Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="El Ravager" data-source="post: 836576" data-attributes="member: 738">I am pro vile.&nbsp; I have neither the Dungeon nor Dragon issue that contained &quot;Vile&quot; content, but I do own the BoVD.&nbsp; On the whole, the BoVD did not impress me much with its &quot;vileness&quot;.&nbsp; It just wasn't that vile.&nbsp; Sure some of the descriptions were kinda gross, but overall, it wasn't that &quot;Vile&quot;. So, why am I pro vile?&nbsp; Because, while some of it is a little out there, the vast majority of isn't.&nbsp; More importantly it details a few things that are pretty staple in fantasy such as ritual sacrifice and possession.&nbsp; Now, with the BoVD, these are &quot;Vile&quot; and including them is suddenly a controversy.&nbsp; Things that were taken for granted now have rules and all of a sudden bother people.&nbsp; Here is an example.&nbsp; Issue 87 of Dungeon was published over a year before the BoVD.&nbsp; The adventure Cradle of Madness involved a ritual sacrifice.&nbsp; It was No Big Deal.&nbsp; I don't recall any threads popping up about how Dungeon was deteriorating and people were canceling their subscriptions and, while I am missing a few issues after it, I do not recall any letters sent in to the magazine complaining.&nbsp; Now, had the issue been published after the BoVD and the rules for sacrifice been used and maybe the cult leader been given a vile feat or vile spell, this would have been a &quot;Vile&quot; issue that children couldn't read and would cause people to cancel subscriptions.&nbsp; Ridiculous.Now certain things have a &quot;Vile&quot; label that they didn't have before and are suddenly taboo.&nbsp; In my opinion, most of the gross and unsettling text in the BoVD was in descriptions of feats and spells - things that wouldn't actually be printed in the magazine issue that they are used in, only the names of the spells and feats would be actually printed in the magazine.&nbsp; Does the material in the BoVD have the potential to offend without adding to the game?&nbsp; Yes.&nbsp; Does it have the potential to be used in a context that adds to a story without being overly gratuitous and offensive?&nbsp; In my opinion, the answers yes as well. I guess I am only pro vile if the &quot;mature&quot; content is used in a mature way.&nbsp; In my opinion this sort of material has been used in the past in a mature way before it was known as &quot;vile&quot; and that possibility remains, with our without the &quot;vile&quot; label.I have stopped buying Dragon regularly for completely separate reasons from this issue.&nbsp; Even if Dungeon used &quot;vile&quot; material in an inappropriate way, I would continue my subscription.&nbsp; I would either ignore the articles or edit them to suit my needs.&nbsp; My reaction as a parent wouldn't be much different than what I have written above, but this post is long enough so I will not get into it.&nbsp; Sorry for the long winded post.&nbsp; ========El Rav</blockquote>

[QUOTE="El Ravager, post: 836576, member: 738"] I am pro vile. I have neither the Dungeon nor Dragon issue that contained "Vile" content, but I do own the BoVD. On the whole, the BoVD did not impress me much with its "vileness". It just wasn't that vile. Sure some of the descriptions were kinda gross, but overall, it wasn't that "Vile". So, why am I pro vile? Because, while some of it is a little out there, the vast majority of isn't. More importantly it details a few things that are pretty staple in fantasy such as ritual sacrifice and possession. Now, with the BoVD, these are "Vile" and including them is suddenly a controversy. Things that were taken for granted now have rules and all of a sudden bother people. Here is an example. Issue 87 of Dungeon was published over a year before the BoVD. The adventure Cradle of Madness involved a ritual sacrifice. It was No Big Deal. I don't recall any threads popping up about how Dungeon was deteriorating and people were canceling their subscriptions and, while I am missing a few issues after it, I do not recall any letters sent in to the magazine complaining. Now, had the issue been published after the BoVD and the rules for sacrifice been used and maybe the cult leader been given a vile feat or vile spell, this would have been a "Vile" issue that children couldn't read and would cause people to cancel subscriptions. Ridiculous. Now certain things have a "Vile" label that they didn't have before and are suddenly taboo. In my opinion, most of the gross and unsettling text in the BoVD was in descriptions of feats and spells - things that wouldn't actually be printed in the magazine issue that they are used in, only the names of the spells and feats would be actually printed in the magazine. Does the material in the BoVD have the potential to offend without adding to the game? Yes. Does it have the potential to be used in a context that adds to a story without being overly gratuitous and offensive? In my opinion, the answers yes as well. I guess I am only pro vile if the "mature" content is used in a mature way. In my opinion this sort of material has been used in the past in a mature way before it was known as "vile" and that possibility remains, with our without the "vile" label. I have stopped buying Dragon regularly for completely separate reasons from this issue. Even if Dungeon used "vile" material in an inappropriate way, I would continue my subscription. I would either ignore the articles or edit them to suit my needs. My reaction as a parent wouldn't be much different than what I have written above, but this post is long enough so I will not get into it. Sorry for the long winded post. ======== El Rav [/QUOTE]

Verification