Nahat Anoj
First Post
haha I sometimes amaze myself with the stupidity of my own comments.
On the matter of half-orcs
- Thread starter Kzach
- Start date
SHARK
First Post
Greetings!
In general, I entirely agree. Excellent post!
However--help me out here. I guess I am not quite getting what the bruhaha is with people that insist that rape in the game be...roleplayed?--or are opponents of such vociferously opposed to even mentioning rape, or having rape included in the game as a story element?
For example...in some of my campaigns, the players may learn or encounter such things as any of the following, fairly commonly;
(1) "Yes, the desperate farmers explain to you that the dark, black-cloaked raiders killed the town militia, burned and raped most of the town in a savage fury, before riding off into the countryside, taking many young captives with them."
(2) "Yes, Julius, your young sister cries on your shoulder, embracing you fully. She explains to you that the Black Knight that had imprisoned her in his Black Tower for the last six months routinely tortured her, and raped her. She is worried that she may now be pregnant, as well. She is distraught, and terrified that the Black Knight will come and get her again! She looks to you desperately...you will avenge her sacred honour, will you not? Your sister is also worried about what she will do with the child she carries...what will people think? How will your family react? She looks to you for answers, and help, Julius."
(3) The young knight Narbus looks at all of you grimly. He swallows some ale slowly, and stands before the great fire, before he explains to you what happened at the temple. He explains in hard tones and deep wrath that the Orcs of Sauron swept into the courtyard, and proceeded to slaughter the priests and guards of the temple. Most of the beautiful priestesses that have helped you in these long years past were savagely raped, and many of them were also brutally tortured and killed. Perhaps two dozen of them were taken alive as slaves by the Orcs of Sauron, as they finished sacking the temple, before they rode off back to their mountain fortress.
I hope that makes sense. I typically reference rape, torture, and all manner of atrocities through roleplaying and so on, as simply part of the harsh, brutal and savage world that the campaign is set in. In 30 years of gaming, I have never had anyone respond negatively to it in any way whatsoever, and in fact, all such elements have caused the players to respond maturely, heroically, and thoroughly in-character.
I guess I'm not quite understanding what exactly is being argued here though, and what precisely is so bad--or what it is these various proponents of rape want to include?
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Nivenus
First Post
I don't think that anybody denies that rape is a horrible, horrible crime. However, I think something has to be said that we, as a society choose to ignore it rather than deal with it like adults. I can't help but think that if we were more open in discussions of rape that we'd see a lot less of it. Sure, there's that idea of sensationization and trivialization but I'm not talking about using rape for shock value. I'm talking about using it in the same way that social commentaries of the past have used race-motivated lynch murders or genocide. Putting a human face on it.
Does this mean it needs to show up in D&D? No, not at all. In fact, I'd shy away from it most of the time if not always, unless you're sure everyone can act sensibly about it. The same goes for torture or similar crimes. But ruling it out entirely seems silly and overly protective, I think.
Actually, what irks me the most about this new policy on half-orcs is not making rape a smaller case. Like others, I'm fine with it being the minority origin for half-orcs rather than the most common one. What irks me is that the new origin seems to indicate that humans and orcs would, by no means, ever feel the need to breed for reasons not emphasized by violence. However, it seems WotC has taken note of this and have made the origins pretty vague, with multiple interpretations.
Does this mean it needs to show up in D&D? No, not at all. In fact, I'd shy away from it most of the time if not always, unless you're sure everyone can act sensibly about it. The same goes for torture or similar crimes. But ruling it out entirely seems silly and overly protective, I think.
Actually, what irks me the most about this new policy on half-orcs is not making rape a smaller case. Like others, I'm fine with it being the minority origin for half-orcs rather than the most common one. What irks me is that the new origin seems to indicate that humans and orcs would, by no means, ever feel the need to breed for reasons not emphasized by violence. However, it seems WotC has taken note of this and have made the origins pretty vague, with multiple interpretations.
Wik
First Post
You know, it's not a subject I want to see in a game. It is something that disgusts me, and it's something I've had to deal with "objectively" in more than a few anthropology/history classes. It is not something I like to see, hear about, or discuss. But I can do it if I must - and I think we should all be aware of it, at least.
