothing that says that every single orc has to be aggressive and stupid, nor that they are a corollary for any ethnic group in the real world. At one point you debunk KoA's point of people equating an animated pile of rocks to a particular ethnic group by saying no one does that, but then you explicitly DO that by subbing out "orc" for "black". You explicitly did the thing you previously said that people don't do. Isaac calls out statements like the following as harmful and bad world-building: “All Inox are proud and stubborn.” “All Quatryls are hard-working and helpful.” I disagree wholeheartedly. That is *efficient* world building. The *only* thing I think needs changing there is to remove the word "all". If you want, you can hedge with something like "typically" or "generally considered to be", or words to that effect, but in essence, a broad stroke has been applied. It's like saying "all artworks in the gallery use paint", which says nothing about the individuals or the variances within. Would you be okay with me saying "African Americans are generally more afraid of the police"? Sure, there are going to be exceptions to that rule, but I think you'd be hard pressed to say it's inaccurate. Furthermore, in fantasy, these things are stereotypes and generalisations typically based on the frame of reference of *humans*, because that's the default frame of reference that people understand. To humans, elves would seem carefree and wandering spirits, because their comparatively long lifetime would free them of the drive required compared to the average human. The great thing is, the subversion of those generalisations is what makes for great stories and characters. I mean, all drow are evil, right? And there couldn't possibly be a famous series of stories about a drow who befriended people and went around doing good, right? Except it does, because people can (and should) interpret stereotypes as exactly that - an overview to provide some frame of reference - but also understand that the individuals within that categorisation vary dramatically, because everyone is an individual rather than a carbon copy of each other belonging to a singular entity. Then there's the issue of D&D stat penalties/bonuses. I understand that people dislike having stat penalties for particular races, but by the same token, then stat bonuses shouldn't exist, because it's implying superiority of one race by positive impact rather than by negative. The impact is exactly the same. More problematically, from a pure mechanical perspective, those stat bonuses are another axis to provide differentiation between the different fantasy races other than by giving special innate abilities. It's a mechanical differentiation that's being ascribed political motives or implications, when the real comparison is more along the lines of: A) Pick option with stat bonuses B) Pick option with special abilities This *mechanical* consideration is being misinterpreted as a *social* consideration, and I can't support a propagation of that misinterpretation compared to the actual purpose and intent of those differences. I absolutely am in favour of making boardgames inclusive and positive for more people. I appreciate you taking the time to have a reasonable and inclusive discussion on this topic.

[@ShelfStories]

Thanks so much for this thoughtful response! I agree that turning "all" into "almost all" is a great shift. Unfortunately, stat blocks are pretty much impervious to "almost all." Especially if the stat block is based on race and not upbringing/ culture. I am not against broad generalizations at all. As you say, it generates some of the world's greatest stories because it sets the backdrop for protagonists to embark on their journeys. But I think it matters where the generalization comes from - race or culture? If it comes from race, the seductive trap will pretty much always pull "almost all" into "all." The roots of human thinking about race come from scientific, genetics-based ideas about human beings. Fixed traits. So, I don't want to erase generalizations, but dislocate them from race and speaking of them as cultural. Honestly, I see no reason to locate any mechanical differentiation on race. To me, "race" should probably largely be story grist - you can accomplish everything you want to accomplish by talking about ancestry instead (via themes, backgrounds, what have you). The supplement from Arcanist Press that I discussed here did an excellent job breaking that down, as well as prompting people with MANY story hooks if they choose stat lines against type (a muscular, beefy Elf, for example). Interesting point criticizing how I handled the human/ rock pile divide, comparing it to how I compared Black folks and Orcs. I don't think I'm being inconsistent, though. Contrary to the belief that lefties see race in every freaking thing, there's very little that will inherently grab my attention with regard to humans and rock piles. Maybe the only thing I will notice is the general word "race". However, when it comes to Orcs and real life Black experience, there are FAR more parallels. Look at the stat block - Aggressive, Menacing, Powerful Build, -2 Int. That's a lot more data points, which gives a lot more opportunity for someone who experiences being judged that way in real life to make those connections. If, on the other hand, that stat block was a template that I could port to an Elf, or Garl forbid, a Gnome (!), that would do a LOT to loosen the association and not trigger the response in the player.

[@Richard-sy1ej]

@@ShelfStories Thanks for engaging! I do think this is an important and nuanced issue. I have my own experiences which are naturally different from yours, so I really appreciate you sharing your take and thoughts. Where you specifically talk about the stat block of orcs, I honestly wouldn't have made those connections. But I guess I can understand someone who feels like they do have those traits or modifiers applied to them as part of society are getting that comparison. But does that mean that nothing can inherently have those traits then for fear of that comparison? I realise that probably sounds like a slippery slope argument, and I genuinely don't know where that tipping point comes for "Yes, this is now equating this group to discriminatory modifiers" applies. I imagine that point is probably significantly different for different people. If it was just "aggressive, -2 int", is that okay? Or is that still unacceptable? At what point do the individual pieces add up to someone declaring something problematic? I don't have an answer for that question, and I'm not sure who does. I'm sure not best placed to make that call, but I also don't know who is. As for you saying that "contrary to the belief that lefties see race in every freaking thing", I don't think anyone does that, neither nor "lefties" or "righties", aside from people with extremely niche and unyielding viewpoints, and they're unlikely to be convinced by an opposing viewpoint anyway. They're not attempting to engage in reasonable debate on this discussion - they're the ones accusing Isaac of supporting torture because his game is made in China, demanding all copies of Gloomhaven be pulled and replacements shipped, declaring that anyone who questions Isaac's decision is a racist, and/or should have their pledge cancelled, and so on. These are ALL things that happened on the comment section of Frosthaven. Those people don't even want to engage with people with alternative viewpoints in good faith, they just want their soapbox. (As an aside, I do detest that there is an overwhelming prevalence of categorising people on so many different subjects into one of these two camps based on a single issue when there so much scope for nuance and variance in position. I understand my previous post could have led people to accuse me of being "right", when I fundamentally disagree with so many views that are considered "right" as opposed to "left") I think the difficulty with many fantasy races is that they are typically considered to have significant differences - actually being different species in a biological sense - like say tigers vs lions vs panthers or even cheetahs. There are inherent physical and physiological differences between them that help dictate those differences to an extent that doesn't really apply across ethnic groups within humanity. In fantasy and sci-fi, the word "race" is typically used as a stand-in for "species", and in general species sounds little too "advanced" or "scientific" for most fantasy settings. Do we attempt to do away with the word "race" in fantasy settings and instead say "species". Does that actually solve anything or at least make some small step towards it? Or does a turd by any other name still smell as foul? (If you'll excuse the crass corruption/inversion of Shakespeare) As for the overall stat variations, I don't see why there couldn't instead by an arrangement between DMs and players to say "species X has +X to two stats of your choice, and -Y to one stat of your choice". This would fulfill the mechanical balance as supposedly required by the system, while enabling appropriate roleplaying or character creation choices not bound by the potentially problematic default modifiers. I won't pretend for a second that I understand all the positions being put forward from either end. I have my own opinions, but I'm trying to question where my experience and understanding may have led me to lack sufficient empathy for others with very different life experiences to me.

[@ShelfStories]

@@Richard-sy1ej I think races should, for the overwhelming majority of the time, just generate story-grist and not mean anything mechanical. Just as being black/ white/ Latino/ etc., shouldn’t say anything about intelligence, desireability, etc., neither should fantasy races. When the races are more animalistic, that’s harder. A sentient bat should probably, inherently, have blindsight or something. I’m totally cool with that. In those cases, I would strongly advise doing everything possible to insure x animal race doesn’t unconsciously repeat stereotypes from a real world culture. Humans ascribing animal traits to their enemies is one of the oldest things we do. Just be careful and intentional, subvert and reverse types in smart ways. That will help a lot.

