Citadels

A quick post on a quick game today: Citadels!

 

For those of you unfamiliar, Citadels is a little role selection & building game, where each player leads a small city and is trying to build new ‘districts’ to increase the prosperity of the city. A nice thing about this game is that it plays 2-8 players and plays pretty well at each size. (Although 7-8 players gets a bit long for the depth, in my opinion.)

Strategic but light, it’s also unfortunately extremely light on the representation front.

Race/Nationality

Every single human pictured in the artwork of this game is white. There’s really not much more to say about that.

Location is unspecified, but vaguely ‘generic medieval European’.

Yeah.

I’m giving it:

0 stars

Gender

30 district cards have artwork picturing people. Abolutely zero of these show any women.

That’s right: It’s so much of a man’s world that women don’t even exist in this city.

What the actual fuck.

There are a few women on the cover art on the box. But none of them show back up in any of the playable cards.

I have the released version, which comes with 9 bonus/expansion characters in addition to the 9 base characters. Of these 18 merchants and artists and assassins and thieves, there are precisely two women: a (fat, disgruntled) Queen that can only be played in an 8-player game and an expansion card of a Witch.

This would begrudgingly score one star, but the rulebook used only male pronouns because fuck the rest of us, I guess. So that’s a full negative star for that, bringing us to:

0 stars

Sexuality

As I said when about Puerto Rico, in a land where only men exist, presumably some of them have to be boning. But the game has no queer-identified characters and no queerable mechanism (but it does have a Queen who takes her power from her involvement with the King, so we do get a smidgen of hetero up in here), so that puts us at:

0 stars

Body

There is a bit of body diversity–a few different body types, various heights, a few fat characters. Not really implemented in a way that felt body pos (the Queen in particular is fat and presented very poorly), but better than nothing, I guess?

1 star

Overall

Overall, grim. So grim. This game was shockingly disappointing. (NOT A SINGLE WOMAN IN THE ENTIRE CITY WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK.)

Anyway.

Race ☆☆☆
Gender ☆☆☆
Sexuality ☆☆☆
Body ★☆☆
Overall Average 0.25

The Red Dragon Inn

Like Villainy, this is another game that is just sheer fun. More random/luck-based and less strategy than Villainy, but equally fun in flavour. (This is another game JimmyTheGeek introduced me to; he’s all about the awesome flavour text. If you want more fun games (specifically unique RPGs), check out his and Bea Bravo ‘s new podcast, Have You Roleplayed.)

For those of you unfamiliar, this game is about the adventure after the adventure. You’re a band of DnD-style adventurers–you’ve got a wizard, a warrior, a rogue, and a cleric. The adventure is over for the day, presumably successfully, and now you’re at the pub unwinding by drinking to excess, gambling away your earning, and giving your teammates shit (real-world drinking and gambling not required; talking shit heavily encouraged). The aim of the game is simple: be the last person standing after all of your friends have been kicked out of the pub for being too drunk or out of gold. 

This is the first in a series of five variants; we’re only looking at the original today.

Also: POOKIE! Hands-down, my favourite part of this game is Pookie, my drunk rabbit. Well, okay, technically he belongs to the character I always play and not to me, personally, but a girl can dream.

Picture of the box of Red Dragon In, showing the five characters discussed below

I genuinely love this game. It’s not at all heavy or particularly strategic, but I always have a riot playing. I’ve left this game *feeling* drunk on nonsense and laughter, having not touched a drop of actual booze myself. It’s…. got a few problems, though. (Content note: references to date-rape drugs.)

Race/Nationality

But first, let’s look at its race-related problems. All of the playable characters are white, but the serving wench is a woman of colour. (She is the only non-playable character in the artwork; she has multiple cards that refer to her, playable by all of the other characters.)

So it meets the “people of colour exist!” test… but not in a way I feel very good about. I am glad she is in the game at all, but if a non-playable servant is the only non-white character in your entire game, ima side-eye you a little bit.

I’m giving it:

1 star

Gender

This is the category this game does reasonably well in. 2 of the 4 playable characters are women; 2 are men. Plus the only NPC, the serving wench, is a woman. No evidence of gender-diverse characters, however.

Fiona the Volatile is pretty badass. It’s nice to have the warrior character be female, and she takes zero shit.

The rulebook uses gender neutral pronouns throughout, except when giving examples of play. Then it uses the character’s gender, which is obviously fine.

