Poll: Rating your D&D game based on criteria in Monte Cook's article in Dragon #300

[seasong]

I'm not sure how this would translate to Monte's Moral Compass, but...

My recent high fantasy campaign (Rating System goes None, Mild, Moderate, Strong, Extreme):

[COLOR=orange]Violence: overall Strong
  Amount: Strong (many, many battles)
  Graphic Depictions: Strong
  Taboos: Strong, due to inclusion of:
    Violence Against Bystanders ("collatoral cost")
    Violence Against Children (villain looked like a 10-year old)
    Sado-Masochism (one PC went to a party)

Sexual Content: overall Moderate
  Amount: Moderate (present, but not dominant)
  Graphic Depictions: Mild (much implied)
  Taboos: Strong, due to inclusion of:
    Prostitution (one PC was a prostitute)
    Various Deviations From Norm (homosexuality, interacial, etc.)
    Sado-Masochism (one PC went to a party)

Romance & Relationships: overall Moderate
  Amount: Strong (very dominant theme)
  Graphic Depictions: Strong (roleplaying seduction, etc.)
  Taboos: None

Crime: overall Strong
  Amount: Strong (very dominant theme - party of rogues, city of thieves)
  Graphic Depictions: Moderate (nothing 'educational')
  Taboos: Strong, due to inclusion of:
    PCs Are Criminals
    Assassins & Thieves Who Do Not Pay For Their Crimes
    Decadent & Corrupt Authorities
    ...Who Do Not Pay For Their Crimes
    ...And, In Fact, Are Paid For Same Crime
    Callous People, Rich & Poor
    Glamorous Thieves

Grossness: overall Strong
  Amount: Strong (plenty of icky things throughout)
  Graphic Depiction: Strong
  Taboos: Moderate, due to inclusion of:
    Disease
    Slimy Tentacle Monsters (no hentai)
    Spiders That Crawl Into Ears To Allow Telepathic Communication
    Swimming In Sewage

Religion: overall Mild
  Amount: Mild (occasional polytheistic events)
  Graphic Depiction: Mild (present, barely)
  Taboos: Mild, due to inclusion of:
    Several Fictional Gods
    Demons To Be Killed
    One Reformed Demon[/COLOR]

I'm not sure how Monte would rate it, but that's how I usually think about my campaigns. The above is pretty typical.

 

[S'mon]

NC-17 is a kinda loosey-goosey new rating that supposedly gives a legitimate rating to movies that want to claim to be something more than just unrated porn.

The examples you gave, Natural Born Killers, the Sopranos (which is TV, and thus not subject to the same MPAA ratings anyway) as NC-17 or worse are actually rated R.

OK - in the UK '18s' are pretty common, and NBK barely squeaked an 18 even with cuts. Most Sopranos episodes would be 15-rated if they were film releases but as video (where classification is harsher) they'd be 18s I believe. Certainly Oz episodes would be 18s.

 

[Desdichado]

OK - in the UK '18s' are pretty common, and NBK barely squeaked an 18 even with cuts. Most Sopranos episodes would be 15-rated if they were film releases but as video (where classification is harsher) they'd be 18s I believe. Certainly Oz episodes would be 18s.

Yeah, that's the sex vs. violence different between Europe and the US again, I'd guess. Violence doesn't seem to bother us nearly as much as sex! Kinda weird when you think about it, though...

 

[barsoomcore]

Kinda weird when you think about it, though...

Less weird when you get to know enough Americans.

*Canadian ducks*

 

[Nathanael]

The beginning of the X rating (starting in the late 60's with movies like 'Midnight Cowboy') ushered in a whole era of soft porn/high violence movies like 'Clockwork Orange,' 'Caligula' and became a way of life for people like Russ Meyer and Ralph Bakshi. This 'freedom' let loose a flood of 'baser' film making, and it seemed at the time like there was a competition amongst X rated filmmakers to see how many actual phalluses (phallusi?) they could cram in a movie. Watch 'Clockwork Orange' and 'Listzomania' to see what I'm talking about. Some of these movies didn't just border, but crossed completely over into on the surreal!

