Thank you for all your responses! Replied to them all in this as didn’t wish to spam via seperate replies to all, please don’t feel any pressure to respond! For clarification the actual years you’d visit are 1945/1895/1795!
@levviathan Honestly that’s not a non-answer at all! It’s good to have a reminder that whichever direction I lean with this I won’t be able to please everyone! They’re all very good questions I’ll have to ask myself over the course of this.
@Keller There would absolutely always be the option to challenge any negative reactions presented towards the MC, it’s more so that there’ll be reactions at all I was worried about - both positive and negative. The intent would definitely be to explore what’s presented authentically as whilst the reason you end up there is plot I’d like the periods and the people within them to feel like more than a stop-gap. But it’s a good point that even fictional and only for a specific segment it could still make the game a negative experience for players which is what I’m worried about.
@RedRoses You raised a lot of really good points/questions so I put it under the cut just to respond to them all! Thank you for your feedback/advice!
Summary
- 1600s was more of an example than hard fact! But of course your point still stands, there would be reactions to the appearance of the MC along with the MC being able to push back on any negative reactions they face. It isn’t just going to be them trudging along as everyone’s a dick, there’ll be plenty of more mundane things to react to and positive ones depending on how willing the MC is to interact with the people around them. I was planning on asking about presentation during the initial character creation and setting a variable for what the MC was wearing before they go through the tear so that it isn’t as simple as you chose to not dress in a gender comforming manner = reaction they’ll be baffled by your clothes regardless in most cases. And of course there’d be more than just white people living what we’d consider normal lives, especially as the plan is for London & Manchester to be the cities this revolves around - both have always been diverse places to be. But of course you’re right to point out that for each negative interaction there should be positive and the inclusion of negative reactivity should be properly considered.
- It’s not necessarily that I think I need to tell a story regarding these things but that the MC will be ending up in these settings and I worry if no one reacts at all to them - especially the people they’ll more meaningfully interact with them - it’ll be left feeling hollow? A gay man in 1895 meeting a gay MC feels like there should be something happening there? I want where the MC ends up to feel real and the people to feel real instead of it being a stop-gap they’re stuck in as part of the plot. I’m not educated on every era but I’m willing to put the work in and given I’ll be writing three/four very specific historical settings in specific places I’ve already been able to do a decent chunk of research on the attitudes and demographics of the place at that time.
- It would fit within the tone, I’m trying to keep it vague as it’s quite a bit plot thing but I’m now aware that the vagueness is likely not helping my response to your very detailed advice - the MC ends up in the past to escape someone, there’s a portal/tear they jump through and where they end up is up to a previous decision the MC has made. The tone is sort of sci-fantasy/thriller where the player is seeking answers as to their past and also trying to stop a destructive group who are very much trying to kill a large group of people so I don’t think any negative reactions would be too jarring in tone?
1945/1895/1795.
@jay-walker I really appreciate this advice, a bit of a concern is this isn’t going to be a historical fiction game but the character will be in a historical setting for a portion of it - so it’s a bit of a balancing act as to how much attention and focus should go to this bit.
@ParrotWatcher It’s not a story about bigotry and even as I said the reactivity question isn’t just “Should I put bigotry in my game?” So much as are people comfortable with the idea of a character commenting on their race/gender presentation/sexuality within the historical context at all? They’ll be surprised by what any character is wearing/looks like depending on where they land but the question was more so about how comfortable people were with the ideas of comments towards more personal aspects.
I’m aware of the historical diversity of Britain, especially the towns and cities with ports but even Hadrian’s Wall had diversity, although I hadn’t heard of Chevalier d’Éon so thank you for sharing that! I’d thought the comment about how in 1666, for example, being white but not from around there could be more dangerous than being black was me sort of trying to say I’m not planning on pretending history was solely white straight people having a great time and that’s all and Britain did not have anyone from anywhere not white living normal lives. But I worded it clumsily so I apologise for that.
@Havenstone
Sorry if I gave you the impression it would be solely negative or that it would act as though it was all homogenous, I’d thought using reactive instead of talking about racism/slavery/bigotry would help but I clearly need to be a bit more succinct in this. Got nervous asking for advice so I somewhat word vomitied instead. Thank you!
@AletheiaKnights Of course! The character unfortunately doesn’t know in advance, although if that’s something that could help readers feel more comfortable there may be a way for me to facilitate that albeit it wouldn’t be a large window of time. And they’d absolutely meet a range of people! It’s a tad location locked to Britain because of how what they’re using works but genuinely a really cool point and idea as to how it would work on a larger scale. And it absoutely does help get the ball rolling as to the variability of the reactivity!
Again I’m really sorry if I gave the impression to people that I just meant reactive = bigoted. I’d planned for it to go both ways but I think it’s really good to have it more explicitly pointed out that the negative direction needs far more consideration as to the weight of it.