Vile Darkness- Controversy and the past

[Psion]

Re: Hey Psion...

Can I ask you something... what's inherently different about the gaming industry, as opposed to say, comics or anime, two other popular nerdy pursuits?

If Archie Comics can co-exist with Bondage Fairies {ahem, I've never actually read that little Japanese import myself...} or My Neighbor Totoro with Legend of the Overfiend {ahem, did see that one...} why can't material that ranges from the completely child friendly to the outright pornographic exist within the continuum of D&D product?

Let me ask you this: does the same publisher put out Archie and Bondage Fairies? I'm not familiar with the latter, but I imagine not. Y'see, publishers tend to have their own policies as to what is acceptable and what is not, and cut out there own little niches. WotC has a standard of conduct, and a book like BoVD could represent a shift in their policy and set a precedent as to the rest of their line. I would rather not see that. WotC is a single publisher; I am not concerned with the gaming market as a whole. The existence of Black Dog Game Factory does not concern me, as I do not have much fear that it will influence other companies any more than I fear the publisher of Archie is going to jump on the Bondage Fairies bandwagon.

Two more points that work in well with this analogy.

First off, who would you feel if you had subscribed to, say, the Legion of Superheroes and then in the middle of your subscription, there was a swank-humor pinup of dreamgirl in the latest episode. That's how I feel about dragon 300. I subscribed for one thing, and got another.

Now how would you feel if nudity offended you, but there was this really great comic coming out (something like Watchmen), but had a few nude picture in it? I think BoVD is a potentially very useful book, but I think a few aspects of it are in bad taste. That's fine, I'll survive. But it is incumbent on us as customers to let the publisher know what parts of the book you liked and didn't like.

 

[Psion]

These parents can grow the brains needed to tell their kids "Play D&D without the BoVD",

Absolutely. So long as BoVD remains an isolated case.

But then, you shouldn't expect all parents to grow brains; the would-be gamers will suffer just the same.

Anyway, that may or may not be a real danger, but if it is I still think it is not a good reason to avoid printing the BoVD.

I never advocated not printing the BoVD. I just think that there are a few items in the BoVD that probably push the limit and should be avoided in future products.

 

[shadow]

Hmmmm....I smell a flame war brewing.
I really don't care for vile darkness in my games. If I want all the dark toned grittiness, I'll play white wolf. I enjoy the high fantasy aspect of D&D, mainly the classic good versus evil confilct. Hence, vile darkness doesn't mesh well with my gaming style.

Although I seriously doubt that the book will be anywhere near as vile as hype has made it out to be, I feel a little uneasy having rules for necrophillia officially associated with D&D, even if the book is a "supplement".

I also doubt that it will ignite much public outrage, since few people are even aware that D&D still exists. The big villians nowadays are rap music and video games.

Ironically, I bet the people who will be most angry at the book will be the hard-core adult fans. I'm talking about those creepy people who live out their dark fantasies through RPGs and are always playing White Wolf and KULT. (You know the type of people that I'm talking about) I'm sure they'll be disappointed that the book doesn't contain rules for rape, bondage, and graphic dismemberment tables.

Now if only the book was truly VILE! Then it could cause public outrage (thus driving up sales) and sell to those creep hard-core players!

 

[MeepoTheMighty]

I'm not afraid of extemists. They'll wail just like they have always wailed.

I am concerned about concerned but otherwise reasonable parents stopping a would be gamer because the game has content that truly is objectionable.

But see, here you're allowing YOUR view of what is right and wrong to influence publishing decisions. What if I don't think that necrophilia is wrong? Not saying that I do, but you see my point. There's enough already there that anyone could find objectionable if they wanted to. Why hold back? For a game whose target demographic is college-aged or above, why not present options for your target demographic?

 

[Psion]

But see, here you're allowing YOUR view of what is right and wrong to influence publishing decisions.

I think many (probably most) parents would be concerned about letting their children get involved with a hobby that speaks about necrophila.

What if I don't think that necrophilia is wrong? Not saying that I do, but you see my point.

No, I am afraid I don't.

There's enough already there that anyone could find objectionable if they wanted to.

I don't agree. D&D's values are very mainstream. And PG-13 is what sells, not R.

For a game whose target demographic is college-aged or above, why not present options for your target demographic?

Oooh, Johnny Wilson's argument.

Why? Because you are not only making material inappropriate for younger folks, but guess what: not all college age folks want R-rated stuff either. You ASSUME that college-age folks want this*. Not all of them do. Of those that really do, most of them are already sold on WW/BDGF. I don't think Johnny Wilson or WotC is doing anyone any favors by pandering to an audience that he doesn't have and is not likely to gain.

* - When I say "this", I am not speaking of the BoVD as a whole; I want stuff like the material on cultists and demon lords, as I am sure many of you do. What I am referring to is the most offensive necrophilia related stuff, which I don't think most gamers are looking for.