[@Richard-sy1ej]

@@ShelfStories Does that mean you don't think - taking D&D for example - that there should be differences between humans, elves, halflings and tieflings? Elves being long lived makes a big difference about their attitude towards life, and mechanically that can make a difference in a setting, because the elf can wait out the human in a vendetta - the human will die of old age long before the elf does. Should halflings NOT be short and lose their innate luckiness? Tieflings shouldn't have darkvision or powers derived from their infernal nature? To me, if those traits are taken away, then all those other races are effectively just "funny looking humans", which seems to me as though it would be *less* inclusive, not more. Or am I misinterpreting your intent?

[@ShelfStories]

@@Richard-sy1ej I think a source of misunderstanding here is that you think I want to remove stuff. Remove dark vision for Tieflings, remove luckiness for halflings, etc. I’m trying to get away from the language of removing and just talk about relocating. Moving around the dots so that people make different associations. A race/ species that lives in the dark should have nightvision. Elves should be long lived (which seems more story grist than anything that affects a d20 roll, but whatever. We can argue that separately). All that stuff makes sense. Keep it. Here’s a good example of what I’m talking about. Halflings have always, in every edition of D&D, had variations of an agility stat bump and tumbling skills. That operates under an assumption that a race of small folk would need things like this to survive as a society. That seems innocuous, on its own. However, GRRM writes about that image affecting the way he initially wrote the character of Tyrion Lannister. He’s written to be a small person with dwarfism, so GRRM drew from what he knew - small people tumbling around. In Tyrion’s very first appearance in Winterfell in the first ASOIAF book, he tumbles and somersaults out of a building and lands in front of Jon Snow. GRRM has blogged about this. He says he regrets every minute of that portrayal. He heard from real life people with dwarfism who told him about the constant bodily pain they were in. He admits his portrayal was affected by his view of halflings/ hobbits and made changes in future books. Now, Tyrion talks about being in pain and having to rub his legs constantly, especially in book five when he’s traveling. He also talks about resenting the family expectation that he caper about like a fool. That is MUCH richer and accomplishes both goals I described in the video - better storytelling, and removing harm. Now, how could that have gone differently from the beginning? Portray halflings with more diversity. Some halflings can be acrobats. Some can be totally land bound and dependent on symbiosis with other cultures. Relocating stat blocks from race to upbringing accomplishes that.

[@briantalarico2925]

I did not watch your full video, so maybe you said something that addresses what I’m saying. A story is a story, how it’s told is supposed to evoke emotions in people, if it doesn’t, it’s dull. Leave real world politics out of it, but politics is a part of all life and all stories and it can be visceral at times and should have its own politics. If someone is bothered by something it is up to the individual to handle their emotions. Making things “safe” is literally impossible. By making it safe you have now insulted many people that found these things that are present in Gloomhaven to have made a good story. My main problem is stop coddling people, start holding people accountable to their own emotions, it’s called having emotional intelligence. It is not my fault if someone has a low EI and gets insulted by something said or done.

[@ShelfStories]

I know a lot of people who feel the way you feel. As long as you express your view with respect here, it's all good.

[@connorhinen1045]

@korrok I hope you're right, but I didn't get those vibes from the update...

[@afaik1Ben]

@korrok You really can't imagine a species where all individuals are exactly the same (atleast from our point of view) or a species where individuals behave differently based on their sex?

[@afaik1Ben]

@korrok I am just saying that for diversity, it is okay in fiction to have species whose members are just very identical in looks or behaviour (influenced by genetics or culturally) from the outside point of view. Think of a swarm of Hive mind species or clones. Obviously, this is just an extreme case to show that something like that could exist. Less extreme would be a species which is just by its genetics or culture very aggressive. Of course, a few individuals could be less aggressive, but probably still more aggressive than an individual from another species. It is always a spectrum. As for player characters: In my opinion it is quite interesting to roleplay a species that is very different from our human point of view and behaviour. With different values that even as a human you might consider "evil" but as that species it would not be "evil" at all.

[@zurviv0r]

Thank you for this response to KOA It tackles all the issues I had with his Video and his far fetched assumptions

[@ShelfStories]

I wouldn't say far fetched. But yeah, I think he allowed his own ideas of "cancel culture," or what have you, seep into how he read Isaac's blog.

[@rb3152]

I love story twists and morally challenging situations. I loved for example that at the end of the video game Knights of the Old Republic you discover you were the villain boss who lost his/her memory. From this perspective, the Isaac's example of discovering Inox children in a tent after you murder all their parents is worrying. I think it's a great opportunity to question what you are doing, consider the implications of your actions and are you the bad people? This kind of introspective I'm afraid it will be watered down to avoid hurting anyone's feelings.

[@ShelfStories]

I see your worry. I think the point of the video was to show that this isn't really about personal feelings, but cultural associations. Tough choices occur across all cultures. Imagine heightening that moral choice - what if the player had that choice, but they came from a background where they lived among Inox in peace and friendship, rather than have them as eternal enemies? I think there's room for that and more in this new way of looking at things.

[@rb3152]

@@ShelfStories yes, I definitely agree that you made some valid points. The Orc Wizard for example. I do love such story twists. In many stories the heroes are either unique persons or put into unique positions. One example from the Witcher universe (if you know it) is how Ciri is trained to become the first women Witcher in history. I love that! But Isaac's update did not make me think this is what he had in mind when he gave the example of the Inox children, quite the opposite.

[@ShelfStories]

@@rb3152 Isaac will be on the show tomorrow to further discuss what he meant. I don't ask this specific question, but we glance at it when I asked him if Frosthaven would still be as violent and "cool", so to speak. He said not one mechanisms or story point would change - just what was written on the backs of the player aids and on the website.

[@rmsgrey]

For me personally, the problem I have with the Inox children isn't the "surprise, you're the baddies!" moment, but the immediate follow-up "What? We're the baddies? Let's put a pin in this until we've finished our murder spree and then think about the implications." The game tries to present us as having no choice, but, considering that you only have to kill a certain number and then the scenario ends regardless of how many survivors you leave, it doesn't sell me on our being unable to stop the murdering early. The game doesn't just present you with an opportunity to discover that you've unknowingly been one of the bad guys all along; it then makes you knowingly complicit.

[@Exilium2090]

I fear for the next Lord of the Ring movie/boardgame, Elves, Hobbits, Humans, Orcs/Goblins... they all have a certain stereotype that they prove wrong. So you take that away and what do you have? They are different races... trents... etc. This is fantasy people, I play to get away from the world not to be consistently reminded of what some people can stretch anything out to be so that they can cancel it. I do not care if you want to improve lore/story, that's fine.. but show me changes or simply let me experience them myself. This is just polarising for the sake of polarising something that a few minority asked for. If you got offended or not safe by a Scenario, dont play it, sell the game, the market has plenty of options for you.

[@ShelfStories]

Gloomhaven is #1 on BGG. Frosthaven made $13 million. With a game that big, its worth a conversation. The final product will be better. No one is taking anything away, only enriching and adding so that everyone wins.

[@ajurban2010]

I can see the situation with your Vermlings example. I wonder if this extends to the long standing mythical groups: Goblin, Kolob, zombie, Orc, vampire, that have been around for a lot of years. Makes telling fantasy stories more difficult and requiring a different prospective on the story. Only problem I have with your video is your a Yankee fan. Ha Ha.

[@ShelfStories]

Haha. Gotta represent me :). Go Yanks!

