Dungeon magazine says maybe more vile. Huzzah!

[Kesh]

I didn't have to have it described to me in detail to find the idea of a bound, insane ogre mage who enjoys being dissected by sadistic bar patrons distasteful and gratuitous. I didn't need graphic descriptions of a polymorphed monster being raped by pirates to find that an ugly idea either.

The interesting thing is, I consider those the only two 'vile' parts of the adventure. The rest was PG-13, at its worst.

I agree, they could've left those out. And if future articles avoid that pitfall, I've got no trouble with mature adventures being in Dungeon. Or, perhaps the annual Halloween issue only for Clive Barker-esque adventures.

(For the record, I love Barker's stuff. )

 

[Ranger REG]

Sometimes you have to appeal to the mass. If the majority says yes to "vile," then that's where they'll go. But as I said before, keep it to a minimum. "Vile" and mature content (because we, the adults, know them for what they are enough to make such decision to see or not ... at least from a legal standpoint) is best served when you tease us once in a while, not saturates us like a bunch of Law & Order series (airing Wednesday, Friday, and Sunday evenings).

 

[Angcuru]

More matter, less art.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

Sometimes you have to appeal to the mass. If the majority says yes to "vile," then that's where they'll go. But as I said before, keep it to a minimum. "Vile" and mature content (because we, the adults, know them for what they are enough to make such decision to see or not ... at least from a legal standpoint) is best served when you tease us once in a while, not saturates us like a bunch of Law & Order series (airing Wednesday, Friday, and Sunday evenings).

You haven't been watching A&E lately, have you? Three nights a week is for lightweights.

 

[Eridanis]

I, for one, hope they don't print more "vile" material; but if they do, they'd better extend their mandate to other WotC books and include them too. The moment more "vile" crud gets published is the moment I start whining for more epic, more monsters from MM2, more psionics, more Savage Species, more planar adventures, more FR... you get the idea.

The notions of having more "vile" material and more "mature" matierial are not necessarily contiguous. One can certainly have the latter without the former. I would certainly welcome more "mature" material in Dungeon. Put "vile" material in the SRD and leave it to non-WotC-affiliated third-party publishers to develop - and leave it where I don't have to see it if I don't want to. I'd hate to miss out on all the other good stuff DUNGEON offers - don't force "vile" stuff into my home on the back of a publication I otherwise value.

Real life is "vile" enough as it is. Check the internet if you don't believe me.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

So, been given this some thought, and here's some things I'd like to toss out for consideration...

First, is BoVD itself gratuitous?

I think not. The reason being: It's a book about vileness. It may seem gratuitous and overdone, especially to those who prefer not to use such material. However, being that it is all between the covers of one book, is this really the case? Would the possession rules be considered gratuitous if it had been included in the Monster Manual? Would the Feats and Spells have been considered gratuitous if included in Lords of Darkness? Would the Devil/Demons have been over-the-top if included in Deities & Demigods?

Second, was the "mature" adventures in Dungeon really "mature"?

While BoVD can be considered "mature" (which I take as "for use by mature people that will treat it correctly" more than anything else), were the adventures in Dungeon during the "month of Vile" truly "mature"? Indeed, going over them, I find them to be pretty much the standard adventures, with the same amount of cheese, clich'es and over-simplified solutions that most WotC adventures tend to always have. If anything, the Dungeon adventures failed to truly do anything really different, thus was gratuitous because the same adventure could have been done without the BoVD even being in print.

When Vile content is used to create an adventure or scenario that could not have been done otherwise, and does it in a matter than challenges the Player's fears without resorting to "shock and awe", than I'd say it's mature. In opposition, when any every-day adventure is painted in vile colors just because "we can", than we are sliding into the realm where people can truly have legitament complaints about the content being used.

Consider:

Would Alien (the first one) have been as scary if it actually showed you the gore?

Would Hellraiser have been as creepy without it?

So, I support Dungeon moving in this direction because, honestly, I am hoping that continued use of this material in the market might actually improve the manner in which it gets used. And if that happens, I would have a new source for material (being that I don't buy it often now). I also support the idea of a third publication, for the same reason and to allow Dungeon to remain useful to those who use it currently. But overall, I would just like to see the material get used more on a professional basis.

