[BoVD] So... did the sky fall?

[Buttercup]

With regard to running a game for minors who aren't your own children, or the children of another player in the group, I agree that it's a terrible idea. I'm trying to imagine a situation where this wouldn't worry me, and I can't think of one.

The idea of adults socializing with kids who aren't their own, sans the parents of said kids, is suspect in this culture, and must be done with great care, if at all. My concern isn't about D&D, but more abut violating cultural norms, which can get you into a great deal of trouble even if you've done nothing wrong.

 

[Desdichado]

A few months ago, we heard nervous voices nay-saying an unseen book, and demonizing WOTC for even thinking of producing it. Now, a short time later, we see people criticizing it for not being what they were afraid of. It just seems silly, is all.

Yes, but if you look into those posts, I suspect you'll find the people who are now complaining that the book isn't dark enough were the same people (for the most part) who suspected that it wouldn't be dark enough. I certainly don't think the same people who concerned that it'd be too dark are now saying that it wasn't dark enough.

 

[WizarDru]

Yes, but if you look into those posts, I suspect you'll find the people who are now complaining that the book isn't dark enough were the same people (for the most part) who suspected that it wouldn't be dark enough. I certainly don't think the same people who concerned that it'd be too dark are now saying that it wasn't dark enough.

You'd suspect that, but IMHO, you'd be wrong. To quote Hellbender from 2 months ago:

originally posted by hellbender
Then obviously, you don't need the book, you are already on a deeper level than what the book will deliver. However, don't grab some haughty attitude about those against it.
My gamers aren't children, I too am an adult, and probably old enough to be the father to many posters on this list. I am a professional (having a degree, as a few of my players do), with a sizable amount of disposable income. I have also lived through two years of hell on this miserable dirtball planet in a warzone as a civilian and have seen more than what many little stomachs can handle. Conversely, I don't need more graphic content, I want away from this reality, and I choose to do so in my games. To me, people that need more graphic content need to get out more, the world is a rather horrific place.

hellbender says as much, earlier in this thread:

The Book of Vile Darkness received a lukewarm reception because it is a mild book, marginally useful, but not really anything astounding and definitely not anything any DM worth his salt can cook up on his or her own. I was one of the concerned people, and having seen it, I admit that I was quite wrong.

I'm not saying he's wrong to do it, just that I think it's much ado about nothing. Again.

 

[hellbender]

To address a few posts:


Having a couple of other countries that are rabid against role playing games is not much of a comparison to the whole world. Sure, some countries are tougher, and some are more lenient. Many countries have freedom of speech, and in some places, it is even more free than here in the States. In my limited travel experiences, I have found that many of the counries I went to had a general lack of concern over rpgs. Clearly, I haven't been to Brazil.


I lived in those 80's. Book burning, PMRC. In retrospect, I see that my concerns were ungrounded for more than one reason. The book is really mellow, and so, there were book burnings, rpgs are still around, nothing happened. I have my old D&D books from that era, unsinged. Couple of family members think I will become some sort of deranged psycopath from playing rpgs, but it hasn't happened yet. Tipper Gore got her way and warning labels were slapped onto music released that contains offesive material. Although that is a pretty scary idea, it really hasn't stopped the music industry from pumping out music with offensive lyrics, and has not had the effect of curbing people from 'moral hoolaganism' to mindless conformity. But then, the 80's were a much wilder time. I got away with much more as a teen than a teen would now.

hellbender

 

[WizarDru]

Although that is a pretty scary idea, it really hasn't stopped the music industry from pumping out music with offensive lyrics, and has not had the effect of curbing people from 'moral hoolaganism' to mindless conformity. But then, the 80's were a much wilder time. I got away with much more as a teen than a teen would now.

I have one word for you: Nostalgia.

 

[hellbender]

I have one word for you: Nostalgia.

Ah, Nostalgia! It was probably people like me that have teens hounded by counselors, concerned outsiders, special interest groups, and I wasn't that bad, all things considered.

hellbender

 

[Vocenoctum]

well... Sigil, i disagree. lots of people have liked it. of 5 reviews on the reviews section of ENWorld, you gave it a 1 and four people gave it a 4.

One of the three didn't really say anything about the book, anothe review seemed to think the book was pretty bland, but both gave 4 of 5. It's like someone said to me once. "Wizards books are rated on a scale of 4-5" or such

 

[Shard O'Glase]

One of the three didn't really say anything about the book, anothe review seemed to think the book was pretty bland, but both gave 4 of 5. It's like someone said to me once. "Wizards books are rated on a scale of 4-5" or such

I'm boggled that it got multiple 4s. 1 is a bit low IMO, though. I'd give it either a 2 or 3, a 2.5 if you will.

Feats: Ah it actually is the book of creepy sissies, and not of vile darkness. What a waste, I guess all "EVIL" types have incredibly poor min/max judgement. Waste of space mechanically though so decent ideas.

