[LionofPerth]

Greetings all

As I'm about to start a quite story heavy Shadowrun campaign, I've got a few players still working on their characters. One of them is set on a troll sam as their character.

I've given them a warning about rascism, saying that trolls and orcs face pretty severe rascism, compared to elves and dwarves.

In short, of my cast of NPC's, I have a number of people who will react badly to them. One will not deal with them at all. End of statement. In her case, she dislikes trolls so much she doesn't see anything wrong with turning the tips of the last trolls horns into earrings for her to wear. Mind you, said troll also cost her an arm in the attack. Still, nasty we can agree.

Other parts do include possible lynchings, not lethal, but certainly painful, they're going to be facing a lot of scrutiny from Lone Star, Knight Errant, even with a legal SIN, they will get stopped and pulled in on a regular basis. Any cyberwear they have will be scanned and checked every time they pass through a major border. Any sort of bioware gets detected, things will get interesting for them.

How far have you guys taken rascism? Do you think I will be taking it too far? Not far enough?

[ZeConster]

Doesn't Seattle 2072 mention Knight Errant is aiming for a better image when it comes to racism than Lone Star had? One of the main NPCs in season 4 is a 10-foot KE troll, after all. Sure, there's plenty of racists, but you're more likely to get heat from the cops over being Awakened than for being a troll or orc, so I think you're taking things too far - farther than the source material supports, at least.

[JackVII]

I'm personally not that big of a fan of that level of discrimination unless race relations happen to be an important part of the story you're telling. If it's just a rider to the main story, I probably wouldn't be a fan.

With that said, as long as you have basically taken these passages:

In short, of my cast of NPC's, I have a number of people who will react badly to them. One will not deal with them at all. End of statement. In her case, she dislikes trolls so much she doesn't see anything wrong with turning the tips of the last trolls horns into earrings for her to wear. Mind you, said troll also cost her an arm in the attack. Still, nasty we can agree.

Other parts do include possible lynchings, not lethal, but certainly painful, they're going to be facing a lot of scrutiny from Lone Star, Knight Errant, even with a legal SIN, they will get stopped and pulled in on a regular basis. Any cyberwear they have will be scanned and checked every time they pass through a major border. Any sort of bioware gets detected, things will get interesting for them.

...and distilled it in a way that is explainable to the PCs that are planning on playing those races, I think you're okay. Your idea of "pretty severe racism" and their idea might be different, so it's probably better for them to have an informed opinion before they settle.

[MijRai]

I personally think it sounds interesting, provided you do what Jack suggests, and make sure they understand the ramifications.  Be blunt about it too; there'll be fewer regrets if you flat out tell them there are people out there who collect tusks or ears as trophies.  In a homebrew game I'm in, the GM explained that being not-human in human-controlled areas (pretty much 75% of the landmass on the map) will get you targeted pretty bad.  To the degree that halflings live like gypsies (complete with stereotypes of being thieves, which our party member doesn't always help with), the 'gnomes' of the setting are nearly extinct, dwarfs in human lands are a bit like historical Jews (in their homelands they're more dwarfy), orcs are flat-out murdered south of the tundra because everyone 'knows' they're murderous apes, etc.  Of course, I chose to play an elf, complete with an Animal Magnetism-esque Quality.  Being chased out of town because the local wives and daughters were staring too long (or worse) has happened a time or two.  Or, him being arrested and charged with murder for trying to save a sick person with his herblore ('magic' is frowned upon; the big inspirations for this setting are primarily historical Europe, Lord of the Rings, and Elric of Melnibone, with some Witcher and Black Company thrown in for flavor). 

Something to always throw in occasionally, if racism is a factor in your Shadowrun game's culture, is old-school pigment-based racism.  Every racist in Shadowrun despises the stupid trogs and hate the worthless dandelion eaters or think all the little breeders should go screw themselves, but nobody expects the KKK (or maybe they do, I guess)! 

Also, now I have the horribly hilarious idea of the Perfect Aryan Troll. 

