About Screampunk....

[Moonsight]

I've been reading "Screampunk" and this has passage has me a bit concerned:

Gothic villains refuse to be bound by the rules
of society. They may consider themselves above
the rules, below them, or simply outside them.
They are ruled by insanity and uncontrolled passions, and are often brutal and seductive, as well as fiendishly intelligent. These qualities aren't inevitable; many villains, such as Dracula or
Professor Moriarty, are not particularly seductive,
and others (such as Dorian Grey) are not
especially intelligent.

Madness comes upon these antagonists, who
might have become heroes in their own right if
they had not been corrupted, either as a result of
their own actions, or in the form of an affliction
by God, supernatural forces, or foreign curses.
Servants or allied groups composed of equally vil-
lainous subordinates, perhaps of foreign origin,
are common.

Strong, sexual women appear as brutally
seductive figures. Freed from the constraints of a
society that considered animal passion to be
unfeminine, they represent female as well as male
fantasies. Toward the end of the gothic period, vil-
lains also become more debauched; this reflects
prevailing concerns in fin de siecle society, when
the decadent movement used art to mock typical
Victorian values, and New Women were widely
seen as a threat to traditional gender roles.
The tortured antihero is more likely to be an
antagonist than a protagonist.

He serves as a powerful reminder to the party of how goodness can
be corrupted, and may even make them question
their own assumptions about good and evil.
Gothic heroes may be upstanding and manly or
sensitive and intellectual, but in either case, they
stand for everything that is right about "modern"
Victorian society. Protagonists in the early gothic
stories were romantic heroes, who might weep
over the wonders of nature or suffer terrible night-
mares when their loved ones were in danger. Later
heroes are more likely to fit the brave adventurer
mode, and to fight corruption with physical or
intellectual force.

Since many gothic authors were women, it's
no surprise that the genre also features strong
female presences. While the stereotyped inno-
cent pursued by a cruel male authority figure is
common, she is a reflection of the very real fears
of Victorian women, still legally considered
chattel of their husbands or fathers. Within these
constraints, many heroines are intelligent and
pragmatic, and often modern in their attitudes.
They come in two main types: the foolhardy ("I
took up my candle and ventured alone into the
catacombs to investigate the strange footsteps"),
and vapid ("At the first sound of strange foot-
steps, a chill came over me so powerfully that I
fell moved to hide behind the curtains"). Players
may encounter NPCs of either type. A timid PC
may rise to the challenge of an adventure and
discover hidden strengths.

Now when playing a Gothic Horror campaign, are strong sexually free women freed from patriarchal control are automatically labeled as antagonists and NPCs and meanwhile women vice versa within the constraints of patriarchy, is this passage saying that they're the only PC/Protagonist types that one wishes a female character in these settings?

If so, then not shows how reactionary and conservative the Gothic Horror setting really is which is something I despise completely.

Now I wonder if it's possible to reverse things around by having the 'strong sexually free woman outside patriarchal constraints' be a PC character (especially when the character happens to be a Vampire and such) since I don't wish to play as a "innocent virgin" or the stereotypical Gothic heroine of course though maybe it's possible to reverse the conservative themes to be 'progressive' like having the Vampire PC destroying the patriarchal social order by liberating the "innocent virgin" from her patriarchal constraints by Men who are the antagonists?

[Ashtagon]

To me, what you're asking is a bit like wanting to play a vampire in a game where the GM has said it's based more on Monster Hunters than White Wolf's productions.

Neither interpretation is wrong on its own merits, but by asking to play a vampire in a monster hunters game, you are intentionally going against the genre.

Does does this mean that in a Gothic (especially in a Screampunk) setting, female PCs must be that submissive stereotype? Of course not. But neither does it mean that any woman who isn't submissive must be a "strong, sexual woman". Both are stereotypes that play up sexuality.

It is entirely possible, and often sensible, to play a female character for whom sexuality is not a defining trait. Just as male characters shouldn't primarily be defined by their sexual conquests (or lack of them), the same holds true for female characters.

[Moonsight]

Originally Posted by Ashtagon

Neither interpretation is wrong on its own merits, but by asking to play a vampire in a monster hunters game, you are intentionally going against the genre.

I thought GURPs goes both sides of having a choice between monster hunting or playing otherwise from surviving by night by night to Byronic anti-heroes when the opportunity strikes?

If GURPS is really about Monster Hunting primarily I guess I either miss the memo or rather I don't like such genres at all especially when things get subjective on what the monster represents and what the Hunters themselves are fighting to preserve which in Gothic Horror's case, the Hunter's role is really about preserving the social order which is patriarchy which the monster threatens it hence it's conservative roots which is what I despise.

This is what I'm trying to say here since if Vampires for example represented a threat to the social order, which is patriarchy which happens to be a inherently a oppressive institution, then I too would be against it and for those fighting to preserve it (the Hunters) would be the antagonists themselves hence why I kinda prefer playing as Vampires, Demons, etc instead to actually BE the force that challenges the oppressive social order itself.

[PTTG]

The setting manual presents the baseline genre. to deviate from that is your prerogative, and I find it to be the most thrilling part of the GMing process.

