D&D 5E Dark Sun, problematic content, and 5E…

[Vaalingrade]

I asked if it would it be satisfactory if we increased the age requirement for a product that features problematic content. And perhaps even label it appropriately (for mature audience or something).
I then asked what would make it ok for an RPG to feature problematic content. I got nothing.

If you don't think that the above is compromising then I guess you're correct.

Making being terrible a thing 'for adults' and therefore desirable for children is not the move.

 

[AnotherGuy]

Making being terrible a thing 'for adults' and therefore desirable for children is not the move.

Roleplaying. Give it a chance, you may like it.
Also no one said you or your character need to be terrible.
Also is being a murderer a terrible thing?

 

[Vaalingrade]

Roleplaying. Give it a chance, you may like it.

Civility. Same.

Also is being a murder a terrible thing?

I don't see a problem with being a large mass of crows, no.

 

[AnotherGuy]

Civility. Same.

If only actors who roleplayed slaves or even slavers could be civil.

I don't see a problem with being a large mass of crows, no.

Funny.
Murderers are terrible too, no?

 

[Micah Sweet]

If only actors who roleplayed slaves or even slavers could be civil.


Funny.
Murderers are terrible too, no?

Actors embody roles far more than most roleplayers. But its ok for them and not for us?

 

[Vaalingrade]

Murderers are terrible too, no?

But that's not what you asked.

 

[BrokenTwin]

Making being terrible a thing 'for adults' and therefore desirable for children is not the move.

What do you mean by this? The majority of the people I've seen arguing to keep the more controversial elements of Dark Sun have been very explicit that they want those elements to rail and fight against, not join and be part of. Modern D&D rarely if ever includes options for PCs to play outright villainous characters, I don't see why a hypothetical Dark Sun 5E would be any different.

 

[Micah Sweet]

What do you mean by this? The majority of the people I've seen arguing to keep the more controversial elements of Dark Sun have been very explicit that they want those elements to rail and fight against, not join and be part of. Modern D&D rarely if ever includes options for PCs to play outright villainous characters, I don't see why a hypothetical Dark Sun 5E would be any different.

Ah, but some people think the fact that they could choose to engage in those elements is enough for them to be removed from published content.

 

[BrokenTwin]

Ah, but some people think the fact that they could choose to engage in those elements is enough for them to be removed from published content.

But... you can choose to do that with ANY published content? To the best of my knowledge, Thay in the Forgotten Realms still deals in slavery. What's stopping a player from wanting to play a Thay slaver? Beyond the same thing that would stop them in a Dark Sun game, eg, the rest of the table telling them to knock it off. Actually, from prior experience, there's probably be MORE push-back in a Dark Sun game, since the horrors of what slavery entails are a lot more front and center.

 

[Micah Sweet]

But... you can choose to do that with ANY published content? To the best of my knowledge, Thay in the Forgotten Realms still deals in slavery. What's stopping a player from wanting to play a Thay slaver? Beyond the same thing that would stop them in a Dark Sun game, eg, the rest of the table telling them to knock it off. Actually, from prior experience, there's probably be MORE push-back in a Dark Sun game, since the horrors of what slavery entails are a lot more front and center.

I'm right there with you. Just trying to explain my perspective on the other side.