[@GaryFromLiberty]

As a world builder in ttrpg (pathfinder 1e specifically but same ability score rules as d&d) I don't see the issue with negative ability score modifiers for races as long as you've worked the best you can to ensure that the race doesn't have a real-world analog to a culture you might be making by accident, which would be clearly harmful for the reasons you pointed out. For example I personally think it's interesting that in a fantasy world Orcs are just naturally, biologically larger with more muscle fibers than humans, but don't have as developed brains so learning new things comes slowly to them (+str -int), which makes the story of the Orc Wizard even more interesting in my eyes because they're overcoming that biological bias. I do understand the idea that you might get pressure from others not to play something "suboptimal" stat-wise but I feel like that could be and should be settled via a conversation about expectations and how you enjoy the game. I think taking it too far would be differences in ability score modifiers based on a race's culture because that dips into real-world false racist ideas, "orcs from here get these bonuses, but orcs from here get these instead" unless the difference in their environments is so extreme and likely magically influenced to alter their evolution, that likely wouldn't happen.

[@ShelfStories]

Good insights. I am personally very skeptical of negative stat mods in any official release. This is going to sound a bit harsh, but I don’t trust a bunch of white men with a profit motive and not much cultural training to do what you said - present negative stats that do not easily correlate to real world analogues. I know the image came fast, but take a look at orc bard mini and tell me not to make a real world association ;). Having said that, I can see an argument for allowing that in a homebrew world.

[@GaryFromLiberty]

Very good point, as much as I think in a vacuum these type of genetic differences between tradition fantasy races is good for storytelling, it would be very difficult to trust it to be handled well at a corporate level, where PoC are categorially under represented, without a lot of transparent change to the corporate culture and appropriate training

[@BannisterNicholas]

I'm curious, I did not make the association from the 'little' explanation of the vermlings (ratlings/skaven/ver-men) to American Indians, and especially found it upsetting that you specifically picked out 2 of the many varied American Indian tribes that looked more like that image, like you're trying to make it racist (for views?), and the white colonization, you also failed to include *all* the variants of how the British also invaded India, Australia, and several other lands, colonizing those lands, and their cultures, or the Vikings and how they invaded several other cultures, or how the romans invaded and colonized many races, or the Aztecs, the Sioux, the Arabians, or the hundreds of other variants of one culture invading and destroying or colonizing. You need to include all these variants, ban all those as well from story telling, its just not appropriate to tell a story that will offend any one of the descendants of those cultures. Someone is going to put the dots together, somewhere, so they all need to be banned. There are NO cultural contexts that don't exist. I found it funny, your solution instead of offending the native American Indians, you instead want to offend the Visigoths and Jutes and their descendants, What about the Americans and the British, closer culture right? um, Tea party anyone? gonna offend someone, somewhere. So hypocritical. Please understand, that, the colonization story exists, because one race is technologically superior in warfare, they want resources, and its easier to get the locals to follow your rules, than wipe them out and repopulate. If as story teller 'increase' the 'lower' race with better weapon & war tech, then colonization wont likely happen. it'll be two separate cultures, standoff, with trade happening instead. The story becomes disconnected, unbelievable and the reader will discard it. Telling the different stories you suggest, not only takes away from the story being told, colonization, but also have their own trigger groups. You told the story about the magic artefact, offending the Greeks by getting their lore wrong, then creating the story of Egyptian Artifacts and how Egypt lost its power from the British stealing all their artefacts & wealth, so now you're offending the Egyptians and North Africans and Africans and Aztecs, telling their stories but making 'them' the rats. I hope you understand the point, that no matter what story you tell, any conflict will have some dot points that resonate with someone from the side that was hurt. You cannot escape it.

[@ShelfStories]

Thank you for giving the video a chance. Unfortunately, there seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of “offense.” It isn’t just borrowing stuff from other cultures, or the association with animals. Cultural borrowing happens all the time among humans, and is generally a good thing. The “one-eye, three-witches” has been shared and sold so many times, no Greek person would really notice or care enough to take “offense”. As in all cultural stuff, it matters how you do it. The colonization story that Gloomhaven tells is based on stereotyped BS that most Americans learn in school. Natives are primitive, merciless savages who got washed away by the inevitable tide of human advancement. In real life, they lost, but “merciless savage” was propaganda used to justify genocide and land theft. The Natives had culture, history, poetry, art, laws, and whatever else we recognize as a human civilization. That part of the story is absent in the Gloomhaven myth, as it currently stands. Isaac has educated himself, and we we’ll see some better changes that will 1) not impact most people’s player experience 2) improve mine and anyone else who is aware of the other side of the history. Everyone wins. In addition, we cannot hide behind the “it’s fiction” defense. You clearly recognize the evocation of colonization tropes, as do most people besides the truly, willfully obtuse, or folks who truly believe that I want to ban everything. Nonsense. I say so in the video many times, I don’t want to talk anyone’s stuff away. This all can be fixed by telling better stories where the resistors have agency as a culture, not just random individual Mindthiefs. I also reject the “someone somewhere will take offense” argument. Each element of cultural borrowing is case by case. Some are better than others. If the individual case “offends”, then the author should have a good reason for it. There is no good reason to make Vermling culture reduce to garbage-eating savages. Isaac can, and will, do better in a way that maintains the integrity of the story.

[@bartwalczak2715]

Thank you for your voice. I think we all agree that we want interesting stories to be told. I will also say that it's good to have this discussion, and I have seen interesting arguments made on all sides. In my response I chose only those parts with which I disagree. I can't shake the feeling that the Race Essentialism argument is artificial and borders on a strawman. First, all RPGs start by introducing the Golden Rule, which says that if you want to do something that is not covered by the rules or against the rules, talk about it with your DM/GM and it's up to them to figure out a solution. They have carte blanche and the final say on what goes. The general rules have been conceived to give a semi-balanced foundation upon which to build and are more suggestions than hard-fast rules, even for rule-lawyers. It is something that has always been obvious to RPG players (at least those that I know). I am aware that board gamers feel different about the rules, but still, if you take the Golden Rule into consideration, the whole argument about not being able to do something, because there are generic descriptions in a book, falls apart immediately. But, let's continue. I have never known anyone who treated the "race" (and I'm totally willing to change the term here to get rid of this particular word, FWIW) descriptions differently than an archetype or a stereotype. A general description of an average "exemplar of that species". Overall strength and weaknesses attributed to that particular group of beings. Same goes for entries in Monsters Manuals. It's just a building block that you can shape to fit your story. I was actually perplexed when on Ludology podcast James derived a conclusion that because orcs are labelled violent and evil, therefore all half-orcs must come from rape. Excuse me? I have played RPGs for more than half of my life and I have *never* encountered this idea before. Makes you really wonder what twisted (sorry) mind could even conceive this. It really feels like his basic assumption is flawed and that he is arguing against something that is not there. I can't say anything about the Vermling example, but somebody already has. So maybe you are being selective when you are "connecting the dots"? Also, I can easily see how not all "races" need to have rich or even multiple cultures. In the spirit of true diversity it makes sense to argue that not all of them should have one. It really depends on the point of view or point of reference. The problem here of course is that you cannot control what your readers will project on your descriptions and what they will be triggered by. Where they will think you see them. But this is mostly beyond author's control unless they are making an analogy or metaphore on purpose. The solution is actual true diversity which includes the level of sophistication of various "races". What you glossed over was the argument that KoA was making that in S-F/F all *humans* are one "race", regardless of their culture, upbringing or color of the skin. How actually cosmopolitan and egalitarian S-F/F usually is. We introduce other "races" in S-F/F to create something more alien, where we can have various types of interaction and conflicts. And then all bets are off. Why is it that when some people see the word "human", they automatically read "white male" and assume that aliens and other "races" must by necessity be stereotypes about real-world people with different skin colors? Is it because the real world treated them so harshly, that they tend to connect the dots in a particular way? Have they internalized the racism and oppression so much that they might fail to see the positive message too? I think that we could definitely use is more diversity in perception of various "races". Most of the books only give you one - usually humans are taken as a point of reference. Maybe if we had several "race" descriptions partially written from the standpoint of another "race", for example "humans are annoyingly clever weaklings", it would make it easier to understand, that the description is just a guideline, an average, from which there always are outliers, and in the end it is your (DM's AND players') story and you can make with it whatever you want. With regards to board games, I am very curious about the hopefully incoming soon OrcQuest, where Orcs are the heroes and humans are the nuisance. To end on a positive note - I agree that we need a bit more awareness about language and how systemic racism manifests. I agree that we need more empathy. I even agree about the underlying sentiment of Race Essentialism argument, even if I disagree with its premise. It's great to have a discussion about it.