[emsquared]

As long as you're not doing it as a kind of "pocket nerf" for characters because of their combat abilities, I think that's a pretty standard/mild use of racism in a game. In our present campaign I have a Harumen, and personally I really dislike those "heightened fantasy" aspects that came with Runners Companion (free spirits, drakes, etc.) as player options - I feel they detract from the gritty cyber-punk aspect of SR that anchor it in the genre, so it's just something that I personally try to discourage at my table (but won't disallow if it's what a player really wants to play), anyway, I gave my player the exact same sort of warning when he told me about his concept. That he would likely be excluded from locations and conversations, and possibly targeted with violence (Lonestar may think it's okay to kill him, whereas on everyone else they might go S'n'S), because most people will think of him as just an awakened critter, not a human.

I wrestled with this for awhile, because I really dislike punishing players for playing something they want to play, but I determined that I dislike the idea of straight up disallowing it even less, so I try to use it to complicate the RP. I talked with him at length about it and he was okay with it too, ultimately really looking forward to it, and getting into it and using it well as a fun RP aspect of his PC.

Now, we also have a Deadlands game going (a highly racially charged setting), and our GM for that employs what I would consider severe racism. Using language and depicting acts that can actually make players uncomfortable (OOC as well as IC). We're a mature group, all good friends/know each other well enough to know where it's coming from, and all understand and participate in it in a fashion where we know it's importance to the story and in driving our hatred for our enemies, but at that level (where you're potentially making people uncomfortable) I think you have to really know your table and players well and have to be careful not to take it too far. What is too far? Depends on your table and players.

[LionofPerth]

Doesn't Seattle 2072 mention Knight Errant is aiming for a better image when it comes to racism than Lone Star had? One of the main NPCs in season 4 is a 10-foot KE troll, after all. Sure, there's plenty of racists, but you're more likely to get heat from the cops over being Awakened than for being a troll or orc, so I think you're taking things too far - farther than the source material supports, at least.

I'd have to disagree, some of the character creation material over the 4th ed times was.... suggested in my mind some very bad attitudes towards trolls, orcs. In some cases, the language really suggested that it was deserved on some level. Of course I'd say it came about from a self fulfilling prophecy, that because they're seen as criminals, they end up as criminals and the smart criminals prosper, becoming known for being successful criminals, ergo, more trolls are seen or believed to try crime as a means of gaining status, success etc. I believe some of the material from the Shadowrun 4 core book is pretty harsh towards them.

I'm personally not that big of a fan of that level of discrimination unless race relations happen to be an important part of the story you're telling. If it's just a rider to the main story, I probably wouldn't be a fan.

With that said, as long as you have basically taken these passages:

In short, of my cast of NPC's, I have a number of people who will react badly to them. One will not deal with them at all. End of statement. In her case, she dislikes trolls so much she doesn't see anything wrong with turning the tips of the last trolls horns into earrings for her to wear. Mind you, said troll also cost her an arm in the attack. Still, nasty we can agree.

Other parts do include possible lynchings, not lethal, but certainly painful, they're going to be facing a lot of scrutiny from Lone Star, Knight Errant, even with a legal SIN, they will get stopped and pulled in on a regular basis. Any cyberwear they have will be scanned and checked every time they pass through a major border. Any sort of bioware gets detected, things will get interesting for them.

...and distilled it in a way that is explainable to the PCs that are planning on playing those races, I think you're okay. Your idea of "pretty severe racism" and their idea might be different, so it's probably better for them to have an informed opinion before they settle.

I have been pretty clear with the group in regards to race on this front, if not saying on some level, this applies to everyone, regardless of what race they choose. Someone, somewhere, will not like them. Trolls and orcs have worn some pretty severe racism and for most, it's well deserved. Humanis is not the only group out there that has openly racist agenda.

I do plan on a little speech at the start, saying that what they are going to see are that people will be people, with all of the good and bad habits. They will have the pleasure of some people's company, the misfortune of others.

I've also made a point of saying that there's going to be down time, use it. Have a plan and do something, keep your self busy. One of my potential players wants to study magic and run their own street clinic. Another wants to be an assassin. Part of this really does tie in to what I want to do with their world, they have the chance to do some real good, build support networks and reputations for themselves as being something other than a Runner.

