Is this gaming product too offensive or merely funny?

[am181d]

Well, given the, uh, "d" word for a lesbian, I'd have to classify this as "offensive." I can only imagine the uproar if they had a male prestige class called a "swishy f*****." As a rule, making fun of people who are oppressed, disadvantaged, etc. is not funny. (Unless it's between friends; I make all kinds of jokes about my pal "One Legged Pete.")

I haven't seen the original product, but seeing as how this is a web enhancement, I wouldn't be surprised if this was material that the publisher thought was too "edgy" to appear in the actual published book.

 

[Anti-Sean]

The Horny Acne Scarred Boy - Must make will save not to make obnoxious come on to any women with a 12 or higher charisma.

Speaking as a former HASB, thinking back on those days, I'd say the Will save applied to any woman with a Charisma of 3 or higher!

 

[jdrakeh]

*smacks hsi forehead*

How a sophomoric, near-pornographic, piece of trash likeThe Book of Erotic Fantasy garners critical praise while a purely satirical work such as The Slayer's Guide to Female Gamers is decried as indecent confuses me and makes me wonder if people aren't right when they say "Gamers have no social skills or understanding of social dynamic".

 

[Crothian]

Just to be clear, here - you actually *read* the book, and got this offended?

thin skin indeed

 

[somekindofjerk]

Is it offensive? yeah. I don't know about write-an-angry-letter offensive, but that could be because I'm a dude. And, truth be told, it wasn't terribly amusing. "Boy women sure are slightly different from men" humor is just plain lame. I'd start to worry about Mongoose if they release PDFs of "Slayer's Guide to Smashing Watermelons" or "Slayer's Guide to Airline Food: I mean, what's the deal with that? Am I right?."

 

[atom crash]

In defense of Mongoose:

This particluar Slayer's Guide was published in 2002 (April, IIRC). And if you don't follow the direct line in this thread, and instead find the product on its web enhancement on the Mongoose web site, you'll also find the following product description:

This series of supplements is normally designed for use in all fantasy based D20 games systems and settings. However, this one is a joke, a jape, and a jest, albeit poorly written and in bad taste. It is here as a joke, to extract the Michael, to make you laugh and to tweak the nipples of propriety and run away laughing.

...None of this should be taken as offensive, though it probably will be.

And the following disclaimer for the web enhancement:

Warning - contains humour some people may find offensive!

Here's the product page. Look for yourself.

 

[gizmo33]

...and makes me wonder if people aren't right when they say "Gamers have no social skills or understanding of social dynamic".

Yea, gamers are doofs

...uh...wait...THAT'S ME!

Now I'm confused - were you trying to teach me a lesson about generalizations? For some reason when I first read this I figured you were talking about OTHER gamers. Hmmmm. I need to think about this.

 

[Brennin Magalus]

A thread at WOTC messageboards describes a Web Enhancement for Mongoose's "Slayer's Guide to Female Gamers" that I personally think crosses the line.

Good stuff.

I have been called overly politically correct on that thread. I was wondering what you guys thought.

I agree with that assessment. Mongoose should do a spoof on guys like you as a follow up.

 

[twofalls]

Offensive... no, not really, completly tasteless, yes. I don't undestand humor like this, humor that targets a class of people for the express purpose of abusing them. In this case they are trying to poke fun at a stereotype, but the article just isn't funny. Frankly, whatever rings your bell, if people are buying this product then someone finds it funny. Several folk here have said they laughed at it... more power to ya. I find it all extremely childish, and I agree that these two threads give the material more attention than it deserves.

 

[somekindofjerk]

In defense of Mongoose:

This particluar Slayer's Guide was published in 2002 (April, IIRC)

Wait, folk are getting worked-up over a 3-year old April Fool's prank, you say?

The mind boggles.

Well, I don't know about everyone else, but I'm going back to browsing more topical threads. Thanks for pointing this out, crash.