 

[Wayside]

So, it seems that, to most detractors, vile content is gratuitous in itself. I just think this is wrong. I suppose it boils down to context. Does throwing a pile of whacked out nasty into a campaign for no reason make it adult or mature? Of course not. Does tossing in bubblegum princesses and Paladins and the concept of an absolute good and an absolute evil somehow constitute a superior game to the ridiculously gratuitous one? God no. I don't think any campaign that isn't thoughtfully constructed has any value, whether it's gratuitous or candy striped. And how about infinite resurrections so nobody ever really dies? Nah. Even Achilles and Gilgamesh couldn't escape death.

Now, I have no idea what's passed off as vile in the BoVD or in Dungeon/Dragon, but anyone who tries to say categorically that it's something it has the potential not to be is just wrong.

Believe me, I have stronger feelings about the idea of rape than anybody I've ever met. If it were possible I would love to personally administer the death penalty to every rapist or child molester or sexual abuser in general on the planet. BUT--the concept of rape can also illustrate the concept of perfect moral virtue, as in the story of Collatinus' Lucretia. Livy wrote about this and so did Shakespeare.

This is how I run my game, and this is how my players like it. I'm sure it makes a difference that we've all been friends outside of D&D for 12 years, and playing D&D off and on for most of that time. We play to create an interactive story that's as much a surprise to me as it is to them, not to level up characters, collect magic items, slay goblins or any other D&Disms.

So, I think pretty much every aspect of D&D has the potential to be gratuitous, as much as they can be great devices for storytelling. I'm sure there are plenty of vile content fans that run ridiculously immature games. IMO games toned down for children are just as much a waste of time though. My kids will be weaned on Vergil's Dido, on Agamemnon's sacrifice of Iphigenia, on a thousand other stories like these. I can't imagine that they will blink twice at the BoVD.

 

[Darrin Drader]

The moment more "vile" crud gets published is the moment I start whining for more epic, more monsters from MM2, more psionics, more Savage Species, more planar adventures, more FR... you get the idea.

While I disagree with describing vile content as crud, but I do agree that it is 1 surcebook out of many, and other sourcebooks should be equally supported. I too want to see more Monster Manual II and Fiend Folio monsters in use. I want to see psionic adventures and epic adventures and planar adventures. I certainly would not be in favor of all adventures using the core rules only and the vile stuff, because then they would be including it just for the novelty of it.

On the other hand, if they are supporting these other books, I would also like to see vile content occasionally used as well.

 

[rounser]

I don't think any campaign that isn't thoughtfully constructed has any value, whether it's gratuitous or candy striped.

That which isn't vile isn't necessarily "candy striped". We're not talking Disney's The Sword In The Stone toned fantasy versus Flesh + Blood toned fantasy, here. It's more like Lord of the Rings toned fantasy, sort of a standard, versus Flesh + Blood toned fantasy...a definite 'acquired taste'.

 

[Guillaume]

While I disagree with describing vile content as crud, but I do agree that it is 1 surcebook out of many, and other sourcebooks should be equally supported. I too want to see more Monster Manual II and Fiend Folio monsters in use. I want to see psionic adventures and epic adventures and planar adventures. I certainly would not be in favor of all adventures using the core rules only and the vile stuff, because then they would be including it just for the novelty of it.

On the other hand, if they are supporting these other books, I would also like to see vile content occasionally used as well.

Again, I'll say that I did not really care for the last vile adventure published in Dungeon. However, when I hear some clamoring for more support of all the books published by WoTC, I can not help but cringe.

You see, my collection of d20/D&D 3e books is very limited. Since I game on a budget, I do not have the inclination to start buying all the books that WoTC put out. Also, the main reason I am a subsciber to Dungeon, is that it gives me great adventures for a relatively low price. I still consider it good value, even with the addition of Polyhedron.

Now if they start publishing adventures regularly using rules in optional rulebooks, I must say that the value of the magazine will only go down in my eyes. Sure, I can do some adaptations and substitute monster A for monster B. But that takes time. And that brings us to another reason I buy Dungeon : it saves me a lot of prep time. If I have to buy more books or increase my prep time, Dungeon again goes down in value in my eyes. Now, if they give me free access to the rules/monster/magic item/whatever, like they did with Life's Bazaar, well that's a different ball game.

As for specifically vile content, I do not really care for it. If they must include it for profit reason, guaranteeing the continuing publication of the magazine, so be it. I'll probably skip over it unless it somehow manages to catch my fancy, which up until now, none of the vile product has managed to do.

Guillaume