Overall:

2 stars

Sexuality

There’s a wee bit of innuendo in cards that can be played against other characters/players of any gender;  I guess you could argue that this is a mechanism that allows choices that implicitly identify sexuality and nothing prevents a player from queering those choices?

But it ultimately doesn’t matter because I am giving this game an automatic fail and some Serious Side-Eye in the Sexuality category because of the following card, which is in Gerki The Sneak’s deck:

A Gerki The Sneak's card reading "Slip a Mickey"

I prefer my board games without jokes about dosing people with date-rape drugs, thanks. 1

0 stars

Body

All the women all have pretty identical body types–slender with a few curves and nice breasts; the dudes get a little more diversity with a scrawny, short, buck-toothed thief and a tall, old wizard. (Plus a cute chubby bunny!) So a little but not a lot.

Also, while the women aren’t particularly scantily clad in most of the cards, there is an absurd over-focus on all of their boobs and more than a little gratuitous boob art. Now I like boobs as much as the next person really into ladies, but this over-sexualisation of these characters was pretty unnecessary, felt pretty out of place with the rest of the game, and made me a bit uncomfortable.

Three cards showing the gratuitous boob art. Also my fingernails, which are painted blue with purple spots.
I didn’t fully crop my hand out of this picture because my silly nail art game was on point last week.

1 star

Overall

Overall, a fun game in the ‘somewhat problematic fav’ category. I want to check out some of the future games in the series and see if they capture the same vibe without some of the grossness. 

Race ★☆☆
Gender ★★☆
Sexuality ☆☆☆
Body ★☆☆
Overall Average 1

Notes:

  1. There is an argument to be made that historically, ‘slip a mickey’ meant to drug someone for the purpose of robbing them, not assaulting them, but that’s no longer the common usage and it’s pretty gross and unnecessary regardless.

Villainy

So I played this game Sunday night while visiting a friend out of town. The first moment of the game when I drew my random character and she was a fat queer-coded woman villain, I knew I was going to have to write a post on it stat. When we laid out the first random row of henches and not a single white male appeared, I knew I was going to be pretty happy about its score in said post. (One glaring exception, which we’ll get to at the end). Also I got to have a dinosaur. This is all I’ve ever wanted.

Villiany playor tableau, showing the Villain and three henches: a disreputable doctor, a dinosaur wit han eye-patch, and a golden alien.
My villain and her henches, about halfway through the game.

For those of you unfamiliar, Villainy is a…. let’s say worker management?… game where you’re a bit-rate wannabe super-villain trying to put together a team to enact your nefarious EVIIIIIIL PLAAAAAAANS (which are all completely ridiculous).  With a perfect mix of frivolity, luck, and strategic complexity, it also has flavour text that had my gaming partner and I choking on laughter the entire game. It is just sheer fun.

It also has the most diverse and well-represented cast of characters of any game I’ve played since I started this adventure of having too many opinions about representation in tabletop gaming. Let’s take a closer look.

Race/Nationality

There are eight playable characters (the wannabe villains). Zero of the eight playable characters are white men. (Although there are two white women.)

Rex Roofer (seriously this game is great) is a black man; Doctor Loom is brown-skinned but not entirely human. Ms Tikal is a woman of colour–seems to be coded Latina with her name and the artwork. The rest of the playable characters have non-natural skin colours (green, blue, purple, etc).

Many of the henches are not human or even humanoid. There are about 15 that are human-or-close-to-it; only 4 of them are white men. 6 have a non-human skin colour, and there are 4 women and 1 man who are people of colour.

The game also includes naming titles so you can add your own flavour and identity to your characters. We’ll talk about these more below, but there are Spanish words and titles included among these titles (Jefe, Señora, Fuego, and a few more).

Overall, a stand-out game on the representation front and indisputably:

3 stars

Gender

This game is also a stand-out on the gender front. The game uses gender neutral language throughout the rulebook, and only uses gendered language when referring to a specific character — which varies between he/she/them/it (the last for for animals and robots, not people) depending on the character. I also liked that it used the word ‘henches’ instead of ‘henchmen’–I actually had to repeatedly stop myself from saying ‘henchmen’ even when referring to non-male henches. Male-specific language is so entrenched.