[Andrew Hackard]

Originally Posted by Moonsight

If GURPS is really about Monster Hunting primarily

That poster is referring to the GURPS Monster Hunters subseries.

[Ashtagon]

Originally Posted by Moonsight

I thought GURPs goes both sides of having a choice between monster hunting or playing otherwise from surviving by night by night to Byronic anti-heroes when the opportunity strikes?

If GURPS is really about Monster Hunting primarily I guess I either miss the memo or rather I don't like such genres at all especially when things get subjective on what the monster represents and what the Hunters themselves are fighting to preserve which in Gothic Horror's case, the Hunter's role is really about preserving the social order which is patriarchy which the monster threatens it hence it's conservative roots which is what I despise.

This is what I'm trying to say here since if Vampires for example represented a threat to the social order, which is patriarchy which happens to be a inherently a oppressive institution, then I too would be against it and for those fighting to preserve it (the Hunters) would be the antagonists themselves hence why I kinda prefer playing as Vampires, Demons, etc instead to actually BE the force that challenges the oppressive social order itself.

GURPS is generic, in that the game engine is designed to be able to handle every kind of genre (whether it succeeds is an open question, but I'd say it generally does).

However, just because it can handle every genre, that doesn't mean a game that includes every genre will be fun. It is GM prerogative to decide what goes into their campaign setting (albeit by mutual agreement with all players involved in that table). And it certainly doesn't mean that every game supplement should be written with the assumption that every game supplement (especially genre-specific ones) must include details of how to include other genres within that setting.

Monster Hunters doesn't include rules for playing PC vampires for a reason: it's out of genre. That doesn't mean a suitably flexible GM can't allow it. It does mean that you shouldn't expect the book to cover it.

So returning from the analogy, if you want lusty female PCs in your steampunk setting, go wild. Personally, I wouldn't (both because it's out-of-genre, and because I don't like sex to be about the forefront of my tabletop RPGs). However, because it's out of genre, it's unreasonable to expect that book to cover it. And indeed, it would have been amiss of the author to fail to note that such characters would be out of genre.

[Refplace]

The GURPS rules are designed to allow a wide variety of campaign types and settings.
Certain genres have thier own conventions but that is a stereotype not a requirement.
However a game is a social affair and the people involved in the group need to have an understanding and expectation for it to work out.
Some will enjoy certain things more then others and some things may be particularly jarring to other peoples enjoyment of the game and their immersion in it.
GURPS itself gives the potential for anything but the genre books recognize common themes and gives tips towards them.

But the gaming group decides.
Lets say a group wanted to play Star Trek but one player (or the GM) wanted to have magic. That would make it less like Star Trek and might not be what the others wanted to play.
Supers group wanted a street level game but one person wanted 4 color, would everyone be happy?
These are group decisions, not rules system decisions.

[Mailanka]

Originally Posted by Moonsight

I've been reading "Screampunk" and this has passage has me a bit concerned:

It's discussing the genre. It's about as alarming as realizing that Arthurian romance glorifies monarchy and class, or that Westerns tend to depict Native Americans in a less than glamorous light.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Moonsight

I thought GURPs goes both sides of having a choice between monster hunting or playing otherwise from surviving by night by night to Byronic anti-heroes when the opportunity strikes?

If GURPS is really about Monster Hunting primarily I guess I either miss the memo or rather I don't like such genres at all especially when things get subjective on what the monster represents and what the Hunters themselves are fighting to preserve which in Gothic Horror's case, the Hunter's role is really about preserving the social order which is patriarchy which the monster threatens it hence it's conservative roots which is what I despise.

This is what I'm trying to say here since if Vampires for example represented a threat to the social order, which is patriarchy which happens to be a inherently a oppressive institution, then I too would be against it and for those fighting to preserve it (the Hunters) would be the antagonists themselves hence why I kinda prefer playing as Vampires, Demons, etc instead to actually BE the force that challenges the oppressive social order itself.

Don't confuse what GURPS is about with what GURPS Screampunk is about. One can certainly roleplay femme fatale vampires in the 19th century, or werewolves and homunculus constructs. But that is simply a different genre from the one being discussed in that book.

[johndallman]

Originally Posted by Moonsight

I thought GURPs goes both sides of having a choice between monster hunting or playing otherwise from surviving by night by night to Byronic anti-heroes when the opportunity strikes?

GURPS, as such, doesn't take a position on this at all.

The thing to remember about the GURPS core is that it's a game construction toolkit, not a ready-to-play game. It has lots of add-ons that support various things, such as expanded rules for particular aspects of a game, like martial arts, or various genres.

Screampunk is about a particular aspect of horror in a particular kind of genre. In particular, don't assume that it's "GURPS' answer to the Gothic-Punk ideas of the World of Darkness," because it isn't - it's about reproducing a particular literary genre, and it was written because a freelancer had an idea about how to do that, rather than as part of an overall plan or to support a metaplot.

So Screampunk tells you how that genre works, but nothing says you have to conform to it. A GM might want to run a campaign that conformed to that genre, or to subvert it in a particular way, or something else. But that's the decision of that GM, who decides what their game is about. GURPS doesn't make that decision for them.