What We Lose When We Eliminate Controversial Content

Status
Not open for further replies.

Kariotis

Explorer
The point is that it is not our call to make. We're not here to explain away what other people ought or ought not be offended by, at least it doesn't help anyone. What does help? Actually listening to a wide range of people, their perceptions and opinions. Getting knowledgeable about other peoples' experiences.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Voadam

Legend
I have seen that cover so much but never noticed that detail before
It gets cut out or reworked in a number of homages.

1679581104412.png


1679581175368.png

1679581218275.png

1679581261048.png
1679581376492.png
 

Scribe

Legend
I mean, most of these complaints really seem levelled against Disney and their sprawling franchise - which is fair enough.

Because Wizards has been on a track to 'disney-fication' D&D over the last several years, and as far as RPG's goes, its at least as big a gorilla as Disney is.

Its the undercurrent of the direction the game's presentation has been going in for a long time now.
 

Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
The point is that it is not our call to make. We're not here to explain away what other people ought or ought not be offended by, at least it doesn't help anyone. What does help? Actually listening to a wide range of people, their perceptions and opinions. Getting knowledgeable about other peoples' experiences.
What are we here for? Do people want to have a discussion, or do they want to be right?
 


So not a problem from this century millennium then... I mean most people playing probably weren't even born when that came out.

I am not troubled by them. I like the art and layout of the 2E books. I still play 2E and it was a bit frustrating the only the revised PHB and DMM are the only ones available drivethru (still have my old 2E books but they are falling apart). Not sure if the interior images had anything to do with that decision though
 

Kariotis

Explorer
What are we here for? Do people want to have a discussion, or do they want to be right?
Sure we can have a discussion, that's what we're doing, including your and my post. But look at what's been happening all over the thread, too: people minimizing other peoples' complaints and experiences instead of acknowledging that other people may experience things differently than them. Which is especially questionable in those cases where the complaints and experiences don't touch on the real-world life experience of those doing the minimizing.
 


I have the Hacklopedias as well and agree they are pretty fantastic. Slotted seamlessly into an AD&D game I ran as well. I wish they were still available as PDFs for sale.
I remember a gaming friend suggesting we switch to hack master when TSR went under because it’s similar and was still being printed
 



But look at what's been happening all over the thread, too: people minimizing other peoples' complaints and experiences instead of acknowledging that other people may experience things differently than them.

But people are not going to agree about whether something is complaint worthy because these are subjective things, and there are a lot of competing values people will balance differently. That is just part of having a discussion
 

Bagpuss

Legend
The point is that it is not our call to make.

Totally is, who's opinions I believe are valid or have worth is totally up to me. Not all opinions are of equal value, and certainly random folks on twitter rank way below people I meet in person or actual experts.

We're not here to explain away what other people ought or ought not be offended by, at least it doesn't help anyone. What does help? Actually listening to a wide range of people, their perceptions and opinions. Getting knowledgeable about other peoples' experiences.

The point is being offended by itself doesn't matter, not without context and reason. The fact you caused offense doesn't mean you are wrong. The fact you take offense doesn't mean you are right. The opposite is also true, which is why I say offense alone doesn't matter. Offense only shows people have a difference of opinion on what is acceptable, it doesn't make either opinion right.

Sure I can listen and acknowledge other peoples' experiences, but just because they get offended by something doesn't mean that thing should change, perhaps they should change. Sometimes their offense deserves to be minimised, it is healthier for them and society for them to learn not to be offended, rather than change to accommodate them.

I would say being upset that fantasy characters are illustrated as if they were capable (IE: Young and healthy) adventurers is one of those times.
 
Last edited:

Kariotis

Explorer
We can disagree with others, be they present or not, without saying or implying that their complaint is baseless. We can also reflect, realize and admit we don't really know much about a certain topic, subtopic or other peoples' experiences, which is neither practiced often nor seen as the virtue it is, though. These are complex issues. Variants of "all opinions matter" tend to just murky them down. By which I don't mean that any of our opinions don't mean anything, just that they are often not as informed as we think them to be.

In the end, none of this matters much anyway, because we are just a couple of random folks shooting the breeze about matters much bigger than us on a message board in some corner of the internet :D
 

Voadam

Legend
That C&C Castle Keeper's Guide's cover is awesome.
I'm not sure what spell the victim in the fiend's hand is casting though.
My guess would be one of the Summon Monster spells, though that raises the question of what type of spectral bird it is.

I was always partial to having summoned monsters actually be temporary creations of magical force which fits with the image well.
 

ilgatto

How inconvenient
And, maybe that's a fair critique. But I don't think it really fits into the "controversial content" bucket this thread seems to be focused on.
Agreed.

But it could (and perhaps should) become a topic of debate, and that is one of my points. I tend to agree with what I believe to be the gist of what the honorable (if a bit ranty imho) Dame Maggie Smith posted here, namely that the definition of "sexual art" and therefore aspcets of "beauty" is never a given. What is considered "beautiful", "sexually attractive", and "sexually controversial" is different for each culture, gender, and, worse, changes over time. Of the many examples I could give here, I suppose I can safely refer to early imagery of Isis/Aphrodite, the Rubensian beauties, and the fact that whole streets in Victorian London would keel over and die if an eligible young lady introduced to polite society would show a bit of ankle.

I guess I'm just trying to say that the matter is, to quote a certain notorious liquefactionist, "complicated".

Page 25? The weirdly draw halfling, yes having a huge head like Mr. Mackey off South Park is an unrealistic body image.
(...)
The halfling is on p. 26.
 



Bagpuss

Legend
We can disagree with others, be they present or not, without saying or implying that their complaint is baseless. We can also reflect, realize and admit we don't really know much about a certain topic, subtopic or other peoples' experiences, which is neither practiced often nor seen as the virtue it is, though. These are complex issues. Variants of "all opinions matter" tend to just murky them down. By which I don't mean that any of our opinions don't mean anything, just that they are often not as informed as we think them to be.

I don't believe all opinions matter. I perfectly happy to listen to all opinions, but it is stupid to believe all opinions matter. I do not value the opinion of a flat-earther over, and astronaut over the shape of the planet. I actually believe all opinions deserve to be heard, even offensive ones, in fact especially offensive ones. You can bet people were offended when Rosa Parks didn't give up her seat, or the Suffragettes smashed windows.

In the end, none of this matters much anyway, because we are just a couple of random folks shooting the breeze about matters much bigger than us on a message board in some corner of the internet :D

While I agree to an extent, the internet is where a lot of opinions are formed now days, and then those opinions and ideas spill into everyday life, and can eventually lead to policies and more serious stuff.

But yeah, just shooting the breeze so feel free to dismiss my opinion. Even if I am offended by the idea that someone thinks young, healthy athletic illustrations in the PHB are "dangerous".
 
Last edited:

Bagpuss

Legend
If we replace the somewhat derogatory-sounding "Disney-fication" with "recognition that some of the presentation was off-putting to parts of the market we want in the game," we get a better picture of what's going on.

I'm not sure I want the part of the market that thinks the illustrations in the current any PHB could be "dangerous", in the game. Thanks. At least not if they are going to want to change it to fit their world view.

I'm glad we have got people in the hobby that might have considered illustrations in the older PHB books, sexist or offensive in the hobby and the PHB has changed to accommodate them.
 
Last edited:

Status
Not open for further replies.

Epic Threats

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top