Of the playable characters, 4 are male-coded and 4 are female-coded. BUT the dynamic of the naming titles allows you full flexibility to give a character any gender-signifying title or naming you like, regardless of their coding. The naming mechanism has no purpose other than game flavour and developing your character’s identify; this leads me to feel that the ability to queer your character’s gender is explicitly allowed or even encouraged. High-fives all around. Oh, and also:

3 stars

Sexuality

Okay. So we’ve talked in The Scale about how it’s inherently problematic to try to guess someone’s sexual identity from just a picture of them. But it’s a limitation of the medium, so we’re left we making guesses from their artistic ‘coding’.

There’s also the inherent problem of defining what queer-coding even is. What makes someone ‘look’ gay? Even some of the more obvious ones–queer haircuts, for example, often chosen by queer folk for the explicit purpose of communicating their queerness to others–run afoul when trying to decide if someone just has a cool, punk alternative style or if they are intentionally declaring themselves queer as hell. (Plus you can obviously be queer as hell with a totally mainstream haircut.)

And finally there’s also a long media criticism history calling attention to the problematic queer coding of villains (here’s looking at you, Disney) and you could make an argument that it’s not actually a good thing that there are so many queer-coded characters in a game called Villainy where everyone is an aspiring bad guy.

But but but…. I kind of don’t care. I LOVE that a majority of the women in this game look like women I’d flirt up in coffee shops or expect to see at LBGTQ rallies or have actually dated. 2 of the playable female characters are queer/alternative coded. 3 of the hench-ladies are definitely folks I’d hit on under the right circumstances. 1

It may not be a perfect proxy, but multiple characters who look like me and my queer women and gender-diverse friends? This is good enough for me.

Between this and the ability to queer your playable character’s gender choices, I’m leaning strongly towards:

3 stars

Body

Finally, I was pretty excited about how well this game does this in category as well. With the playable characters, one of the characters is gloriously fat and thoroughly kickass. The women are all appropriately clad, with slightly different bodies.

Unfortunately, the playable men all have pretty identical (muscular) bodies BUT there’s a huge array of bodies among the henches! Super muscular (not sexy lean muscly) women, chubby men, old women, scrawny people, huge stocky dudes, etc. A good cross-hatch of humanity.

All the playable characters are fully able-bodied appearing, but we have a few signs of physical impairments among the henches–one hench who is missing a leg, a character with an eye patch (okay, it’s the dinosaur), and a few such things hints at a higher level of ableness-diversity than we’ve seen in any other game I’ve looked at.

3 stars

Overall

So! Our first game with 3s across the board. But–unfortunately there’s a but. And it’s a big one. 2

Where this game failed is in the neuro-diversity/mental health area. As per The Scale, there’s not a particular category for this, but I was going to award bonus stars in the body category for games that did it well. Not entirely sure how to handle a game that does it poorly, except I don’t feel comfortable endorsing this game as a complete standout for representation with this bit it in.

Essentially, there’s an element of the game where you can give your characters ‘specialities’ in different categories: Weapons, Science, Loyalty, Deception, etc.

Take a look at the Deception tiles and see if you can spot the problem:

Eight 'Deception' titles reading Got Plans, Good Liar, Smooth, Crazy, Hypnotist, Seductress, Tricky, and Bipolar.
…seriously?

My guard was down because the rest of this game was so delightful and inclusive, so I was extra horrified to draw two Deception tiles and find them to read ‘Crazy’ (cringe) and ‘Bipolar’ (what the actual hell). You seriously couldn’t come up with one more silly descriptor that wasn’t the name of an actual (manageable) mental health issue that millions of people are living with? Was it really necessary to get a dig in against people struggling with mental illness for what, a cheap laugh at their expense? I seriously don’t understand this, but I am pretty disgusted by it. I thought about giving the Body category a fail for overt ableism, but it didn’t quite feel right since this category isn’t usually looking at mental health issues, so I am docking a half-star to the overall score and giving the most serious of serious side eye to the shitty decision to include those two tiles.

SERIOUS SIDE EYE.

Overall,

Race ★★★
Gender ★★★
Sexuality ★★★
Body ★★★
Overall Average
(with -.5 for grossness)
2.5

Notes:

  1. Full disclosure, *my* hair is queer as hell in large part so I get read as queer by ladies I’d like to flirt with. So definitely showing my bias here.
  2. Heh, heh, a big butt. #mature