[Dragon] Lord, the cheese...

[barsoomcore]

I mean come on, the majority of the Conan audience was made up of heterosexual males.

Heh. I wouldn't be so sure of that...

 

[Shard O'Glase]

I think the cover was a clever ploy to make us miss the more important thing of this issue: The Snail is completely gone.

and the world didn't end, or the snail didn't go on a killing spree or anything cool, dang.

 

[hellbender]

Rant

Mob speaks my ass. Its no different.

I asked a straight friend about this and he agreed with you. Then i said, "Steve, you went to Backstreet* with me and Randy and you left because guys kept hitting on you. Right?"

He said yeah. I then proceeded: "Well you were there because of the straight girls right?"

"Yeah"

"So are you saying we should just deal with it or leave, like you did?"

He then stopped to see what i was saying is right. Yeah, the majority may be straight gamers. BUT we gay gamers and girl gamers exist. You say you are the majority therefore we get nothing. Well what if you went to a gay club where all the guys were hitting on you. You were a minority. Would you stay and take it or leave?

Im not about to leave my hobby over art, nor am i about to not say its discriminatory either.

/Rant

Angel:
I never suggested that you leave the hobby. I merely pointed out that the majority of players of dnd are heterosexual males, which has always been my experience and something I have noticed as someone in their thirties that has gamed since they were 12. I will say that I do not discriminate for any reason and have had many people, including gay males, play in rpgs that I have run over the years.

Basically, the art has never had a bearing on any aspect of our game. I perfer artwork done by artists I like that are competent, but I have never run games were sexuality (or race-as in skin tone) has ever been an issue.

I will still stand by what I said earlier, though, the majority of players will prefer seeing cheesecake over beefcake, and so it shall be. However, you must also look at the furor that overt cheesecake (on covers of products by a certain Avalanche Press) also start up when the artwork becomes of questionable taste.


hellbender

 

[Terraism]

I wasn't going to chime in on this, just because I think Psion and Celebrim have said it easily as well as I could. Thanks, guys. But on the chainmail bikini note, in regards to the relationship it shares with our hobby, I've got a story to tell.

I'm currently in my freshman year at college. This fall, the school ran an activities fair, where all the on-campus clubs had a booth in order to give us all an idea of what's offered, and to maybe take a dip into something we hadn't tried. Great idea, and all in all a good fair. Anyway, Clarkson has a gaming club - The Gauntlet - that ranges from D&D to GURPS to Vampire, from Risk to Magic. A pretty broad range, and they had a nice table set up with books from a variety of games, some cards, and some minis. No, it wasn't going to get the most traffic, but they were sure to get a bit, and probably pick up a few new people.

That wasn't enough, though, apparently. Instead of leaving it at that, one of the female members of the club dressed up - chainmail bikini. (Note - I wasn't aware such things actually existed. I learned otherwise.) Personally, I don't think it was appropriate for wearing in public, but that's me. Point is, they got probably the highest traffic of any booth there. Did it help any? Not really - I can't say for sure, but from the one meeting I've gone too, the only people who seemed to sign up were those that were already looking for a gaming group on campus. And of the masses of other people who stopped to look? I haven't met a single one yet who didn't think it was both tacky and stupid. A shining example of our hobby, indeed.

Yes, maybe having this cheese art sells. I doubt it makes that big of an impact. Non-gamers still aren't going to pick it up, because if they want a magazine with half-naked women, they'll probably just go the whole nine yards and pick up Playboy or some such. Here's another issue of Dragon that I'll buy for the content, but pull the cover off of if I plan on reading it anywhere in public.

 

[Dr. NRG]

Oh my eyes! I've never seen such... oh, wait. I guess seeing much more sexually oriented covers on Cosmo, Vogue etc. at every single supermarket checkout stand -- right at eye level for a 6-year-old does count.

For those of you who are offended, you must be offended an awful lot, especially if you have a TV in the house.

For those of you who think it's in bad taste, you're perfectly entitled to the opinion. That said, matters of taste are notoriously difficult to debate. For example, I happen to think liver tastes great...

NRG

 

[Darrin Drader]

For those of you who are offended, you must be offended an awful lot, especially if you have a TV in the house.

I get highly offended by people who are offended an aweful lot.

 

[Brown Jenkin]

I stopped buying Dragon and Dungeon a couple of issues ago because of the move to more "mature" content and the attitude of the editors. Previously to that I purchased all the 3e issues as well as large numbers back in my 1e playing days. I would like to purchase again but until the magazine changes course that won't happen.

As for the cheesecake on the over I would treat it the same way I do Avalanche Press covers. I won't reward behavior I don't like by buying the product. When Avalance on rare ocaisions prints something without a half-nekkid woman on the cover I buy it to show support for that decision. I won't try to force my morals on others, but I will vote with my wallet. If more people vote with thier wallets for cheesecake and "mature" content then so be it, I will do without.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Are you suggesting that you'd read Cosmo, Vogue, etc in public? Even if I were interested in the content (which I'm not), the covers would make me think twice about buying those magazines. I think the same could probably be said for quite a few heterosexual males (and probably for a lot of adults in general).

So the question is: why is it a good thing for Dragon to be in the same category of Cosmo, Vogue, Maxim, etc.? Are the people who buy dragon the same people who buy those other magazines? And do they buy Dragon for the same reasons? (Or would they buy Cosmo or Maxim if they wanted Cosmo/Maxim)?

Oh my eyes! I've never seen such... oh, wait. I guess seeing much more sexually oriented covers on Cosmo, Vogue etc. at every single supermarket checkout stand -- right at eye level for a 6-year-old does count.

For those of you who are offended, you must be offended an awful lot, especially if you have a TV in the house.

For those of you who think it's in bad taste, you're perfectly entitled to the opinion. That said, matters of taste are notoriously difficult to debate. For example, I happen to think liver tastes great...

NRG

 

[Brown Jenkin]

Oh my eyes! I've never seen such... oh, wait. I guess seeing much more sexually oriented covers on Cosmo, Vogue etc. at every single supermarket checkout stand -- right at eye level for a 6-year-old does count.

The supermarket I shop at has solid black covers in front to Cosmo and Vogue (but not others like Good Housekeeping) so parents don't have to worry about thier 6 year olds from seeing them.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Considering the number of people who make their living by being perpetually offended, you must spend most of your waking hours being offended then. . . . hey, does that mean that since you're offended a lot, you even offend yourself?

I get highly offended by people who are offended an aweful lot.