That being said, I don't want to see it in a game. I don't mind seeing it alluded to, if you're running a dark game like the Shark. But the second the "R bomb" is dropped, I am taken out of the game, and reminded of the real world too much. I don't like it, even if it's "realistic".
I'd much rather mention that the evil riders came through the town, and that afterwards, many of the townswomen were crying. And that, nine months later, the midwives were kept busy. That, to me, is much better than saying "Yeah, and the evil riders raped the women." There's a difference in tone there, for me.
So, rape is a no-no in my game, but it can be alluded to, so long as no one actually says "Rape". It's a silly rule, but it works for my personal comfort level.
***
As a side story, I remember playing with a GM who started off well, before his game fizzled into one of the worst campaigns I've ever been in. During the rough turning point, he ran an encounter I personally hated (worst encounter I've ever been in).
The gist of it was, three human bandits and a dwarf were raping a human villager. Our characters were to rush into the fray, and help the poor woman.
What really bothered me was the light-hearted way the GM was describing the scene, especially concerning the dwarf who had to decide whether to "finish up" or charge us while pulling up his pants (har har, really funny). The bandits were bungling idiots, and the woman was pretty much ignored by the GM.
The whole thing made my skin crawl, and I decided I didn't want to participate in this encounter. I got up, got a drink, and told my brother to play my character while I was gone - figuring this was a pretty good sign. Unfortunately, they paused play until I got back, twenty minutes later.
the woman's barn caught fire, and I had my character in the barn, rescuing chickens and whatnot, while the bandits were busy fighting the rest of the group, simply because as a player, this wasn't something I wanted to deal with. The GM didn't catch on to my discomfort, and kept on snickering at his portrayal of these bandits.
At the same time, my fellow players weren't engrossed in the scene, but none of them were really bothered. My brother ignored the rape part of things, and treated it as a combat encounter. A friend of mine just sort of leapt into the fight, and actually laughed at the "pulling up the pants" part of things.
So, maybe the rest of the group was cool with it. But I wasn't. I wound up mentioning it in a roundabout way to the GM, after the session.
The moral of the story: I don't like seeing rape in my games. And if I do see it, I don't participate. Because it is the antithesis of fun for me.
(as a sidenote, I feel the same way about elongated torture scenes, though I have a bit more leeway here. I don't mind describing the basics of torture, but I cut things short).
That being said, I don't want to see it in a game. I don't mind seeing it alluded to, if you're running a dark game like the Shark. But the second the "R bomb" is dropped, I am taken out of the game, and reminded of the real world too much. I don't like it, even if it's "realistic".
I'd much rather mention that the evil riders came through the town, and that afterwards, many of the townswomen were crying. And that, nine months later, the midwives were kept busy. That, to me, is much better than saying "Yeah, and the evil riders raped the women." There's a difference in tone there, for me.
So, rape is a no-no in my game, but it can be alluded to, so long as no one actually says "Rape". It's a silly rule, but it works for my personal comfort level.
***
As a side story, I remember playing with a GM who started off well, before his game fizzled into one of the worst campaigns I've ever been in. During the rough turning point, he ran an encounter I personally hated (worst encounter I've ever been in).
The gist of it was, three human bandits and a dwarf were raping a human villager. Our characters were to rush into the fray, and help the poor woman.
What really bothered me was the light-hearted way the GM was describing the scene, especially concerning the dwarf who had to decide whether to "finish up" or charge us while pulling up his pants (har har, really funny). The bandits were bungling idiots, and the woman was pretty much ignored by the GM.
The whole thing made my skin crawl, and I decided I didn't want to participate in this encounter. I got up, got a drink, and told my brother to play my character while I was gone - figuring this was a pretty good sign. Unfortunately, they paused play until I got back, twenty minutes later.
the woman's barn caught fire, and I had my character in the barn, rescuing chickens and whatnot, while the bandits were busy fighting the rest of the group, simply because as a player, this wasn't something I wanted to deal with. The GM didn't catch on to my discomfort, and kept on snickering at his portrayal of these bandits.
At the same time, my fellow players weren't engrossed in the scene, but none of them were really bothered. My brother ignored the rape part of things, and treated it as a combat encounter. A friend of mine just sort of leapt into the fight, and actually laughed at the "pulling up the pants" part of things.
So, maybe the rest of the group was cool with it. But I wasn't. I wound up mentioning it in a roundabout way to the GM, after the session.
