Coming from the TRPG side of the hobby and not the writing, reading, CRPG, educational, activist, etc, sides I need to understand why there are so many rules of inclusion when it comes to gender, romance and ethnicity, but not when it comes to personality, advantages, ideologies, goals, religion, backgrounds, etc? People seem to have no problem with playing a revolutionary pirate with a somewhat shady background, but their sex and romance options must be elective for some reason.
I’ve played a lot of characters during a long life on TRPG, and while many of them have been somewhat close to myself or borrowed parts of my own personality, they have all had big differences to set them apart from myself. In a way that is why I play them. I don’t play myself in a strange land or setting, I play someone else, it is half the fun.
So for me, it wouldn’t be a big deal to get a character presented to me, if that fixed character also came with a better personalized story. Sure it is fun to create a character, out of the blue, or be inspired by some other fictional or real character, or based on a strange bit of lore in the game world or an interesting game mechanic (if that is the focus of the game). But it is in no way necessary. Since it is very hard for the GM/author to present all those options and then actually make them a relevant part of the story.
When it comes to coding or trying to take a myriad of different options into account it seems to get exponentially more complex. Especially if the choice is made in the beginning and then doesn’t change during the story. If the main plot is romantic or sexual or coming to terms with who you are, then it would be very relevant. But if your story is about piracy, why have a choice at the beginning that will decide between X variants of every scene for the rest of the book. Almost every novel ever written could be adapted for a different looking main character, or a main character with a different back ground or ethnicity. But you never see 5 versions of a book or localizations of the setting, just to make it easier for the reader to identify with the MC.
Does Choice mostly have to be, “What would I, as the MC, do?” and not “What do I think that the MC, given the MC’s personality and the MC’s situation, would do and what would make for an interesting choice story-wise?”. I can get invested in many characters, not just the ones that feel very similar to me. And even though I hate Hitler, I wouldn’t be against reading a book about him, or a Choice adventure about him. It might be interesting to be the villain, or get an insight into his mindset and maybe get some understanding of why he did what he did.
It is a common problem in TRPG that people bring way to much of themselves into their characters. In short a medieval knightly tale might turn into A Yankee at King Arthur’s Court. This is of course fine, if every player around the table is on the same page. But most problems with TTRPGs stems from a difference in expectations.
And, yes I do understand that there is a limited amount of inclusive heroic MC for a lot of genres, but so it is for the elderly, the ugly, the handicapped, the fat, the scared, the shy, the stupid, the short, the untalented, the average, etc. In short, heroes tends to follow the current cultural heroic stereotype and we need more alternative fictional heroes, but why focus on just a few of those choices/inequalities and not the rest? And why have the choice instead of encourage whole books that focus on more diverse MC? It seems strange that a whole setting should swap gender norms based on a choice made on page one. It is like asking if you want the MC to be shy and fat at the start, and then, as a result, the whole setting shifts to make shy and fatness the norm, but the story remains pretty much the same anyways. It feels a little odd to me.
Am I worrying too much, before even starting to write?
Thoughts?