 

[Pielorinho]

Psion, I think I see where you’re coming from, and I can respect that. This is one aspect of the book that makes you skeevy, right? And you want WOTC to know that if they make a habit of uberevil in their sourcebooks, you’ll be less likely to purchase them, right?

That makes perfect sense to me. Similarly, I’ll tell them what I *do* like in sourcebooks – and horror is definitely something I like. I’ll encourage them to put out more products with adult horror.

WOTC will listen to both of us, as their customers, and decide what material to publish. They’ll listen to the gnome haters, and the PrC lovers, and the Keebler Elves (if I remember Sean Reynolds’ rant correctly), and all the other folks, too. Your anti-grisly voice is just as legitimate as all the others.

I apologize for suggesting that you were calling for WOTC to tone down this one book; I misunderstood you. I *don’t* think folks should try to prevent WOTC from publishing a sourcebook for us horror fans – but it’s a whole different matter if you’re trying to discourage WOTC from putting adult horror in all their books.

Daniel

PS. Adult horror, incidentally, doesn’t mean, “ooh! I spew maggots at you! Ooh!” Adult horror is horror that children probably shouldn’t deal with. If I wouldn’t take my nine-year-old cousins to see a movie with that kind of horror in it, then it’s likely adult horror.

Adult horror can be stupid – Friday the Thirteenth, part MCMLVII testifies to that. But it can also be good – Signs, The Vanishing, Season 6 of Buffy testify to that.

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

Well, Psion has defended the logical points again and again, and no one seems to want to listen. (EDIT: Apologies to Pielorinho, who apparently did listen. You beat me to posting.)

Neither of us said the book shouldn't be printed. We merely expressed some concerns about it.

Does expressing concern about something makes us fascists who are trying to bring down free speech?

Does expressing dissent with the marketing plan of a corporation make me anti-American.

Only in Bush's America, I suppose.

Is there some obscure need to see yourselves as champions of free speech, even when no one's attacking it?

 

[MeepoTheMighty]

I think many (probably most) parents would be concerned about letting their children get involved with a hobby that speaks about necrophila.

Then let that be an issue between the parents and their kids. I don't know many parents who let their kids spend their allowances on anything they want. Will some kids be prevented from playing d&d? Maybe. Will they find ways to play anyways? Probably.

I don't agree. D&D's values are very mainstream. And PG-13 is what sells, not R.

D&D's values are what you make of it. PG-13 may be what sells, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the best movies are all PG-13. Note that best != best selling.

Oooh, Johnny Wilson's argument.

Why? Because you are not only making material inappropriate for younger folks, but guess what: not all college age folks want R-rated stuff either. You ASSUME that college-age folks want this*. Not all of them do. Of those that really do, most of them are already sold on WW/BDGF. I don't think Johnny Wilson or WotC is doing anyone any favors by pandering to an audience that he doesn't have and is not likely to gain.

I never said that all of them do. I say that there are those who do. Look at the popularity of South Park and similar shows among college-aged kids. I'm inclined to trust Johnny Wilson's judgement of his demographic, the man's been selling magazines to college-aged kids for the last 15 years.

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

One other thing before I take off...

I've definitely made a couple comments here I'm not proud of. And making said comments distracted me from the what I should have been addressing...

This whole "get some self-esteem" and "if you're a gamer, be proud of it" routine is a load.

I have no problem regarding the hobby. I openly walk into and out of game stores, display my books proudly, and discuss my hobby with anyone interested (I suppose I don't evangelize to the uninterested, but if you want to be a social irritant, that's your business. I prefer to appear sane.)

Nor am I particularly politically correct. If you've seen me post around here, I'm somewhat morally high-handed and I could not care less if people get offended.

That's not the issue at all. I'm not suggesting we should hole up in a dark corner of society, despite the fact that someone here apparently thinks we already are (that whole, we're a margin of a margin, or some-such crap earlier).

The core of my issue is that I can empathize with the 10-15 year old kid who's suspended from school because he games. Am I alone in thinking that sucks? Maybe all of you were the type of kid who rather enjoyed being suspended, or who wasn't bothered by rank injustice. It's one thing to be marginalized by other kids, and it's yet another to be in conflict with your parents over gaming (everybody rebels about something, anyway). It's something else entirely to be censured by an authority figure over it, even if that authority figure is misinformed.

I do not think the book should be banned on this account. But personally (as in, for ME, not for the entire publishing world), the first time I read a newspaper article about a group of kids who were suspended because the lunch lady heard them talking about necrophilic magic spells, it's going to sour all my subsequent dealings with the book.

If the immature gross-out spells and necrophilia haven't done that already, that is.

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

OK, one more. I couldn't resist this...

...
Look at the popularity of South Park and similar shows among college-aged kids. I'm inclined to trust Johnny Wilson's judgement of his demographic, the man's been selling magazines to college-aged kids for the last 15 years.

Man, when I was in college, did I know the only 27 college students in history who appreciated South Park more for the ironies and social commentary than for the fart jokes?

We must have been a weird bunch...