Gandhi's Angels introduction - mission statement

[ffutures]

Here's my first stab at a rationale for Gandhi's Angels - not the details of the show, but the reason why it exists.

You already know the score if you’ve read Diana: Warrior Princess. Imagine our world, seen by someone as remote from us as we are from the ancient Greeks, and with as many gaps in their knowledge. Imagine it converted into a TV series by a production company with the loving attention to historical accuracy we have come to expect from such series.

Like most successful series Diana… has spawned spin-offs. The most popular is Elvis: The Legendary Tours, in which wandering bard Elvis tries to find a way back to his home, the mystic Land of Grace, and overthrow its evil ruler, his half-brother Costello, but Elvis… doesn’t catch all the key advertising demographics as well as it should. In particular, it doesn’t quite meet the intellectual needs of that large percentage of the audience that wants to see scantily-clad women deal out violent justice as graphically as possible, to the accompaniment of machine-gun fire, car chases, and loud explosions. To service this group another show is needed… that show is Gandhi’s Angels.

Does this seem like a reasonable premise for an RPG?

Comments

[learnedhand-dj.livejournal.com]

Well, anything with scantily-clad women is bound to have some appeal, right? I'm not sure how a 70's-era PI show will work as an RPG for a more serious gamer, but it's bound to be fun at the very least.

I do wish you'd stuck to the Sam Raimi oeuvre for the game names, though. I'm sure you could come up with something for Jack of All Trades or Cleopatra 2525.

[ffutures.livejournal.com]

I wanted to, but they've never actually shown JoAT in the UK, and the whole point of the Dianaverse is "creative" history, so a story set in the future like Cleopatra 2525 really doesn't work.

[ffutures.livejournal.com]

Another thought - who are these serious gamers of which you speak, and why in Cthulhu's name would they want anything to do with the Dianaverse?

[adrian-middle.livejournal.com]

Are you sure that Gandhi is as acceptable a figure of fun as Diana or Elvis?

Gandhi works fine as a side character, but as the title character he would draw attention, and I can't help thinking it's the wrong sort of attention.

I suggest a little market research because in isolation the title could generate negative publicity along the lines of "Who is this English upstart who pokes fun at our history?"

The same probably applies to characters like Mao-Tse Tung. You might get away with Pol-Pot or another universally vilified dictator (Saddam Hussain may have been executed by the time you go to press).

[ffutures.livejournal.com]

You might get away with Pol-Pot or another universally vilified dictator

Like Princess Di?

History gets people wrong, popular culture gets them wronger. Combine the two and a few thousand years and nobody will be able to tell the heroes and villains apart, which is what this whole thing is about. Take a look at what some people say about Gandhi now, let alone in a couple of thousand years - you may be surprised.

[adrian-middle.livejournal.com]

I'd be far from surprised. My point was that cultural differences cause different reactions, and that Indian culture is far removed from the passive resistance of Gandhi's day. Just suggesting you be aware of whatever movements might promote or even deify Gandhi for reasons other than his principles. In a Politically correct society a single complaint from another cultural environment carries more weight than common sense. Wouldn't want you to find nobody was prepared to stock or advertise it because of groundless fears.

[ffutures.livejournal.com]

Not a concern - it'll be a PDF.