Prestige classes: some decent, most not so decent, one is a bit powerful, another I don't know about(hey give em 9 cleric spell levels over 10 level prestige class, maybe it works maybe not too different fo em too judge), some average power, the rest weak. A couple cool ideas, but again mechainically they let me down overall, I'll try to put something together more concrete if people care whwn I'm at home with my book.

Spells: Yawn mostly, some cool(brain eating and psychic poions), a lot of sissy spells as well.

Torture tools, sacrifice rules: I thought they were lame, but hey if someone likes them good for them. Me I think my gut on the fly rulings work better.

Drugs: It's not something I really normally introduce into a campaign so I didn't really care much, but I do think this was mechanically the best section. If a player of mine cares to bring it in somehow like in his background fine I'll use it.

Overall mechanically I thought it was sub-par, it wasn't very vile, though it had some nice thematic ideas(though I usually run games in a different genre so not particularly useful for me) which when balanced with the sub-par mechanical rules almost make an average book.

 

[The Sigil]

Well, it's got posession rules, new diseases,

Granted. I just didn't see $33 worth of this. I barely saw $5 worth of this.

excellent sacrifice rules, nice prestige classes,

I don't think so. It has sacrifice rules and prestige classes that I found poor, not excellent, but I suppose that's a matter of taste.

demon lord stats,

which we had online a couple of years ago (thanks, Scott)

and new spells.

which I found peurile and sublimely uninspiring. It goes without saying that YMMV. One person's trash is another person's treasure, right?

I haven't read through all the spells but I've found several that I found interesting. Eating an enemie's brain to gain access to his memories? Come on, that's a great spell for a villian. Anyways, just because YOU happen to dislike boobies and blood doesn't mean everyone does, and it doesn't mean that it's the "poorest product released to date." Please direct your attention to Song and Silence, otherwise known as Silence because we couldn't think of anything fun for the Songs.

IMO, it was their poorest product released to date, but reviewing is always subjective - and I didn't exactly give Song & Silence high marks, either - I gave it a low 2.

You sure are passionate about something that you even admitted in your interview you flipped through in a store.

Flipped through in a store. Then sat down and read. Flipped through again with a notepad. Took notes. Posted review. Got feedback. Sat down with a notepad again and re-read. Came to pretty much the same conclusion. I am passionate about it because I thought it was that bad. I needed the BoVD like I needed Hot Elf Babes In Chainmail Bikinis - which is to say, not at all, and I'm going to be pretty vocal when I tell WotC, "I thought this was utter crap and I don't ever want to see any more of this drivel." If I don't, I fear they'll think they're doing a good job of meeting my needs (I won't speak for anyone else's needs, but they sure as heck haven't been meeting mine - and this goes back to pretty much everything released by WotC since Magic of Faerun).

When a company doesn't meet my needs, they can expect to hear about it from me. Obviously your needs are being met. Conclusion? We have different needs.

Also, not everyone has access to the Creature Collection stats, or has even heard of them, for that matter.

Not everyone has heard of them, but that's not the point. WIZARDS had heard of them and if they're going to re-do them, I want them to be BETTER (or what's the point of a remake?). I don't know if Scott still has them on his site or not, but my point wasn't just "you can get them elsewhere" - it was also, "if this material has been unofficially released for over two years - and WotC knew about the Creature Catalogue - then you darn well do a markedly superior job on your write-up." I expect a LOT more of a d20 product published in 2002 than of a product published in 2000 because there are more examples (good and bad) out there to be used as benchmarks. The Creature Collection (SSS) gets high marks from me (probably a 4) based on when it was released (which I do think needs to be taken into account). If it was released today, it would rate a low 2, possibly a 1. Many products deserving of 4's and 5's two years ago would probably rate 3's or 2's if released today.

I'm rambling, but the point is, "WotC did not make any significant upgrade compared to things that they were already aware of." IMO, if you're going to publish something for the d20 system, it had better be superior to existing products that cover the same ground... because the "worst" you should be able to do is a straight re-print.

And for the record, Green Ronin's Secret College of Necromancy was a powergaming piece of baloney. Come on, a wizard type with MORE spells per day than a sorceror, in addition to a huge load of special abilities? If you're going to attack mechanics, you've REALLY used the wrong counterexample.

I will get to what was right - and what was wrong - with SCoN when I get a chance to review it (since I'm in the process of a physical move starting Friday, there are no guarantees that this will be any time soon).

--The Sigil

 

[Shard O'Glase]

. I needed the BoVD like I needed Hot Elf Babes In Chainmail Bikinis - which is to say, not at all, --The Sigil

Blink, blink you don't need hot elf babes in chainmail bikinis. Now sure hot elf babes in bikinis or in the buff would be better, but I'd settle for chainmail bikinis.