Weird rumor concerning "Book of Vile Darkness"

[kenjib]

This book sounds great as long as everything in it is there for a purpose other than empty shock value, which from your descriptions sounds like it will be very much the case. Must...have...human sacrifice. Need...demonic...pact. I'm looking forward to it Monte.

 

[Regdar]

Bah, prostitution is far from vile!

Prostitution is not Regdars idea of Vile. A lot of this material Regdar sees no need for but some may hold interest, as long as it is better then the crap that was Evil.

 

[Isida KepTukari]

Regdar, you're my hero!

 

[GravyFingerz]

I think this is a refreshing pace for D&D, and I would for one buy this book

I hope one person in my group doesn't buy this book ... he isn't mature enough for the book, despite being over the threshold of maturity

 

[Aaron L]

I think it looks pretty interesting. For example, why would anyone sacrifice people in D&D? It does nothing for you. This book hopefully will give rules and benefits for WHY those evil cultists are having those sacrifices.

 

[Razuur]

In the Demonology book my Mongoose, sacrifices give you incredible bonuses when attempting to summon greater Demons or Demon princes...

If you have that book, it makes sense.

I am a dead buy for this book, because some, not all, but some of my games have a darker edge, and it is a shame that one has to go to netbooks to find info on the darker things in Dungeons and Dragons.

I personally can't wait. I also thought that AEGs Evil wasn't that bad. It had a lot of good stuff in it if you read it carefully. Most of it was Roleplay stuff, and I like that. The unsuccessful stuff in that book was based on summoning rules, etc... Plus it was horribly organized. But I proudly bear it on my shelf, but I know the the Book of Vile Darkness will eclipse it by far. Have any of you seen Call of Cthulhu D20 done by monte? THAT is what I am talking about.

This book will be in my hands virtually the moment it hits the store!

Razuur

 

[Tiberius]

No, this isn't going to go over well with ultra conservatives and the religious right. It's time though to tackle the dark side of D&D.

I dunno. Many people would consider me an ultraconservative, and I like the idea just fine! I can't wait for October. Anyone know when this book will be available for preorder?

-Tiberius

 

[drnuncheon]

I think it looks pretty interesting. For example, why would anyone sacrifice people in D&D? It does nothing for you.

Well, aside from death knell and imaginative interpretations of some of the bits in the planar ally and planar binding spells, anyway.

J

 

[Dave G]

I'm not surprised at all. It's what the folks at WOTC (I almost said "we") have been saying for (literally) years. Wizards RPG division does not have to get a single one of its non-Hasbro property related books approved by anyone at Hasbro. WOTC steers its own RPG ship and has from the very beginning.

I'm under no circumstances trying to call you a liar Keith, but something doesn't quite jive here. For example, WotC bandied about with the SLA Industries game for a while back in the mid to late 90's

Source is here: http://www.ex.ac.uk/~jnfuller/faq/faq01.htm
After two years of inactivity, a clause in the contract between Jageeda and Wizards reverted the IP ownership back to the latter, and SLA once more was shelved.

In 1998, Wizards confirmed that they were never going to develop the game, on the grounds that its setting was too dark to be incorporated into their existing game lines.*

I'm not disputing your creative control, however, not publishing a product because of its relative tone does show a form of precedence. Thankfully WotC trasferred the IP back to Nightfall.

I guess my question is, does the tone of the BoVD fit within WotC's existing game lines? If so, does anyone not see it that way?

* I added the bold for emphasis

[edited for clarity]

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

*

I guess my question is, does the tone of the BoVD fit within your existing game lines? If so, does anyone not see it that way?

* I added the bold for emphasis

Just wanted to point out one thing - all of that happened before WoTC was bought by Hasbro in 1999. So the decision was made, just as Keith has said, by WoTC, not anyone else.

And also, from what I have heard mentioned on Monte's site, there is some internal debate at WoTC about publishing an unidentified project by Monte Cook and Sean K. Reynolds due to corporate politics (I'm assuming that being because neither is with the company anymore).

Does anyone have any info on this? Could this be the project Eric heard of that was in doubt, not BoVD?