[@ShelfStories]

Archetypes are good. Stereotypes are bad. An archetype is just as you say, an exemplar. All cultures have them, which excites me greatly. I love learning about cultural archetypes and the ways in which peoples and groups exercise their freedoms to either live up to those stereotypes or go different ways. Stereotypes are bad. It is a copy of a thing, drained of dynamism, color, and the ability to be anything other than what it is. Individual PCs might become exceptions (ie, the Orc Wizard), but they remain exceptions. Why not make a point of writing that diversity more deeply into the lore, so more people have more to work with when crafting their characters? You ask creative people: they all pull from the real world. Gene Roddenberry, GRRM, they’ll all tell you they pull explicitly from real world cultures. All I’m saying is, do not pull from it thoughtlessly. Be aware of blind spots. Thinking past racial stereotyping and moving more to cultural archetypes would be a great move in that direction.

[@bartwalczak2715]

@@ShelfStories I hear you about digging deeper, no argument from me here, except sometimes you do need a rule-of-a-thumb or a generic one-size-fits-all description to quickly make some determination (is it going to eat me if I don't react *now*), before you can dig into details. That's how our brains work and there is no escaping from having a broad-brush heuristics (if you allow this terminology here). I'm of course not saying we should stop at these. But they do have their uses, despite being inherently biased (because based on past experience, limited knowledge, etc.). The question: do you think that *any* "race" should have access to *any* archetype in *any* capacity? If not, then how do you describe those tendencies and how are they different from stereotyping. Or maybe - do you differentiate between "generic", "average", "typical" and "stereotype"? As far as borrowing from the real world - sure, we are human beings, our imagination is shaped and limited by our experience. And I agree about being thoughtful.

[@ShelfStories]

@@bartwalczak2715 I’m trying to eliminate “race” from my verbal diet. “Race” just sloppily clumps together things a bunch of different things - inherent traits, genetic heritage, attitudes, behaviors, etc. In my ideal D&D PHB, we’d set the scene with species, or ancestry, to generate physical traits for the different groups - orcs, Halflings, savvas, etc. Have all the generic traits for the different groups, then other biological things like opposable thumbs, tusks, claws, etc. I’d make as hard a separation as I could between biological stuff and behavioral/ attitude/ mindset archetypes. I’d put that in culture/ upbringing/ family of origin, etc. Orcs can have tusks and green skin from their ancestry, but “aggression” would come from upbringing. That way, different orcs can have a different cluster of attributes, depending on upbringing. My Orc in a wizard tower, for example, could be a pacifist soul, and also hated because he runs against cultural expectation. The supplement from Arcanist Press does an excellent job of making that real. Nothing would have to really change if people didnt want it. Want your bloodthirsty Orc barbarian? Go for it. It just wouldn’t be the default anymore. To your point, do we need defaults? Not really. What is a “default” halfling - the acrobat, or clumsy Bilbo? Short with hairy feet seems enough for me. Then the behavior traits can depends on what each player gravitates towards.

[@bartwalczak2715]

@@ShelfStories I'm totally fine with changing the "race" to something else. I'm also seeing that the counter-proposal still did not settle on a single term - Isaac is struggling with the proper other name ("genus" or "species" does not seem to cut it for him). But that's a separate discussion. I'm also ok with having a culture be overlaid over nurture - like we've had with for example Player's Handbook to Elves in 2nd ed. Give writers more space and they will fill it with words and ideas. In fact, a lot of RPGs that came out in the 90s was a direct reaction to the stereotyping and monster-bashing perception of D&D, trying to dig deeper and go into the story more, showing PCs *and* NPCs that venture outside of the "racial" stereotypes. All in order to tell deeper stories. Heck, even D&D created one of the most interesting settings that focused on the battle of ideas (Planescape), where thoughts became reality. To be honest, you did lose me with your last paragraph. You're saying there are going to be defaults (traits, cultural expectations), and yet we don't need those defaults. Some could argue, that just because you can have a character with some genetic mutation (say an orc without tusks), then even the traits are meaningless. So where do you stop with "no defaults"? Golden Rule gives you right to every exception already, there's no need to fight over it. Also, will these traits have actual in-game effect? Like claws giving you +1 to combat? Would you object to a negative trait then? Like something that would lower the average intelligence? For some reason I feel like physical characteristics are ok, but people mostly strongly object to the mental ones, because nobody wants to be called stupid (if you allow me, no disrespect intended). And because rules are mostly about trying to invent some numbers to be able to compare things sort of objectively, this goes against the current trend of giving more credence to subjective experience and non-judgment and suddenly we're touching a taboo and nobody wants to have negative bonuses to stats anymore, defeating the whole purpose of stats in general. Well, we've had stat-less RPGs as well. They didn't last, they catered to a very specific group of people. What I'm hearing is that you yourself are saying "nobody will tell me how my PC should look like or should behave" - something that you accuse critics of. Which is perfectly fine, and which as I said is covered by the Golden Rule, and has never been a problem for anyone but some novice DMs. But then I'm also hearing this: "These people are described in such a way that it reminds me of some real-world people, and they have a negative characteristic ascribed to it, and I don't like it, because it propagates the false stereotype.". Is that what this is all about? Because it's a totally different point, that we can absolutely make and don't need the whole Race Essentialism argument to support it. In fact, because Race Essentialism argument seems flawed to me, it weakens (or even undermines) the "have more empathy" and "be more thoughtful with your real-world references" argument.