The moral of the story: I don't like seeing rape in my games. And if I do see it, I don't participate. Because it is the antithesis of fun for me.
(as a sidenote, I feel the same way about elongated torture scenes, though I have a bit more leeway here. I don't mind describing the basics of torture, but I cut things short).
Maybe not in your society. Here in London...
Seriously, I'm not happy with the idea that murder (which takes place in both our societies) is fine to portray in-game, but rape isn't. More people have been raped than have had a relative murdered, but in neither case is it a reason to eliminate it from fictional reality. Two cousins of mine drowned when a ship (the Herald of Free Enterprise ferry) sank. It means I got pretty uncomfortable watching Titanic in the cinema. Doesn't mean I'm going to say there should be no ship sinkings in any RPGs anywhere. Obviously it's a good idea for a player group to be sensitive to the concerns of the players in that particular group; but that's no basis for determing the content of an entire game.
Who's saying that a character can't be the product of rape?
Any character of any race could be the result of a rape. I don't see it mentioned anywhere in the PHB as a possible background, though. Strangely, no one was up in arms over that omission...
The fun thing about dying is that it's rather difficult to have horrifying trauma caused by it due to being dead.
You're killed once, and them bam, it's over. You settling things with whatever afterlife you get, and there you go, eternal <whatever>. All and all, not that bad of a deal. Oh sure, dying, that sucks. But once the dying is over, you get to kick back and relax.
...Not so much with rape and torture. I guess my issue with rape and tortue is that you can have a perfectly evil character without relying on those two, and frankly, both seem to be buttons that are pressed just for the sake of pressing them. "How bad is my villain? He's so bad he rapes people!" You don't even really need to comment on midwives being busy or whatever. "The gang of evil bandits stormed through, murdered many, and stole everything of value" is pretty bad as it is. I mean, if you want to impress their dastardliness, have the PCs talk to some people who had a husband or brother killed. Yes, it's horrible, but the dead guys are dead. It's not like there's a moustache twisting countest to make the most eeeeeeeeevil villain you can.
That's the issue when you bring rape and torture into it - suddenly, the dastardly deed doesn't end with the villains or bad guys or whatever going down. Suddenly you've got a person who's now a victim for their entire life. You can have a game that's not immature or childish, without being mature or adult, both of which are, ironically, often interchangable with immature and childish. In the end, I've found that, 99 times out of 100, bringing in rape - unless it's one very specific case that's meant to be a highly dramatic moment in game - just makes everything fall apart. The players get uncomfortable, the DM typically looks rather slimy, and it doesn't exactly do great things for the reputation of tabletop gaming.
It's just...unneccisary.
You're killed once, and them bam, it's over. You settling things with whatever afterlife you get, and there you go, eternal <whatever>. All and all, not that bad of a deal. Oh sure, dying, that sucks. But once the dying is over, you get to kick back and relax.
...Not so much with rape and torture. I guess my issue with rape and tortue is that you can have a perfectly evil character without relying on those two, and frankly, both seem to be buttons that are pressed just for the sake of pressing them. "How bad is my villain? He's so bad he rapes people!" You don't even really need to comment on midwives being busy or whatever. "The gang of evil bandits stormed through, murdered many, and stole everything of value" is pretty bad as it is. I mean, if you want to impress their dastardliness, have the PCs talk to some people who had a husband or brother killed. Yes, it's horrible, but the dead guys are dead. It's not like there's a moustache twisting countest to make the most eeeeeeeeevil villain you can.
That's the issue when you bring rape and torture into it - suddenly, the dastardly deed doesn't end with the villains or bad guys or whatever going down. Suddenly you've got a person who's now a victim for their entire life. You can have a game that's not immature or childish, without being mature or adult, both of which are, ironically, often interchangable with immature and childish. In the end, I've found that, 99 times out of 100, bringing in rape - unless it's one very specific case that's meant to be a highly dramatic moment in game - just makes everything fall apart. The players get uncomfortable, the DM typically looks rather slimy, and it doesn't exactly do great things for the reputation of tabletop gaming.
It's just...unneccisary.
While this is commendable, it's hardly universal.
Edit: Eg there's a homosexual rape scene in Pulp Fiction that's played for laughs.
Similar Threads