In my mind, also gives them something their character would do if they want to retire them, which is something I want to offer, considering how this campaign could go.

MijRai

It's not going to be every session, every second, third. It's going to come up when dealing with some NPC's,

In terms of the type of racism, I was going to try and keep it to species lines, that since dwarves and elves are the most 'human' of the metahuman types, they don't get it as bad, if they get it as bad. Orcs and trolls look the least human, most obviously not-human and so the most severe reactions.

emsquared
Running SR5 and just planning on the basic races. I was going to keep it really simple on this front, as much as I could do to keep it about the players and what they do, how they choose to do it.

[Namikaze]

If you're planning on setting the campaign in Seattle, then you have Proposition 23 to worry about.  Proposition 23 is the ruling that allowed the Ork Underground to become a full-fledged district of Seattle (with all the corporate and government oversight that comes with it).  There are lots of people on both sides of the border who hate the proposition, but it passed in 2074, if I remember my timeline correctly.  That one issue is the basis for a bunch of missions in Season 4, and also for the Splintered State mission.  Racism is alive and well in Shadowrun, but it's a subject that can get way out of hand really quickly if not handled deftly.

For instance, one of my games was about a bunch of elves and such that went missing (because they were homeless, not because they were elves) - but the elven bloc of Puyallup only noticed the missing elves.  It's a bit of racism from the elves that they didn't look at anyone else.  It's a bit of racism on the players because they didn't look either.  And ultimately, the whole thing fuels a race riot that Knight Errant sends an elven woman to be the face of the company in order to help calm people down.

What I was trying to show is that:

• homelessness isn't racist
• racism isn't limited to orks and trolls
• people will find connections tied to race in otherwise non-racially motivated behavior

In the end, it was a big push by Tamanous to get into Puyallup.  Humanis was accused and even attacked, race riots began to break out all over Puyallup, etc.  And the whole thing had nothing to do with race, these people (that's the key word) were just in the wrong place at the wrong time.  Racism can be a very effective tool; in my game sessions, the game itself was very straightforward.  I used the race riots and racially-charged background to help throw the team off a little bit, and it worked.  In the end, I think everyone came away with a good lesson in tolerance, and they all learned how intolerance works in the SR world.

[LionofPerth]

If you're planning on setting the campaign in Seattle, then you have Proposition 23 to worry about.  Proposition 23 is the ruling that allowed the Ork Underground to become a full-fledged district of Seattle (with all the corporate and government oversight that comes with it).  There are lots of people on both sides of the border who hate the proposition, but it passed in 2074, if I remember my timeline correctly.  That one issue is the basis for a bunch of missions in Season 4, and also for the Splintered State mission.  Racism is alive and well in Shadowrun, but it's a subject that can get way out of hand really quickly if not handled deftly.

Mostly in Washington, though there's plenty of international travel planned, I don't have to worry about Seattle at the moment, though there's a possibility if the main antagonist does get slightly derailed. That will take work on the players part. I actually expect them to get suckered in by him to be honest.

Thanks for the heads up, all the more prep time.

I was thinking of trying to play more on the subtle side, different looks. Sharp looks, think of that scene in one of the Fast and Furious movies, the people who live in the favela all pulls weapons on the cops, or is it Brian. I can't remember now. Either way, it's to be things like that and more subtle elements.

[emsquared]

emsquared
Running SR5 and just planning on the basic races. I was going to keep it really simple on this front, as much as I could do to keep it about the players and what they do, how they choose to do it.

Not sure if you read my post, the exact races and edition aren't important, point was I've done in the past exactly what you did here. I was validating your use of racism. Only giving context with the race and reasoning involved.

[Wolfshade]

 I have to agree with Namizaki, the main thing I try to remember that racism is not limited to just humans against other species. It does go both ways. Also, racism because of species isn't the only thing out there.  Stupidity isn't picky, male chauvinists, actual RACISM, sexism.....etc. 

