Author (and artist) of The Book of Erotic Fantasy

[rkanodia]

Take 1: Yeah, but then you have all that failure before you succeed.

Take 2: Yeah, but then it still only lasts 2 minutes.

[runs off]

Seriously. If your significant other is willing to let you take twenty, you, sir, are a far luckier man than I!

 

[Pirate Queen Eliza]

Re: Re: BoEF Artist Starts Own Thread on the Subject...

Question: If the press release is spreading misinformation, who's to blame for the spread of misinformation?

Whoever wrote the press release, and I have no idea who that may be.

 

[Eridanis]

Apparently, Ms. Kestrel reads our questions, but can't be bothered to reply to them. Read her condescening comments over at gamingreport:

http://www.gamingreport.com/article.php?sid=8290&mode=thread&order=0

At first, I was in the "they can do what they like, it's a free country, but I won't buy it" camp. But with her condecending attitude, she has lost my respect with lines like "It's really a question of what your interests are and whether you're comfortable with the topic of sex." No, Ms. Kestrel; my comfort with sexual topics has nothing to do with whether I want rules for sex in one's campaign. I can understand if you want to look down on those who don't agree with your point of view, but for the sake of your business' bottom line, you might want to keep your snickers behind your hand.

I have no doubt that some game groups might enjoy adding this book's rules to their game. But please don't look down on those who might prefer to concentrate on politcal, military, or philosophical topics in thier games, and leave their sexual adventures to their interactions in the real world.

 

[Piratecat]

Actually, let's be fair. She mentioned over at her own bulletin board (and Andy's) that she was having trouble getting through. I have no doubt she'll be back.

 

[Zappo]

Apparently, Ms. Kestrel reads our questions, but can't be bothered to reply to them. Read her condescening comments over at gamingreport:

http://www.gamingreport.com/article.php?sid=8290&mode=thread&order=0

At first, I was in the "they can do what they like, it's a free country, but I won't buy it" camp. But with her condecending attitude, she has lost my respect with lines like "It's really a question of what your interests are and whether you're comfortable with the topic of sex." No, Ms. Kestrel; my comfort with sexual topics has nothing to do with whether I want rules for sex in one's campaign. I can understand if you want to look down on those who don't agree with your point of view, but for the sake of your business' bottom line, you might want to keep your snickers behind your hand.

I have no doubt that some game groups might enjoy adding this book's rules to their game. But please don't look down on those who might prefer to concentrate on politcal, military, or philosophical topics in thier games, and leave their sexual adventures to their interactions in the real world.

I've read the post, but I sincerely don't see any condescending attitude. What she's saying in that post is that games with an erotic theme have as much right to exist as any other - now, one might disagree on this, and one might even find the comparison degrading for militar, philosophical, or political games, but that's just one's problem. She isn't looking down on anyone.

 

[Silver Moon]

I just wanted to say that I am extremely impressed with the quality of the discussion on this particular thread. It is great to see this topic treated in such a serious and mature manner. Even the "comic relief" posts are well done, adding some needed humor without detracting from the overall discussion.

As for the topic itself, I personally would not purchase this product, however I find myself agreeing with many of the points on both sides of the issue.

 

[Tiefling]

Apparently, Ms. Kestrel reads our questions, but can't be bothered to reply to them. Read her condescening comments over at gamingreport:

http://www.gamingreport.com/article.php?sid=8290&mode=thread&order=0

At first, I was in the "they can do what they like, it's a free country, but I won't buy it" camp. But with her condecending attitude, she has lost my respect with lines like "It's really a question of what your interests are and whether you're comfortable with the topic of sex." No, Ms. Kestrel; my comfort with sexual topics has nothing to do with whether I want rules for sex in one's campaign. I can understand if you want to look down on those who don't agree with your point of view, but for the sake of your business' bottom line, you might want to keep your snickers behind your hand.

I have no doubt that some game groups might enjoy adding this book's rules to their game. But please don't look down on those who might prefer to concentrate on politcal, military, or philosophical topics in thier games, and leave their sexual adventures to their interactions in the real world.