[@ShelfStories]

@@bartwalczak2715 These are some well considered thoughts. Thank you. I believe that the Golden Rule (which refer to as Rule Zero) cannot be relied upon in any way as an answer to a cultural critic’s concerns. If an RPG or fantasy product is niche and targeted, there’s a lot more latitude. But for any product with SF-F elements meant for a wider audience, the baseline product should be as culturally sensitive as humanly possible, while answering to its core mission of being fun. That balance should be there, baked right into the mechanisms. Rule Zero gives a lot of freedom for players to do whatever they want, be it even more representational, or less! If people in their home groups want to play all the stereotypes, with chain mail bikinis for all the females and orcs that look like gorillas, I can’t stop them. I just don’t need anything like that in the official source material. The point about only some novice DMs having problems with Rule Zero is gatekeeping. Experienced GMs have more tools to make a good game work, no matter what the rule set gives them. Newer GMs will go lift what they read right off the text and go. We all have biases, so whatever biases they have will creep into their games without thought. That’s one of the biggest points to emphasize. I talk a lot about wanting to radically minimize racial essentializing in SF-F games. It is a LOT easier said than done. Whatever gets produced, anywhere in the chain from writing to art to publication to playing it, emphasize thoughtfulness and empathy. These things are not emphasized enough in the current products. That in itself would be a welcome change. I totally agree that a statless RPG doesn’t do anything for anyone. If D&D is anything, it’s full stat blocks. I’m saying, those stats need to be tied to worlds and cultures, not just independent races floating above any world. The funny thing is that D&D always approached it this way - 5E is rooted in Forgotten Realms. When I first played in 2E, the default world was Greyhawk. The book clearly said it, but only once in a skippable blurb, then moved on to present a “generic” setting. I don’t want a generic setting. “Generic” settings always hide their biases behind its generic-ness. Let’s have settings, lots of them! Just not a “generic” one. Fantasy settings should always be highlighted. Foregrounding one setting as a baseline for players to get a foothold does not necessarily mean presenting “THE generic world”. The books shows that by giving explicit guidance if players want to change their setting. It is made clear that the characters (and their stat blocks) can, and will likely, change, or that alternative stat layouts are always available. That might be clear to you and to me, but it’s not clear to many people picking the book up. Changing the setting changes the Orc. That’s cannot happen under a “racial essentializing” paradigm where an Orc’s full stat block doesn’t change, no matter the setting. One last note about interpretation. At one point you used the construction “what I’m hearing you say is...”. That is your interpretation. And I can tell you from about 31 of these comment discussions, the default resistance is almost always someone perceiving some kind of force or restriction. I’ve said many, many times, I’m not trying to force anyone to do anything. My project is about persuasion and critical thinking. That’s it. I might sneak a should or a must in there, sure. But those are in the inner moral sense of “do good, avoid harm” that I think all humans should strive for. At no point do I advocate for anyone to force anyone else to do anything. If you find a disagreement, and your disagreement runs along the lines of “well, it sounds like you’re trying to force or restrict...”, I invite you to explore your own framework and ask 1) do you suspect I’m trying to force people into something and I’m somehow not saying it, and 2) does that suspicion make my recommendations sound worse to you than they actually might be? I don’t mind defending myself against the force presupposition, but it does get tiring after multiple conversations ;).

[@hausser3024]

Your points would be more valid if Isaac wasn't already considered a SJW for the other things he supports in the board game community. He just piled on his already poor reputation with the Safehaven scandal.

[@ShelfStories]

Frosthaven will rock. All of this is peripheral noise.

[@hausser3024]

@@ShelfStories I hope so.

[@NancyABQ]

Thanks for the thoughtful video, Jason. I think KOA just needs to stay in his lane and post his gaming content. I already unsubscribed from him after his video re: the Tiny Epic Dungeons controversy, because it was immediately evident that he hadn't researched the details of that one before weighing in. Unfortunately, his posts on these topics just cause a lot of self-confirming back-slaps from other white guys who (being charitable) just don't get it.

[@MrCABman1972]

Is not the word race in fantasy just a replacement for several other words that in the past made things simpler as it never distinguished between different species or sub species within a species in general. The scientific meaning of the word race are basically a sub species within a species and can mean a species separated by geography, time, behaviour and a few other categories. I'm not opposed to get rid of the word race as long as it's not replaced with something odd like sub species for example. To be honest I don't understand what is wrong with what so called Racial Essentialism as you put it in Fantasy or Sci-fi is? Is it not just stateliness that show the main genetic differences between Humans and other "races" in that context?!? It is not suppose to reflect cultural differences, just genetic ones... although genetics and culture can often shape each other in terms of sentient beings, we only know about a few sentient cultures here on earth and they all belonged to the same species... so we can only speculate how much certain strong genetic traits may universally influence culture within a specific species. In role-play there is NO winner so you can NEVER play sub optimal, this is just an odd thing to even say. This mainly sound like someone playing an online computer game where stats mean everything and story mean very little, that is NOT role-play. Role play is about playing an individual and all individuals are just that, individuals. Any individual may have aptitudes for different things and that is just natural... any individual might also have interests that have nothing do do with their natural aptitudes or the lack of them, this is true in the real world as well, most inaptitudes can be overcome with rigours training but you will never be a world champion but you can certainly be better than most on whatever task you decide to become good at. So, if species X has a +2 strength, a +1 stamina and -2 intelligence over humans I see no wrong in that as that is just genetic traits inherent to that "race" that differs from humans. I would really like to see a mechanic that is not "Racial Essentialism" that show the differences between species in this regard. As species X is on average bigger and stronger than humans, how else do you show this from a game mechanic perspective?!? You can still play species X as a wizard if you wish, that is part of playing role-play to explore different aspect of the world and the story you are telling. It is up to you how much you want to play into the stereotype from an individual perspective or if you want to experience a different angle. Perhaps you want to play the Orc bard that beat the odds in the Elven court and become a legend despite their origin. Is this not the same struggles we see in everyday society for some people where society unfairly (and unjust) is predisposed to make it harder for them?!? Why do Orcs perceive Elves as fair and beautiful, should they not perceive them as ugly from a Darwinist point of view?!? Perhaps an elf would have the same struggle if they tried to become famous within an Orc society... but perhaps elves just have traits that Orcs too find attractive instinctively as part of their genetic code, there is nothing wrong in that narrative. It also exist in the real world as well even if they are not genetic traits but cultural ones. Some cultural traits might be more universally positive than others, even among those cultures that don't possess them as much. In my opinion people usually mix the individual with the overall archetype or the norm of a culture. For example... Swedes (i'm from Sweden) are generally seen as more introvert and "afraid" of conflict as a stereotype, which is not completely wrong if you look at us a culture. But from an individual perspective you hardly will find anyone who fit that stereotype perfectly and that is how the real world works but it does permeates the Swedish culture versus other cultures when you take a birds eye view, that is just a fact how it is perceived. I'm in no way against the stories of any game being more inclusive and that we should not draw direct parallel in text and symbols between real sensitive issues... my issue is that it often is too easy to draw parallels to any issue as an after construct so we should be really careful in how we do this. So, it is great that companies take the time to make sure their writing is as neutral it can be without sacrificing content and meaning. I mean, every piece of fantasy or sci-fi is inspired from historical or current events and that is the ONLY way we can do things so people feel drawn into them and can relate to them.' On a less serious note I'm certain I'm going to be able to find more than one item in Frosthaven that I will be able to drawn some stereotypical Norse myth that is not really true and could potentially be offensive to a Scandinavian, not that we are but I bet some individual seriously could be. Or a parallel to the indigenous Nordic people I. bet 99.999% I can find something like that in Frosthaven when it comes out if I really try...

[@ShelfStories]

I’d like to avoid the offensive stereotypes that leap out without actually trying. For my background as someone very friendly to Native American perspectives, the “noble savage” stereotype of the Vermling is far too on-the-nose. You can have that element in fantasy. But my argument is that different races shouldn’t largely *only* be these things, with individual exceptions for PCs. It would help if there were different tribes of Vermlings at different levels of development and cultural expression. You know, like real life societies. Humans get to be complex and multi-faceted. So should everything else. So, I think we’re mostly in agreement.