All of this calmed down a bit as the decade progressed and the X rating became the line to be avoided if you wanted a commercially accepted picture, as crossing it relegated your movie to dank adult theatres being visited by guys in dark glasses and trenchcoats. The folks who made X rated films in the late 80's and early 90's were tired of having their films seen as closer to XXX than R when they believed that they were making art and not porn. These filmmakers bothered the MPAA until they came up with another rating to replace the old one. NC-17 became the replacement rating for X (starting with the movie 'Henry and June'). Supposedly this changed the formerly X rated movies from soft porn in to art, but nothing has really changed. The NC-17 rating is still the 'how far can you push the MPAA for an R rating' metre. That and a way for people to take home porn while being able to say 'I don't watch Porn, it's high art.'

Just a short info moment for those who are confused by our very confusing MPAA rating system, which does little to actually stop kids from getting into restricted features. I mean, seriously, how many of you were in the theatre with the rest of us minors when 'Porky's' came out?

 

[S'mon]

I watched some of 'Caligula' on Channel 5 (British terrestrial network TV channel) a few nights ago - very silly movie, lots of penises - would that be an NC-17 in the USA now?

I realise now I don't understand US movie ratings the way I thought I did. I used to use them for my PBEM games, now I know why my last 'NC-17' game degenerated into porn...
If I run another one I'll label it 'R'.

 

[Kyramus]

My game goes through the whole range from lighthearted to Vile.

It all depends on who and what they are encountering.

If they encounter a really really bad evil, chances are it'll be vile.

 

[Ralts Bloodthorne]

My Ravenloft game runs particullarly into vile.
Let's be real with this one.
The PC's find out that the food they had been eating for 3 days was hapless victims butchered and the food covered with an illusions (and to top it off, I'd served ham sandwiches to everyone-2 players puked) and the victims ran the gamut from children to the elderly.
One of the PC's got drug into a cell in the insane asylumn and sexually assaulted.. (No details, just hit for subdual damage until unconcious, then "drug into the cell") The PC's found her huddled up on the floor, dressed in rags, and covered with bruises and bite marks.
Sacrifice of virgins, PC's, babies, ect, mostly behind the scenes though. I don't do the Shining river of blood scene.

My regular campaign is definately mature, dipping into vile though. Sex is there, just glossed over, but it is there. Violence is sudden, shocking and deadly.

So, I voted vile.

 

[Werewolf_26]

I voted mature simple because that is what our group rated on most of the categories in the article.

In some areas of the area the party slid around a bit, bouncing between standard and vile, with most of the categories being a mature game.

Its our opinion that the games we play currently slide between the varying levels depending on which villain, what quest, etc. that the party is dealing with.

 

[the Jester]

Well, I don't have the new Dragon, so it's hard to judge, but how about I give some examples from my campaign and you folks with it give me a clue as to how Monte's system would rate it.

There's lots of foul language.

There's some sexual content, including orcish pcs butt-raping each other (although with all the orcish pcs having died off, that's over and done with). Generally, rape occurs only off-camera and as part of campaign background (for instance, the pcs might encounter an npc who's been raped and have to hunt down her rapist, or they might find a group of harpies or lamia who have enslaved men to be their unwilling breeding stock). There is a nation that is proud of having achieved "sexual liberation" for pedophiles (which, of course, I personally think is vile) but this has never come up in-game. Still, it's in the campaign write-up. There's prostitution everywhere, if you look around. And there's a god of necrophilia, rape, perversion and cowardice.

There's lots of violence; the game, to a great extent, centers around fighting monsters. We all like it graphic, so I give vivid descriptions of brains splattering on the wall, the crunch of bones tearing as limbs are hewed off, etc.

There's cannibalism, too. One of my homebrewed core classes revolves around eating the hearts of vanquished enemies, and though there's only been one pc in 3e that has taken the class, it's there and I've done a lot of work on expanding its options (several prcs, new spells, epic progression, etc.)

So: is this a mature game, or a vile game?

Just curious- from some of Monte's comments, especially about a vile game being one that's almost been taken too far, I'm curious as to how we rate. Personally, I don't think there's anything in my game that isn't treated appropriately, whether that is with a healthy dose of humor (the butt-rapes were really funny for everyone, including the victims), sensitivity to other cultures (cannibalism isn't always about psychopaths), or squeamishness (like I said, most in-game rapes occur off-camera, as it were, and other than the aforementioned pc orcs gettin' naughty, I haven't had a pc get raped in my current campaign world).