Q. Rogue/Fighter Nudity?

[JoeGKushner]

What's up with the full frontal nudity on two of the female rogues in this book? I thought the one piece in Q. Fighter was bad enough but it looks like a growing trend. Leave the super cheesecake to Avalanche eh?

 

[Mongoose_Matt]

Okay, this is an interesting one. . .

There is _no_ full frontal nudity in The Quintessential Rogue. None. _If_ Mongoose ever presented full frontal nudity in any of its books, we would have a disclaimer on the cover. We have no intention of presenting any such artwork.

 

[Lady Dragon]

what about the "ladies" on pages 72 and 74 alright the lady on page 72 does have a sheer gown on but come on at least admit it.

But although I am female it doesn't really bother me.It's only artwork,so don't think I'm down on Mongoose or anthing I have all of Mongooses products to date and most of them are great and I'm not really one to pay that much attention to interior artwork.

 

[Moon_Goddess]

You put them up to posting this just to get people like me to go buy the book didn't you Matt.

Just Kidding

 

[uv23]

You put them up to posting this just to get people like me to go buy the book didn't you Matt.

Just Kidding

I know what book I'll be flipping through next time I'm at the gaming shop.

 

[thundershot]

You know, I almost ordered those two books... I like quality books, and i like cheesecake... if something has BOTH, I'm sure to buy it.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Are You Sure?

Okay, this is an interesting one. . .

There is _no_ full frontal nudity in The Quintessential Rogue. None. _If_ Mongoose ever presented full frontal nudity in any of its books, we would have a disclaimer on the cover. We have no intention of presenting any such artwork.

I guess we must disagree on what full frontal is then. On page 72, the gown does not cover the female nipples. On page 74, I fail to see a gown at all.

In Q:Fighter, p. 13 has a female where her dress shows nipple as well. p.36, I don't even see a dress so perhaps I'm missing it.

All pieces done appear to be the same illustrator.

 

[mythusmage]

There are real life outfits that let you see a lady's nipples, and they are worn to go grocery shopping.

Women have nipples, it's a normal part of their anatomy. Catching sight of them will not make you blind or drive you into paroxyms of lust.

If near or full public nudity were a part of our daily lives, this sort of thing would rouse no comment at all.

 

[JoeGKushner]

There are real life outfits that let you see a lady's nipples, and they are worn to go grocery shopping.

Women have nipples, it's a normal part of their anatomy. Catching sight of them will not make you blind or drive you into paroxyms of lust.

If near or full public nudity were a part of our daily lives, this sort of thing would rouse no comment at all.

Dangerous way to think amigo. That's like that men for boy love organization claiming that if more adult men had sex with children that other people wouldn't see it as wrong. Decadence doesn't just sprint into being whole. It creeps in a steep at a time.

And yes, women do have nipples and yes, it is a normal part of their anatomy. However, perhaps unlike some here, I do not buy role playing books for nipples.

Nudity in a rpg book is like a comediain relying on swearing. It's done by the weak. If the artists has to use nudity, how about keeping it on a web site? The Moongoose books have fairly good content and all the T & A, in my opinion, just make me shake me head and smile sadly. It's hard to have other adults take your hobby seriously when it has to rely so much on T & A that nudity is just accepted without batting an eye. "Gee, I see why you like roleplaying." Makes me wonder (not) why women don't play in the same numbers as men.

Ah well, sorry to rant. I just wanted to know why Moongose felt the need to put nudity in, not start another flame war between sex sells vs. quality sells.

 

[Talaysen]

I think the definition of "full frontal nudity" may be at issue. Now, personally, unless...well...the full Monty (or, er, Montina) is revealed - including areas below the waist - it's not full frontal nudity. I suspect this is Matthew's/Mongoose's definition as well. If only the areas above the waist are revealed, the lady in question is simply topless. You get that sort of thing in certain of White Wolf's products as well, and no, I don't mean their Black Dog books. Have you had a look at the Scarred Lands DM Screen Companion?

I don't believe any of the images referred to above feature actual full frontal nudity by that definition, nor do I think that any of the images in the book, period, feature it. I don't have the book handy at the moment, but I'm pretty sure I'd remember something like that.

Now, I can't say I'm terribly pleased with the images, and I'm not really sure I understand why they're there - if they're meant to attract *ahem* a certain element of gaming society, it's rather silly to bury them halfway through the book. Why not simply go the Avalanche Press route and stick them on the cover? I would like to know why the rather gratuitous cheesecake is present, yes.

However...it's not as bad as you're implying. If "topless" is your definition of "full frontal nudity," so be it, but you should know that not everyone goes by that same definition.