[@MrCABman1972]

@@ShelfStories Yes... I agree that we too often generalise cultures in games and often that is lack of space to flesh them out. If you only have about 400 words to explain what a "race" is you have to generalise but you also have to assume some level of wisdom on the part of the reader when you do that. If you have a board game and all the text you have at the disposal are the back of the play mat to describe a whole civilisation in a few sentences to portray a feeling for what they are then stereotypical tropes is a way to do that. For good or bad.. we have to assume the reader understand that the individual in that society generally are as diverse as humans are, humans are also stereotypes equally in those cases too... take a game like Twilight Imperium for example. I do agree that in a game like Gloomhaven there are a lot more room to have interesting characters that break the stereotype of individual races to build more believable individuals. We have the narrative story and Events to help with that. In terms of Native Americans I always though of Inox to be more like Native Americans to be honest (strong an proud warriors), but that is my preconceptions in how I view things. Vermlings for me always reminded me of Skaven from Warhammer anyway so I never even went there in the first place. They just were a shamanistic tribal people and that's it. You don't need some advanced backstory to show individualism on any race. Vermlings can be a truly stone age people until humans encountered them and they have only started to evolve from that recently due to interaction with the humans and are still reeling from that culture shock... can be equally interesting stories from that. But it can also be as you described, but it does not have to be to make them interesting. This is why I think it is also a bit of a slippery slope to backtrack from the original intent of a creator. As all the ideas that we have MUST in some shape and form come from our real world experiences and knowledge. We should all be respective of other cultures but not blind to history and atrocities so they can't be made to tell a compelling believable story. Living in Europe and close to history I'm all to familiar with holocaust deniers and stuff like that so I'm a bit sensitive to anything that tries to bury horrible things that happened in the past as one example. Anyway... keep up the work and let us all be friends and tolerant with each other... :)

[@tigormiti]

In the Vermling discussion, the reasoning that establishes the connection between Vermlings and Native Americans is inconsistent and unnecessarily self-serving. You say that it’s “pretty clear” that Vermlings are a metaphor for Native Americans, based on clothing and maybe other things like weaponry. Assuming this is reasonable, you then quote Cefalophair’s blog. But if you read that Vermlings “feed off the flesh of the dead”, are “weak-willed”, and so on, and using the same kind of reasoning based on clothing, this should instead invalidate the previous attempt at drawing a metaphor (unless you think Native Americans feed off the flesh of the dead, are weak-willed, and so on). The dots don’t connect. That is, you use differently the data points according to how they validate (or don’t) your view. An unbiased reader of the Cephalair quote would just tell themselves “ok so they don’t speak of the Native Americans.”

[@ShelfStories]

Isaac has admitted he drew from real life colonial tropes in setting up his universe. That's not controversial, it's a known fact. If we're talking colonial tropes, "garbage eating savages" pretty much sums up the colonial attitude towards indigenous peoples around the world during the age of European expansion and conquest. "Merciless Indian savages" is written into the American Declaration of Independence. It's all colonial perception and not really real. That's the point - Gloomhaven replicates these colonial tropes in a stereotyped, un-nuanced way. As someone who cares about current Native American issues and who works with those folks, the dots come together for me very clearly. If you don't see it, that's fine. But it's not correct to call that the "unbiased" view. We all bring our life experiences. It's an easy fix. Just turn 2D into 3D. Keep Vermling society savage, but also have some depth to it to explain the savagery a bit better than "they're just a bunch of savages, except for the random PC." Trust me; your game is going to be just as cool.

[@tigormiti]

@@ShelfStories “Isaac has admitted he drew from real life colonial tropes in setting up his universe:” sure. I even based my argument on “assuming [some of your reasoning] is reasonable”. So this is not the point. Isaac borrows from reality, as all storymakers do. But when he uses rats and says they eat flesh off the dead and all the other stuff, that’s where the metaphor stops short. What you’re doing is ignoring this, and in addition, making the metaphor greater than life, by saying it implies or suggests that Native Americans are dead-eating rats. I can see why you think what you’re thinking, but only in the sense that it’s based on a fallacy.

[@ShelfStories]

​@@tigormiti From the very beginning of the Age of Conquest period, conquistadors and other European conquerors spread propaganda about native peoples engaging in blood sacrifice, cannibalism, and other dirty and uncivilized practices, e.g. Columbus et. al. regarding the Carib native peoples as savage cannibals. They were actually the Kalinago peoples, descendants of which still live in Hispanola and other parts of the Antilles today. The Gloomhaven lore borrows this and many other colonial tropes. Hunting with crude knives and bows, smaller stature, motivated by food and fear... these are ALL tropes present throughout the period of active native displacement, stemming from initial colonization through events like the Trail of Tears in the 1830s. So no, my thoughts on the matter are not based on fallacies.

[@tigormiti]

@@ShelfStories The fallacy is about the logic of your inferences from _observation_ (i.e., observation of the game), the propaganda trope doesn’t change that (it isn’t about observing something and trying to deduce what it means), no more than it can prove that propaganda is right. You could argue that your argument is irrational, and that irrational arguments are relevant in the sense that humans are irrational, and I could accept that. But in terms of logic, your inferences don’t work. In a way, you’re victim of the fact that you laid down your reasoning methodically (starting with the equations), so I felt inclined to rebut you on logical grounds. That said, I can understand that the Vermlings backstory can bring back painful tropes to mind through resonance. Just bear in mind that analyzing one’s emotional reactions with logic can be quite useful (rationality is also a human invention, after all).

[@ShelfStories]

@@tigormiti I don’t think you’ve correctly identified my core position. I’m not saying Gloomhaven obviously connects Vermlings and Native Americans. Gloomhaven does not engage in something like Napoleon in George Orwell’s Animal Farm, which hits the reader over the head with the Soviet parallel. My claim is that Gloomhaven presents things in a way that gamers with relevant life experience are liable to “connect the dots” and see Native stereotypes reproduced in the work. The point about life experience lending to meaning-making is core to the argument, because I realize that not everyone will see the same thing here. That’s ok, since that how humans actually work. If you’re not going to directly engage the life experience point and assert the possibility of an “unbiased” or logical viewpoint outside of particular experience here, then you are not really engaging my point. I don’t really care about the unbiased view, if such a thing were possible. For me, it’s enough that SOME people see the parallel, based not just on feelings but on relevant life experience and historical memory. That is enough for me to call for change (which is coming). Should it matter that some people would draw the parallel, but others do not? I contend a creative person can find ways to rearrange the “dots” of their fiction to help folks like me see different, more interesting, and safer things without too much effort. In this case, I happen to be one of the someone’s who sees the issue. I would support a similar effort if I didn’t see a problem, but others did, within reason and consideration of their historical memory.

[@Darkjin7]

