WotC Responds!!!

[mkarol]

They might be able to alter the d20 STL to avoid products like this, like they did with miniatures, but that's going to be an amusing read.

Ah yes: All products applying for use of the new d20 (which will be renamed d20pg-13, not to be confused withed d20 on pg-13 of the PH which is of course is just the Human racial trait, which do not include “reproduces sexually”) license must present their application to The Wizards of the Coast Morality, Decency, and Maturity counsel. The WOTCMDM (not the WOTC DM, who would actually use products) will be designated the official censors for the gaming community and will prevent any indecent, immoral, or icky bad stuff from infecting our hobby.

In accordance with the EOTCMDM’s determinations, the spells like ‘raise dead’ will be renamed ‘awaken fallen friends’ and all weapons will now do subdual damage! Poisons are renamed to “happy juice” and you get double XP any time you talk your way past a challenge rather than revert to inhumane violence.

 

[Ranger REG]

But I guess in this case they can't, really, since it's an important employee in the D&D cog.

Gee, and I thought Sean K Reynolds is wierd. Just Kidding!

One can't help but wonder if there is a grain of truth in that long-ago article by John Tynes.

Any reason why Anthony decided to publicly air this out? I mean he could have used a pen name, right?

 

[BiggusGeekus]

Any reason why Anthony decided to publicly air this out? I mean he could have used a pen name, right?

Yeah, but he would have been Johnny Ignoro if he did that. This would have been a less of a big deal. Look at it like this: what do you think the response would have been if I had written such a book?

 

[Kai Lord]

The WOTCMDM (not the WOTC DM, who would actually use products) will be designated the official censors for the gaming community and will prevent any indecent, immoral, or icky bad stuff from infecting our hobby.

d20 is not "the gaming community", its a trademark owned by WOTC.

 

[mkarol]

d20 is not "the gaming community", its a trademark owned by WOTC.

Thanks for missing the point of the post... which was to mock the tone of the press relase 'response' which makes WOTC seem like they are telling people what was 'appropriate.'

 

[Ranger REG]

Look at it like this: what do you think the response would have been if I had written such a book?

I would feign a look of surprise?

 

[Kai Lord]

Thanks for missing the point of the post... which was to mock the tone of the press relase 'response' which makes WOTC seem like they are telling people what was 'appropriate.'

They stated what they find inappropriate, in the context of a product that requires their own Core Rules. I fail to see the problem in that.

 

[Angcuru]

Methinks WotC is being a bit paranoid, but hey, in today's world, you have to cover your arse. A bit of pre-scandal self-protection never hurt anyone. It ANNOYS a lot of people, but still no harm done.

But if a book of mere sexuality is enough to make them nervous, I wonder why they did not release a similar statement when the BoVD was released. While useful, I think a lot more people find the BoVD more offensive than some Sex Tome. What do you think people would find more offensive: A book containing details of sacrficing innocents which also contains a spell that requires that you indulge in necrophelia; or a book about sexuality in D&D?

I think this book actually fills in a large gap in the D&D world actually. In our own world, sexuality is a significant force and holds great influence, so why should it not be so in the game world? I mean, most game worlds are very similar to our own, barring that dragons, monsters, and magic are real, there are elves, pixies, etc., and there is evidence that Gods actually exist. Information on sexuality in this world gives explanation and detail to a powerful force, and the great thing is: YOU DON'T HAVE TO USE IT IF YOU DON'T WANT TO!!

But that's just my view.

 

[Ranger REG]

While Wizards find such a product inappropriate, I doubt they can do anything to prevent such a product to come out except to include a moral restriction clause into the Trademark License and Trademark Guide.

(Sorry about the legal nature, EricNoah.)

I do agree with everyone, there will be a restriction, perhaps a legal disclaimer is the more prudent direction, added to the already restrictive guidelines on Wizard's trademark use.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

It's funny that every time something people might object to comes out, there's suddenly a score of cheerleaders saying something to the effect of "you ignorant idiots, how dare you suppress their free speech/free thought/etc by objecting to the fact that product XYZ is being published. You don't have to use/buy it if you don't like it. (Although we'll call you ignorant and intolerant if you say in advance that you won't use it on principle.)" Would they all be cheerleading if product XYZ was D20 Pornmaster: the role playing game of kiddie porn producers I wonder. According to the stated principles of many of the cheerleaders, I can't see why not.