Fantasy Sex Roleplaying Game Releases October 2003

[Belen]

I would not consider it negative. I would prefer to see a discussion on the topic. Maybe some people want to disillusion themselves to the truth, but I see this as a ploy to play on our emotions.

Monte even said that WOTC marketed the BoVD as completely different than he intended. We have seen how they treat their customers in regards to quality (seen any typos lately?). Why wouldn't they trick us in this manner as well.

heck, it recently came out that a lot of companies such as AOL own huge stock in the pron industry through 3rd party deals, so why would WOTC be different.

When AV asks if we want a "mature" WOTC label and then a few weeks later we have Valar, then what should we think?

In any event, I will not, and do not consider the BoEF to be "mature." Any GM in their right mind can create a story that will suit the maturity needs of her game. As I have said in the past gore and erotica are not mature, just child sensitive.

Dave

 

[Belen]

Monte said that he was creating a Book of evil NPC options, not a book for mature gaming.

He said that WOTC marketed the BoVD as a mature book with lots of Vile content, but that he had never intended to write it in that manner.

 

[Umbran]

Re: AV/ WOTC in bed together (Mature company) and the BoEF!

It seems that he has made my worst fears come true. His definition of maturity will make an 8th grader giggle, but will do little for those of us who'd like a truly mature book of game content.

Others are handling the troll factor, so I'll use this as a nudge...

Consider, for a moment, that the book isn't out yet. You haven't seen it. You don't know what the content is, or how it is handled. Do you also judge movies before you've seen so much as a trailer for them? Novels before you so much as read the blurb on the back cover?

So stop making assumptions before you see the thing! Everybody, please. Make up your mind once you've got the thing in your hands, and not before. Anything less is simply not fair to Mr. Valterra, the product, yourself, or the people on these boards.

If it winds up being a pile of purile drek, then feel free to rip into it. But don't go critiquing the thing sight unseen. It's stupid.

[/rant]

 

[Aaron2]

Monte said that he was creating a Book of evil NPC options, not a book for mature gaming.

He said that WOTC marketed the BoVD as a mature book with lots of Vile content, but that he had never intended to write it in that manner.

Then why was it called a Book of -Vile- Darkness if he never intented to write a book with Vile content?

Aaron

 

[rounser]

I get a tad miffed if people try to prevent me from making a choice what I need or do not need in a game. I don't tell people "You don't need rules for mass warfare, just make it up." or try to convince others that roleplaying does not need rules for social skills since you can just play it out (incidentally, I am not of that opinion).

Mass combat and rules for social skills aren't comparable to rules associated with themes of elves in bondage, but that's just my opinion.

Might be something to it, but then why should I care about it?

I don't know. You seem pretty worked up about the principle of the thing, so it should matter to you.

This I find ridiculous. If I cared about what others think of D&D I would have quit long ago, my own sister thinks it is puerile and stupid. Do you want your game to be associated with a "kill monster and take their stuff"-kiddie game? I don't care about ignorant opinions, I don't laugh at other hobbies either no matter how impossible it is for me to understand how anyone could enjoy it.

I was talking about the players as well, including in particular myself. I don't want the D&D I love associated with this stuff in my mind, I don't want to dodge products and conversations, and yeah, personally I care about that more than I care about your right to buy RPG porno. That's why I'm saying I'd rather the product didn't exist.

Your real world must work different than mine, but then I live in good old Europe, where sex is not as much censored as in the USA.

I don't live in the USA, and you're doing no favours for the reputation of good old Europe by displaying such bigotry.

Again, why should I not be allowed to buy such a book for my campaign?

Again, we're back to principles. Get it through your head - I'd prefer your preferences were ignored and the book didn't exist. My preferences don't amount to censorship though - I can say it's probably bad for the game, bad for what I associate with the game, and I have.

Why should I care about the feelings of any person unable to cope with the fact that in the real world people have different tastets, different morals, and different takes on right and wrong? Why should I change my favourite game just so that others can feel clean when playing their PG-13 game?