[LionofPerth]

I have to agree with Namizaki, the main thing I try to remember that racism is not limited to just humans against other species. It does go both ways. Also, racism because of species isn't the only thing out there.  Stupidity isn't picky, male chauvinists, actual RACISM, sexism.....etc.

Indeed, part of the reason I have said what I have. I'll make it clear that it's handed out by everyone, if you look at a wide enough picture.

emsquared

I suspected as much, though my reply was to make sure you completely understood where I was coming from. That while you've done, seen certain things, that we're on the same page.

[Critias]

Just remember the golden rule, and that's that this is a game, and games are fun.  If you're going to throw that level of random vehemence against folks based on their metaspecies, make sure you're tossing them a bone every now and then, too.  Make sure they get to satisfyingly beat up some Humanis thugs, make sure they get to have their own space (where they're welcome and the rest of the crew has to feel ill at ease, for a change of campaign), make sure the players are on board and enjoying themselves, instead of just taking an "I warned them, now they suffer!" type of stance.

If you're gonna focus on racism, try to keep the game enjoyable despite it.  I'd, personally, shoot for Django Unchained racism, not American History X racism.

[LionofPerth]

Just remember the golden rule, and that's that this is a game, and games are fun.  If you're going to throw that level of random vehemence against folks based on their metaspecies, make sure you're tossing them a bone every now and then, too.  Make sure they get to satisfyingly beat up some Humanis thugs, make sure they get to have their own space (where they're welcome and the rest of the crew has to feel ill at ease, for a change of campaign), make sure the players are on board and enjoying themselves, instead of just taking an "I warned them, now they suffer!" type of stance.

If you're gonna focus on racism, try to keep the game enjoyable despite it.  I'd, personally, shoot for Django Unchained racism, not American History X racism.

It's not going to be a hammer and there's a certain level of control the players should have in this area. As I've made it clear to them, there's going to be down time and plenty of it. What you do with it is up to is very much on your plate. I also keep an open inbox for players to talk to me about what's going on in the game, I try to be as open as I can be.

None the less it is present in the world, one player is going to be in for a rude surprise or two.

[Namikaze]

I'd, personally, shoot for Django Unchained racism, not American History X racism.

Ahahahaha that's so spot on.  This made me smile. 

[The Wyrm Ouroboros]

Just remember the golden rule, and that's that this is a game, and games are fun.  If you're going to throw that level of random vehemence against folks based on their metaspecies, make sure you're tossing them a bone every now and then, too.  Make sure they get to satisfyingly beat up some Humanis thugs, make sure they get to have their own space (where they're welcome and the rest of the crew has to feel ill at ease, for a change of campaign), make sure the players are on board and enjoying themselves, instead of just taking an "I warned them, now they suffer!" type of stance.

If you're gonna focus on racism, try to keep the game enjoyable despite it.  I'd, personally, shoot for Django Unchained racism, not American History X racism.

It's not going to be a hammer and there's a certain level of control the players should have in this area. As I've made it clear to them, there's going to be down time and plenty of it. What you do with it is up to is very much on your plate. I also keep an open inbox for players to talk to me about what's going on in the game, I try to be as open as I can be.

None the less it is present in the world, one player is going to be in for a rude surprise or two.

This strikes me as being very opposite-what-Critias-just-recommended.  "Well, you can go anywhere you want, it's just that in all the good places, you're going to be spat on, kicked out, etc.  This is fair warning, and I hope it's clear to you."  Re-read his post, maybe?  Make sure you have places where the racism is in the opposite direction - or, you know, there's little to no racism at all.

Racism in Shadowrun is like racism in RL - the squeaky wheel gets the grease, i.e. Westboro Baptist gets the press, while the other hundred thousand churches who promote race equality get ignored.  90+% of the people you meet should be neutral, or perhaps only slightly biased for/against a race.  Sure, a human or dwarf (or elf) is gonna be a little skittish around a troll for the first time or two; who ain't, y'know?  But after you get to know her, Becky turns into the Secretary, not the Troll.

Racism is a thing, and it can be a big thing.  It just ain't gonna be a big thing with everyone.  And if it is?  Then make sure there's people who are on their side too.