Going to go against the grain here. (Side note versus all the comments of "echo chambers" - its what people do. The people commenting down below stereotyping and claiming things on KOA's video are doing the same thing here, it's just from their side of the wall it's ok because of the base concept of "I'm right, you're wrong" which everyone is fighting). For the video, fair discussion but I dont agree. The connecting a rat, vermling, and Indian (to me) is a "person" problem. People that grow up a certain way may or may not know the difference of things or other views but that also goes both ways and insinuates that a person can't grow to not think a certain way either. Can't a person that saw racism when there wasn't one grow and change just as much as making me change for them? I don't think a race of people are assholes, I think that a person is an asshole. Perspective and point is important - I agree with wholeheartedly. But in my family and extended family, we have whites, blacks, mexicans, asians, lesbians, gays, and straights. We're a pretty diverse group. We don't see race, we see individuals - the individual action, words, etc. Now I've been told that this is some how wrong from other people - think they called it being blind to race. To which I would counter with, well with all our point of views and perspective our lives and interactions are just fine until someone brings their drama into it, thus we feel they are wrong. Catch 22/I'm right and you're wrong concept. So am I wrong and evil? Is my multi racial and multi cultural family wrong and evil? No. But we're being judged for it because our view is different than yours. Secondary thought about the thought process of "connecting the dots": Sometime in the future we'd hit a wall of what is allowed/not allowed. There will come some point in time that anything could be connected to anyone or situation. A word, a setting, etc. at some point in time anything will cross with a race/culture. Also, there were already comments and quotes saying that this is also going to change some elements of the game. The approach to the town/land, interactions with local creatures and races (choice is good but just stating the changed aspect), and another quote that race was just an example but that the consultant is examining EVERY aspect of the game. How can this not change multiple aspects and have other implications on the rest of the game. Describing the vermlings with more aspects, traits, society, etc sounds awesome! But just as any artist starts with a beat, a broad stroke of a canvas, an outline, they thing fill in and add details and complexity. - This is good. Also, during your video you are flip-flopping on when you are allowed to use context and verbatim and assuming when others do or do not use context and verbatim. This also goes back to the beginning of your video with the perspective and point of view like you discussed. ----- got to this point and stopped, I think I'm truly just done with these discussions and this game now. Full disclosure my pledge was forced refunded back to me because I voiced my opinion (both peacefully and combatively when I was attacked) on the kickstarter and I was not given a choice. Is this inclusion, does this create growth, or does it just silence your opponent unjustly? There is a difference in discussion/inclusiveness and dictatorship/my way or the highway. So upon your connecting the dots now I see him as a dictator that is hypocritical - that a me problem or a group problem? Upon my train of thought that could be a me problem, upon your video thought it could be a group problem. Interesting question with your video huh. Anways, this is way more than I wanted for a boardgame to play with my family and kids. Not worth all this extra drama and politics, we'll just play something else instead. My family lives with good morals and standards, we respect others, help and support others, and we do all this without this drama and mess. Not worth it and not worth giving up our way of life for a more chaotic and negative filled life. Nah I'm good, sorry for the rant on your page but thank you for getting me to this point that I can walk away knowing we're happy and knowing that our actions and inclusion is better than this.

[@ShelfStories]

Thank you for sharing your thoughts. My only rule for KZbin comments is to engage in good faith. I don’t ask for agreement, just engagement. The difference between our world views is probably too big to bridge in the span of a KZbin comment. I have my reasons for making the associations that I do. You have yours, which I totally respect - a thesis of the video. As far as the creeping totalitarianism that some feel the left is guilty of, all I can say is that is not how I operate the only things I can control, which is my own site. I’ve spoken out against making judgments on every side, and will continue to do so. Hope you can find a game that suits you!

[@processseer6693]

@@ShelfStories The whole Frosthaven debacle is mostly about the how not the what or why. It‘s the designers choice if he wants to change or amend the story to align with newfound convictions. The whole Kickstarting thing makes it a bit more difficult if you change your creative vision after being paid for another one but I digress. The issue people had was that the designer dismissed ALL criticism as being proof of being a terrible person, hateful and racist. That‘s where the crap hit the fan. And it‘s actually a bit telling that you didn‘t actually address the exact sentences and phrases people are actually upset about. I assume that‘s because you find it hard to defense them yourself: „I would encourage you to simply reach out to [e-mail] and request a full refund if you feel strongly enough about it. We've already done that for a couple people who didn't think black lives matter, and we'd be happy to do it again for people who don't think board games should be a safe space for everyone.“ This directly implies that every person that is unhappy with the shift of vision or the politication of boardgames and decides to vote with their wallet is automatically a terrible person no matter their actually reason. It‘s actually quite ironic that on one hand the entire text was against stereotyping and then immediately jumps to putting all critics into the same drawer. In bird culture we call that an a..hole move.

[@ShelfStories]

@@processseer6693 Frosthaven’s Update 81 seemed like a sincere apology for that poor wording. Seems like a lot of backers appreciated it, too, from reading the comments.

[@freedom2663]

Gloomhaven seems even more based now. Too bad he changed it.

[@NaouakNawak]

I'm only up to the vermling story but I find your reasoning very flawed. I would compare your story about vermling about the same as the people looking for meaning in reversed song. Every single person in the world will connect the dot differently and in every case, you will find someone that will connect those dots in a way that is not intended and wanted. The issue with safespace, in my humble opinion, is that it is often told as an inclusive thing when it is actually an american exclusive thing. I'm from a culture (metropolitan french culture, legacy from french revolution and french philosophers) that has a very different set of values regarding how to manage inclusivity and difference in a group of people and the rethoric used by a lot of people around the frosthaven controversy is really offensive to me. The discussion that are not moderated on the BGG forums for the frosthaven controversies are enraging me because they go against my core set of values. To me, when your connecting the dots on something in a cultural product, you should be looking for good intentions first. Some kind of Occam's Razor applied to those "connecting the dots". If you're looking for bad intentions from the author, then you're being dishonest with the author. It's really easy to say to the author, "it's because of your biases" when it may be because of the person connecting the dots "biases". And as there is as many biases as people in the world, you will never be able to make something culturally that can be safe for everyone. I'm sure I can find a stereotype for every "evil" character in gloomhaven that could be matched with some real cultures and be outraged about it, but that would be my issue, not Isaac issue. There's no issue in making a product more inclusive for the american people but in doing so, you're making it less inclusive for others(that's perfectly fine if you're addressing only US people or are willingly excluding foreigners). Stereotyping is a great tools in cultures that can be used for both good and bad. Having a species in a game stereotyped, help the players to define that species in their mind but if someone interpret those stereotypes as "absolutely every member of that species is", then they are being dishonest (intentionnally or not). 35 000 of the backers of Frosthaven are not from the US and I'm sure that among the critics of the changes is a lot of people from outside the US. All of that to say that I think Isaac last paragraphs and his twitter apologies is just showing a lack of cultural understanding and is applying an american centric way of thinking. Those "middle" people he talks about are not all part of the US culture and don't want to take part in its cultural civil war. Disclaimer: I'm not a backed of Frosthaven and I have barely played gloomhaven (1 scenario and about 7 or 8 from JOTL). I did not enjoy my time with the game because of the gameplay.

[@ShelfStories]

Thank you so much for engaging so thoughtfully. Critiques from my European watchers have made me think and reflect more deeply than any others. I value them. At some point, I will do a Voices show with a few board game luminaries whose primary language is not English, talking about how they see American board gamers from the outside. The trick will be finding the right voices to make that interesting. But I will certainly try. One thing that struck me in your response- about how, when we connect the dots, we would do well to assume “good intention”. I wish! I could probably assume good intention in one product, one creator, etc. But not when the same dots are presented the same way, over and over. To use the example of the Native Americans, when the same stereotypes persist in Western cultural media (American and European) since first contact, that erodes any good intention I can assume. The way Gloomhaven currently describes Vermlings almost reads word for word like a journal entry from Christopher Columbus. I do not assume good intention or bad intention. I assume thoughtless. Lack of awareness. My answer is not to enforce American norms. My answer is to remove things like essentialized races and open up more space. I can only speak for myself here - I am listening to European critique and trying to incorporate that into my worldview as best I can, even as my core convictions remain.

[@NaouakNawak]

@@ShelfStories I disagree with your way of seeing things. "Existencialized races" is just another term for stereotypes in fiction and I still find people taking those as perfect definition of the species dishonest (again, voluntarily or not). If we take an example like the Pokedex from Pokémon, every pokemon species is "existencialized" yet through the medias and even the games, they've shown that what is written in the Pokedex is not true for every member of each species. They even in later games introduced the notion of regionalized species that are different from their previous appearance. If someone make a race of ranting cooks that always smoke and will go on strike at every occasion, I will surely connect the dots as "looks like a french person" but I wouldn't associate all the actions the race does or is taking part of as part of a statement to the french people. The burden of interpretation is on the interpreter not on the creator. If the author explains that he was making a statement about french people then it's not an interpretation anymore and you can hold the creator accountable. Using ignorance or thoughtlessness, is just a way to say "we think that you're bad but it's not your fault, it's because your values and culture is wrong compared to mine". There may be some extreme case where I might agree with that but only on edge cases, otherwise, I call that cultural colonialism. When you say that someone else culture is wrong, you're invalidating someone and are making your culture "the right one". And that in my book is the definition of exclusion. It's basically the principle of the tolerance paradox. You can't truly be inclusive, you can only be inclusive to one group of people. When you take actions to make things inclusive, you are basically moving the target of toward who you are inclusive to. Again, just my opinion based on my cultural values, I can't pretend to know any better of how any other culture think on this issue.

