Author (and artist) of The Book of Erotic Fantasy
- Thread starter GKestrel
- Start date
- Status
Fusangite, I respect your point, but in that respect, it's no different than a player who wants to use his Dazzling Swashbuckler PrC in what the DM sees as a grim, gritty campaign. Every splatbook, from what I remember, has a big thing at the front that reads "You do NOT automatically get to put this into your game -- your DM is the sole arbiter of whether or not this gets in, whether or not this gets modified, and whether or not you can use it," or words to that effect.
In my main campaign, I have no more intention of letting my PCs use the BoEF than I do of letting them use psionics -- it's not in my game's flavor. But that's really all it is -- flavor.
I played in a d20 Modern game with a 17-year-old kid that my buddy and I were sort of mentoring (as a way to get him to shut up -- we all ended up on stage crew together). It was not a sex-heavy game. It was a guns-heavy game. He STILL ended up asking if he could make a Charisma check to see if he got a "hot nurse" when he went to the hospital after falling from a 9-story building. And he wasn't kidding.
In a game with a bad DM, the lame sex stuff is already happening, and the BoEF won't do anything more than provide titillation and a faint sense of disappointment when it fails to be as Penthouse Forum-ish as they wanted. In a game with a good DM, sexuality might or might not be included. It's been off-screen in my game, and I don't see my players clamoring to change that rule -- but if they did, I'd be up for giving it a shot. And I'm sure that the rules in the book would be more balanced than the joking suggestions I hear tossed out when someone wants to "know how they did" by something other than their own descriptions.
In my main campaign, I have no more intention of letting my PCs use the BoEF than I do of letting them use psionics -- it's not in my game's flavor. But that's really all it is -- flavor.
I played in a d20 Modern game with a 17-year-old kid that my buddy and I were sort of mentoring (as a way to get him to shut up -- we all ended up on stage crew together). It was not a sex-heavy game. It was a guns-heavy game. He STILL ended up asking if he could make a Charisma check to see if he got a "hot nurse" when he went to the hospital after falling from a 9-story building. And he wasn't kidding.
In a game with a bad DM, the lame sex stuff is already happening, and the BoEF won't do anything more than provide titillation and a faint sense of disappointment when it fails to be as Penthouse Forum-ish as they wanted. In a game with a good DM, sexuality might or might not be included. It's been off-screen in my game, and I don't see my players clamoring to change that rule -- but if they did, I'd be up for giving it a shot. And I'm sure that the rules in the book would be more balanced than the joking suggestions I hear tossed out when someone wants to "know how they did" by something other than their own descriptions.
Belen
Legend
It always amazes me how the "publish anything" crowd devolves into name-calling and character bashing in an argument. Someone posts a constructive argument that has nothing to do with censorship, such as fusangite, and someone immediately calls him a nasty nazi-like censor and then labels his nation as bad, just because they do not agree with their opinion.
How pathetic.
How pathetic.
Iron_Chef said:
Gawd, I hope so.There's nothing better than Friday night spent smooching it up with some hot imaginary chainmail bikini babe and chopping off bad guy's heads all in the span of a few hours.
Seriously, you are not understanding that the book is for mature audiences and will be clearly labeled as such. Parents who allow their little gamers to purchase such a book without checking it first are BAD PARENTS. It is by this complete and utter deep-rooted psychological failure by people to accept responsibility for themselves as PARENTS that we continue to see these misguided pro-censorship "childproof the world" campaigns threaten everything that is fun in this world for us adults. This world is run by adults and should be enjoyed by adults. Kids are just along for the ride... It's solely the parent's job to "protect them." Not the author. Not the publisher. Not the corporation that owns the publisher. And certainly not the government. They can't even balance the budget; how are they supposed to do anything right?
I note you are from Canada, land of censorship. Canada has the most aggresive and restrictive censorship policies in the free world, wores than the notorious UK. All mail is routed to one destination for "inspection" where goose-steppin' customs goons can't wait to steal their citizen's money by jacking all their "objectionable" foreign products, like books and movies. Canada recently put a guy in jail in one of the worst travesties of justice ever committed (involving a conspiracy by the police and prosecutors) because the guy made videos with and for adults featuring naked girls undergoing simulated (CGI) gunshot wounds. Nothing you couldn't see in an R-rated movie, but Canada threw the guy in jail, bankrupted him trying to defend himself, and stole the copyrights to all his films in a settlement saying his life's work could never be released again or he'd go back to jail. Nice country you got there. The poor guy can't even move to America now because he's got a "criminal" record, so he's a virtual prisoner of the Canadian regime for the rest of his life, without ever having committed a crime. Lovely; the Nazis would be proud.
Your complacency and apparent endorsement of your corrupt political and judicial system is horrifying. What if they made gaming or one of your other hobbies illegal? Or your religion? Or your chosen career? You'd be next on their hit list and would have only yourself to blame when the jackboots kick in your door.
Canada is no friend to free speech, and your misguided opinions about what we can and cannot read in America are extremely dangerous. Freedom of speech is one of our most important rights here. You stick to your repressive Canada where the government does your thinking for you; I'll take the USA any day (even with the current administration, lol).
BLAME CANADA!
Maybe I missed it, but where did fsungite promote government censorship or suggest that his argument is based on wanting to protect children?
Quote him, or retract your racist remarks. Oh, what the heck, how about retracting some of those remarks even if you can quote him suggesting what you say he suggested.
Skaros
LuYangShih
First Post
I never even knew about this book before reading this thread. The book seems pointless, especially given the ad copy of the game posted in this thread. I doubt it will address any valid topics in a consistent or mature manner. It will sell, though, and that is the point.