I'm not saying you should give a toss about what I think. My opinion isn't about you, it's about what I think of what the book offers D&D, and how responsible I think it's creation is.

It's been said before and I'm going to say it ONCE more: If you've seen and read the book, how 'bout giving us a real preview?

Don't be facetious. Go re-read the stuff about objecting to themes before you've seen the content.

Prove it.

Gladly. It has the potential to change how I perceive the game, for instance. I'm not saying you should care, but you asked for it. And if you're going to make a pithy comeback to that answer after asking for it, you can go jump.

 

[herald]

Then why was it called a Book of -Vile- Darkness if he never intented to write a book with Vile content?

Aaron

Because:

1) There is a magic book in the DMG (From 1e to 3e) called the "Book of Vile Darkness" so he would have the tie in for his product.

2) As stated before, he wanted to have a list of options for evil characters. (Spells, feats, powers, ect.)

 

[Piratecat]

Then why was it called a Book of -Vile- Darkness if he never intented to write a book with Vile content?

Because it's the name of a magic item.

Reminder: Please remember not to sink to personal attacks or hostility, folks. Thanks!

 

[Belen]

We all know that very little "Vile" content exists in the BoVD. I think this supports Monte's take on how WOTC treated that book.

As for commenting before I see the book, if I find the concept to be disturbing, then I feel that I have the right to speak up before that content can be published. I have a definite problem with how they worded the press release and the lack of response from AV and WOTC people (ie. not faceless company) about this book.

I have looked at the content attached with the release and my reaction stems from actually taking my time to evaluate that content before posting my thoughts on the matter. They included the material as an example of how the book will appear, so I think we do have some justification for our arguments.

Dave

 

[Larry Fitz]

I'm upset that no one has given due consideration to what this book may do to the general perception of BDSM fetishists. After all having a photographer known for that kind of work, and given Anthony's specifc reference to his founding of a group for BDSM as a qualification for writing it, many honest, decent, hardworking fetishists are now going to be associated with the "Gamer" label, and not in the way they would like. Ordinary normal sadists will have to add lines to their personal ads

"SWM dom ISO sub NODND plz"

Of course it could open new avenues for them, they could specify elfin features. Sales of chainmail bikinis could go up, boosting our sluggish economy. Maybe a follow up book featuring orcs and goblins...


"Ok there Betsy, hold the pie out a little more, oh yeah, that's it..." <CLICK>
"Now give them a ferocious look, they want your pie Betsy, but you're an orc and you're not letting them have it without a fight <CLICK> that's good, now growl for me<CLICK>..."

The saddest commentary is that the controversy over this will be limited to a small subset of people in our own hobby, despite the attempt to manipulate the mass media, it won't really happen, and instead of that leading to a cessation of attempts at sensationalizing our hobby, it will promote worse pandering to the lowest common denominator.

Do the people who are so vehemently defending this book without seeing it first have any line they will draw? Is there not a subject for a gaming book that revolts you for reasons other than "There are too many of those already?" And for the people condeming the book for its subject matter, is it not possible to present certain subject matter (like sexuality in fantasy games) in a way that does not upset your sensibilities?

For myself I find that this does violate the stricture against using WOTC trademarks in advertising. Who writes press releases? Marketing people write them. Are they meant to be "NEWS" items? Heck no, the language used is hyperbolic and the intent is to generate excitement about the new product in a biased manner. They are free advertising, if you want to use the loophole that they are not paid advertising and therefore exempt from the OGL rules, then fine. But I think WOTC sees it the same way I do, a WOTC employee tried to cash in on his association with the company while producing an independent book, that explains the press release distancing themselves so adamantly from the product. Maybe "Edmonton Boy" is right, maybe this is a conspiracy to generate controversy and sell more books, this one and several others. Maybe WOTC is playing us all like fiddles. Personally I doubt that, I think they will be in the strange position of having to actually fire AV in order to prove that they are serious about their disclaimer regarding this project.

 

[Larry Fitz]

edit: double post