Notice the "what your interests are" part.

 

[Arcane Runes Press]

Apparently, Ms. Kestrel reads our questions, but can't be bothered to reply to them. Read her condescening comments over at gamingreport:

What condescending comments?

The only line I can see in there that could be even remotely seen as condescending is the one you quoted, and that's even really reaching.

The little interview seems perfectly reasoned and reasonable to me.

There's already enough vitriol being thrown around in regards to this book. No need to find offense in innocent comments.

Patrick Y.

 

[Aristotle]

I consider myself a moderate liberal. Personal freedoms (speach, individuality, etc) are very dear to me. I've taken part in the administration of some of the largest free adult chatrooms on the 'net (at least in their time). I'm also a gamer... and spend a huge amount of my time involved in game related activity. In other words... I don't personally have an issue with this product. Heck, I might even be considered a prime member of the target audience.

Will I buy it? That depends on how good the product is. I'll apply the same process of review to it that I do any other game book and decide at that time if it belongs on my shelf.


BUT... I find myelf having an issue with the concept of a book on erotic fantasy. The same issue that so many others have. Kids...

Sure, kids can get "normal porn" much more readily (and at a much lower cover price) than "game porn". Sure, most kids who are old enough to game have already seen erotic artwork or worse. Some of them have probably even experimented with sex. My issue isn't with young teens seeing nudity or even reading sexually explicit stories. My issue is that role playing has a fragile reputation.

I'm not implying that this book will destroy D&D. In fact I'd wager the book will sell well. Sex sells afterall. Rather, I am implying that many parents with children who play D&D are already on guard. They've heard all the old stories and stereotypes, and they are watching what sort of imagery and content these products have.

I thought the "old tome" look was an ingenious marketing strategy on the part of WotC. The trend caught on across the d20 product range, and has kept the chainmail bikini clad warrior and the scantily clad damsel in distress off of the covers for the most part. I feel this has helped the game's shelf image a good bit in the eyes of most parents. Even the "Vile" book looked fairly harmless on the shelf (except for the parental warning).

I hope the designers of this new book take that into consideration. Even a vaguely erotic cover will send up flags in the minds of the majority of parents. The word "sex" on the cover is already going to be an issue... Some parents who see that sexual content is "part of the game" may decide against letting their children participate in the hobby at all. I'd rather see the book placed in as tasteful a light as possible.

Will it hurt the hobby in the end? I highly doubt it... While I think the book itself will sell well, I do believe that the parent factor could cause a small loss of revenue to the hobby in general, although I'll concede that only the smallest of publishers would probably even notice the loss. More importantly it could also cost us a few gamers... While it may not kill the hobby to lose some potential customers because their parents wouldn't let them play the games, I certainly find it very sad that it might cause some folks to miss out on our wonderful hobby.

To those who would say that the scenario I am proposing will be rare at best... I can only base my argument on what I see. my FLGS has a regular influx of kids (some quite young). Some of the kids pull their parents around the store showing them what games they want to play and asking for money to get the coolest new books. Other parents stand silently in the background watching what their children are looking at, and monitoring what they buy. I definately see parents regulating "questionable material" on a regular basis. Maybe this isn't true for every store, but I have to imagine that if it happens here it happens elsewhere too.

Honestly... I'd like to see this book done without the d20 logo (OGL only). While I hate censorship I think it would distance the product from the D&D line a little. I think this would be a responsible thing to do... If there is backlash it might help direct more of it towards the company that produced the book and less of it at the D&D brand in general.

I doubt that will happen, but I would really like to see a parental advisory sticker (like the one on the BoVD) to designate the material as mature.

 

[Spatula]

Apparently, Ms. Kestrel reads our questions, but can't be bothered to reply to them. Read her condescening comments over at gamingreport:

http://www.gamingreport.com/article.php?sid=8290&mode=thread&order=0

I don't see any condescending comments there. Nor anything that could even be construed as condescending.