4E - Increased potential for controversy/moral panic?

[Rel]

Egads! My edgy and controversial hobby has become "quaint" when I wasn't looking!

 

[Aus_Snow]

Egads! My edgy and controversial hobby has become "quaint" when I wasn't looking!

Oh no! Whatever shall you do?

 

[delericho]

Yeah, I can tell just by looking around that 4e is pretty controversial. I'm not talking about here, though -- I'm talking about the greater world. Is anyone else worried that D&D 4e might end up the target of more Patricia Pulling/Jack Chick/BADD-style attacks?

No, not really. Anyway, if there were further attacks, those would actually help D&D, rather than harm it.

Think about it for a second. Warlock is now a core class - which involves getting magical power from a deal with devils. (and yes, you don't have to play the class that way -- but since when has that ever mattered in the world of sound bites?) The PHB now includes lists of possible magical Rituals (not real ones, of course, but again, since when has that ever mattered?). Tieflings are a core race, allowing you to literally play a character with a demonic background.

As far as I can see, the mistake you are making is assuming that the D&D-haters will read the new books.

 

[Celebrim]

Egads! My edgy and controversial hobby has become "quaint" when I wasn't looking!

LOL.

Yes, in order to differentiate yourself from everyone else, maybe you should go play Grand Theft Auto.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

LOL.

Yes, in order to differentiate yourself from everyone else, maybe you should go play Grand Theft Auto.

I would totally do it, if it was out for PC!

But to be honest, I was always bad at this rebelling stuff. Maybe I just rebel against rebelling...

 

[Jorunkun]

It seems to me that 4e is actually fairly sanitised so as not to step on the toes of any real world religion.

Sure there's devils and demons, but it's pretty clear they are the bad guys you'll go up against.

Evil alignments and deities are - by default - not available to player characters.

Most importantly, they seemed to have deliberately avoided drawing any analogies to the big monotheistic religions - i.e. no crosses for holy symbols, no power or spell titles mimicking real world religions and, most importantly, no provisions for DMs to easily create monotheistic settings.

Obviously, the easily offended will still be, erm, easily offended by the presence of warlocks, tieflings and the like, but you can't really have a fantasy roleplaying game without magic, can you?

 

[Rel]

Oh no! Whatever shall you do?

Historically speaking, I have found other ways to remain controversial and edgy.

I am, for example, a pervert.

 

[Simon Marks]

Covering the books in barbed wire and fire-ants would do a better job of selling the books than WOTC's marketing dept. ever could.

Total threadjack but...

4e seems to be selling mighty fine, which suggests to me that WOTCs marketing department has done the job damn well.

You may not like the advertising, but it certainly seems to have worked.

I don't get this statement. Marketing is based on results, not opinion. And results say "Job well done".

Uhhhh....

Controversy? Not really... it's a 30 year old game. It's hard to be controversial when you are part of the establishment.

 

[the Jester]

I lived through the hysteria of the 80s; I can't imagine it being anything like that now, pretty much no matter what.

 

[Gothmog]

No, not really. Anyway, if there were further attacks, those would actually help D&D, rather than harm it.

I agree- a controversy would vastly help D&D sales and get a lot of younger players interested- heck, it might even pull them away from their MMORPGs!

Can you imagine? "The PHB contains real spells to charm that hottie in 11th grade!" or "Become a real-world warlock and use this curse to give your enemies constipation for 1d6 + your Charisma modifier days!"

Honestly, I think as others have said, our culture has matured significantly since the 80s. 95% of people out there know D&D is just a game, usually played by nerdy, socially shy people with vivid imaginations. Why get worked up about a game other people play that doesn't affect you when there are other more important real world situations that are MUCH more problematic on a national and global scale?

As far as I can see, the mistake you are making is assuming that the D&D-haters will read the new books.

What? Actually read, research, and do your homework before getting morally outraged about something?!?!?!? Why, that would be......logical!

Don't worry, that ain't gonna happen.