Iron_Chef says
No. It's perfectly clear to me that it will be labeled as such. I'm sure you'll agree that product labelling does not have the most enormous effect on who consumes a product. Other factors are more important: what products something is associated with, where they are sold, how they are advertized, at what price they are sold, etc. There are many many factors which determine a product's availability to and popularity with a particular group of individuals.
My argument is that the most important thing about this product is that it is the first and only one of its kind. This factor, beyond any labeling and marketing considerations, will produce an impact and an impact disproportionately felt by gamers who lack other sexual outlets.
So, you blame the inability of parents to be omniscient and omnipotent for the rise of state action to censor things. As you well know, all adolescents defy their parents and all adolescents engage in transgressive acts. The outrageously insensitive statements you make about the absolute power and exclusive responsibility of the family unit stuns me here.
This kind of brutal nihilistic philosophy is supported by no one. If kids are hungry and their parents can't feed them, would you argue that they should starve because the rest of us in society have no responsibility for their welfare!? What utter rot. The well-being of not just kids but all members of society is a collective responsibility we all share. When we take actions, we must understand that they affect others and work to ensure that these effects are not negative.
Are you going to apprehend the children of all the parents whose credit card debt or mortgage is out of control on that basis?
I agree with you here. The child pornography law in Canada is an absurdity and a disgrace. Our customs officials have far far too much power and the government will do nothing about them despite repeated rulings against them by our supreme court. We have a very disturbing package of gun control legislation which is written like UK child protection laws not to limit gun possession but to create a loophole so as to permit warrantless searches of people's homes. You are preaching to the choir here about the Canadian government's ambivalence towards certain basic freedoms.
I agree with you that state action is almost always the wrong way to regulate offensive, controversial or damaging material. WHICH IS WHY AT NO POINT DO I ADVOCATE ANY STATE ACTION WHATSOEVER TO DEAL WITH BOEF OR ANY OTHER PUBLICATION I OBJECT TO. You see, I actually believe in the doctrines of personal and social responsibility; I'm calling on the gaming community to live by those ideals. Most quasi-libertarians like you seem to misunderstand your own ideology. The point of libertarianism is for the state to withdraw from regulating various spheres of human behaviour because voluntary institutions and practices will arise in its place. I'm not a libertarian but I would suggest that you would be well-served to at least comprehend your own ideology.
In response to takyris, D&D needs more DMs like you. I'm sure that most experienced gamers will immediately understand why sex and D&D do not mix. My concern is primarily about first-time, young and inexperienced DMs not about BOEF adversely affecting established and successful games.
No. It's perfectly clear to me that it will be labeled as such. I'm sure you'll agree that product labelling does not have the most enormous effect on who consumes a product. Other factors are more important: what products something is associated with, where they are sold, how they are advertized, at what price they are sold, etc. There are many many factors which determine a product's availability to and popularity with a particular group of individuals.
My argument is that the most important thing about this product is that it is the first and only one of its kind. This factor, beyond any labeling and marketing considerations, will produce an impact and an impact disproportionately felt by gamers who lack other sexual outlets.
So, you blame the inability of parents to be omniscient and omnipotent for the rise of state action to censor things. As you well know, all adolescents defy their parents and all adolescents engage in transgressive acts. The outrageously insensitive statements you make about the absolute power and exclusive responsibility of the family unit stuns me here.
This kind of brutal nihilistic philosophy is supported by no one. If kids are hungry and their parents can't feed them, would you argue that they should starve because the rest of us in society have no responsibility for their welfare!? What utter rot. The well-being of not just kids but all members of society is a collective responsibility we all share. When we take actions, we must understand that they affect others and work to ensure that these effects are not negative.
Are you going to apprehend the children of all the parents whose credit card debt or mortgage is out of control on that basis?
I agree with you here. The child pornography law in Canada is an absurdity and a disgrace. Our customs officials have far far too much power and the government will do nothing about them despite repeated rulings against them by our supreme court. We have a very disturbing package of gun control legislation which is written like UK child protection laws not to limit gun possession but to create a loophole so as to permit warrantless searches of people's homes. You are preaching to the choir here about the Canadian government's ambivalence towards certain basic freedoms.
I agree with you that state action is almost always the wrong way to regulate offensive, controversial or damaging material. WHICH IS WHY AT NO POINT DO I ADVOCATE ANY STATE ACTION WHATSOEVER TO DEAL WITH BOEF OR ANY OTHER PUBLICATION I OBJECT TO. You see, I actually believe in the doctrines of personal and social responsibility; I'm calling on the gaming community to live by those ideals. Most quasi-libertarians like you seem to misunderstand your own ideology. The point of libertarianism is for the state to withdraw from regulating various spheres of human behaviour because voluntary institutions and practices will arise in its place. I'm not a libertarian but I would suggest that you would be well-served to at least comprehend your own ideology.
In response to takyris, D&D needs more DMs like you. I'm sure that most experienced gamers will immediately understand why sex and D&D do not mix. My concern is primarily about first-time, young and inexperienced DMs not about BOEF adversely affecting established and successful games.
Darth Shoju
First Post
Iron_Chef said:
Ummm what the hell is this? Fus, man I can't believe you were so mellow about these comments. I mean, yeah I agree our customs officials do have too much power, and our laws need reformation, but Iron Chef's comments went WAY beyond that. I found them to be utterly offensive. I'm having a really hard time understanding how they have been let stand this long. This is a message board about ROLEPLAYING not a forum for slandering other people's nationalities. I would greatly appreciate if you (Iron Chef) would desist from taking potshots at my country. You want to continue to debate this very tired point about the BoEF fine, but leave Canada out of it.
- Status
Similar Threads