[@ShelfStories]

@@NaouakNawak It might be helpful to note here that I'm not just an American. I'm also Puerto Rican. I get just as mad at white American cultural imperialism as the next Latino here. A few years ago, some white folks here tried to cancel the American cartoon Speedy Gonzalez. Too many damaging Mexican stereotypes, they said. Some very vocal folks in the Latino American community rose up immediately and said "don't you dare touch Speedy! You can't catch me, cancel culture!" So now there's a negotiation to remove the most harmful stereotypes (ie, Speedy's friends who are generally lazy drunks), and keep the things that will really inspire people, a negotiation with input from the community being depicted. I think that's the best way, but we'll see what happens when the new Space Jam movie comes out. I realize the irony of talking about Warner cartoons with someone of French descent, considering how we currently see Pepe Le Pew. I kind of wish the character wasn't soaked in grabby sexual assault imagery; that kind of spoils the image there (or maybe is doesn't for you? Is that what you mean by Americans putting their values on others, me making a judgment that incessant cartoon sexual grabbiness is wrong?). You'd have to tell me whether the traits outside of that trigger uncomfortable associations or not. Once again, for me, it's about listening to other people and negotiating something that works for everyone. That's my model. I'm not going to defend if more mainstream American lefty thought doesn't act the same way.

[@NaouakNawak]

@@ShelfStories It's funny with Pepe le pew is that no one in France knew that it was supposed to be a french stereotype because to us in the french version it's an Italian stereotype. So the outrage about it is mostly from people outside of France, some people are being outraged for us without even consulting us. I don't think the character was ever seen as a wrong stereotype in french culture but we as a culture are more openly acceptable of representing stuff that is wrong. We wouldn't have any issue to depict a dictator in a nuanced way, even the worst ones because we believe more strongly in the intentions than the means (which bring me back again to assume good intentions first). I know that you're trying to bridge different group of people and "negotiating" something that works for everyone but we know that it won't ever be possible because there will always someone shocked by something. You can try to be as much careful as you want but you will then offend the cultures that thinks that this kind of behavior is hypocritical. There's no way to write something that will please every one and pursuing that chimera is only leading to more segregation and exclusionary practices. The only thing we can do is accept that you can't please everyone and that somewhere someone will think that you are the worst person in the world because you wrote something they found outraging. I believe that safespace is a misnomer because more than often I personally don't feel safe in those spaces. I don't want to argue on BGG because I know my comment will be considered dismissive at the very least and I'm just facing a ban because my values don't align with the "safespace". We, the french people, had some of the cultural fights the US is having right now more than 200 years ago and we created a culture that resulted with a very different vision of what should be safe or not, what should be acceptable and who to blame for outrages. We are a people that get tons of outrages (we're known for that) but we don't have anything (until very recently with the new generation that has taken in a big chunk of American culture and values in) like a "cancel culture" or anything like that. I believe the core issue of that cultural war is that there is two sides that thinks the other is the most evil in the world and are not willing to negotiate anything in between. There is some views on both sides that are very close minded and as long as there is people that are closed minded, there will be this fight. People are calling that a cultural war because that's what it is, a fight between two cultures to get supremacy other the other and both trying to get more "allies" by painting the other side as evil. It's everything you see in a war but with the weapons being texts and the battlefield being the social networks. There will always be some kind of Switzerland but there will also be overzealous "with me or against me". The issue with that war, it's that it is a war between two US centric groups but they want the whole world in it. Other cultures are the casualties of that war. As I often says to my friends, "if you think you're the good guy, then you're not".

[@kragothevalour1207]

@@NaouakNawak I really enjoyed reading your comments. Thank you!

[@Sthunderrocker]

How is it any better to describe an apparent assumption based on racial stereotype as "caucasity" which in and of itself is stereotyping based on race? I appreciate that you then say it's about actions and not race, but then you use a word that implies that those actions are "essentially" white. You might want to rearrange your dots...

[@ShelfStories]

I address my use of caucasity elsewhere in these comments. If enough people ask, I will address in a separate piece.

[@mmrempen]

This is the best channel on KZbin

[@ShelfStories]

I don’t know about that, but thank you!

[@PatrikGrip]

It's sad to hear so many straw man arguments. Your views seem to be very egocentric, and contrary to what you state your opinions seem to be the only valid ones.

[@ShelfStories]

If you had one or two specific “straw men” that you think I presented, I’d like to hear them.

[@thereal4579]

This is about the dumbest thing I've ever heard.... you yourself make connections that were never supposed to be made. You yourself find yourself upset through an imaginary association. and because you yourself created this connection, you demand change. Issacs's take is overly sensitive to everyone's perceived victimhood. If one has to worry about how another will interpret everything out of fear of "offending" them, then nothing can be written. You choose to make those connections and let those connections create a false narrative.

[@ShelfStories]

Thank you for giving the video a chance. My point here is that we all make connections, no matter the intention of the creator. Some connections are rational, some less so. It's up to the creator to judge that and react accordingly. In Isaac's case, no one demanded anything. He made whatever changes of his own free will. Frosthaven is still dope. People are enjoying it. That's the most important thing, at the end of the day.

[@thereal4579]

@@ShelfStories I agree with you, however it's on the person who is making connections to reflect why those connections are made, it's not the requirement of the creator to do anything but at most refute those connections. I also agree with you about racial essentialism, but again you lose me when you decide yourself to interject a connection that was not intended and then complain or about said connection as problematic. I'm glad people like the game, but that's moot to the argument. I cancelled my pledge immediately after update 80 because the way he demonizes others for dissenting opinions. Ironic to that of the update mission. Overall, it's only the fault of the user to fall victim to their own perceived connections. Not the fault.of the creator.

[@ShelfStories]

In the follow up to this video, I gave the example of George RR Martin making a slight change to Tyrion between books 1 and 2 of A Song of Ice and Fire. This was in the 90s, way before all this cancel culture nonsense. In the first book, Tyrion the dwarf did somersaults and jumped off a roof. He got feedback from folks who had dwarfism in real life, saying they were disappointed and hurt he had reproduced the stereotype of the "flippy little person." GRRM didn't mean it. But he acknowledged people had a reasonable reaction to his work. He changed it in later books to make Tyrion more like real life folks with dwarfism - mocked for his stature, legs in pain. GRRM's free choice to respond to the audience resulted in better fiction and a better reception from the audience. That's exactly the hope for Frosthaven. If you believe this was a case of force, then that's unfortunate. All I can say is that's what my video here was all about - an act of persuasion. People are free to respond however they want - changing stuff or moving forward with their art.

[@thereal4579]

@@ShelfStories those who decided to be offended about this particular character and voice that opinion are the ones who seek validation through others. That's textbook egocentrism. GRRM choice to change the character may have came from a place of good intentions, but it's only by the voice of the "offended" was he persuaded to make such a change. I am not saying it's inherently bad, just reactionary to from the weak minded.

[@ShelfStories]

Fair enough. We're going to have to agree to disagree here, but I appreciated reading your thoughts.