Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Desdichado" data-source="post: 3985737" data-attributes="member: 2205">No argument there.  The only problem I do have is 1) D&D has never explicitly tried to appeal to children (an in fact the topless pictures in early books suggests that children were never part of their marketing strategy) and yet in the 80s it attracted a large number of them.  2)  I'm completely unaware of any RPG that specifically targets children that has been successful.  3)  This kind of self-censorship may be a good thing; or it may be a repeat of 2e's self-censoring.  4)  That is often cited as one reason why 2e underperformed in the market.  5)  Ergo it's possible that this focus on "community standards" will hurt sales of D&D.  6)  Killing sales now on a completely unproven (and IMO inherently unlikely) strategy of trying to recruit kids who will be big buyers several years down the road is...at best... extremely counterproductive.  Who knows exactly how it can play out?  I'm just playing a bit of devil's advocate here and trying to envision the worst possible scenario, and I don't see anything that actively prevents the worst possible scenario from happening.Do I think the "community standards" are going to kill D&D?  No, probably not.  If it's more about quality control than content control, if anything, it's probably a really good thing.  But otherwise I see it as at best neutral, at worst harmful.Oh, I agree.  I've already made a pretty flippant (but accurate nonetheless) post that it's very nearly the last thing I want to roleplay with the guys in my group (possibly only beaten in that regard by my aversion for roleplaying an anal probing scene in a modern conspiracy type game.)  But here's the deal... we're assuming and speculating that that's what the "community standards" will deal with, but we don't know that.  The fact that the clause is in the license means that it can be used for all kinds of things down the road that the current batch of WotC employees may not even foresee.It may be small, but it's still a risk that any potential OGC publisher needs to consider.  It's a point---possibly a very tiny one, but one that could add up with others---against entering the market.And I'm sure that's exactly their thought too.  Whether or not their brand image is harmed by 3rd party products remains to be seen, IMO.  It's entirely possible that their brand image is harmed by this measure being debated in the fanbase than by what some third party publication could do.I couldn't care less what some nutjob decides to do.  If you mean otherwise rational but uninformed people deciding the D&D is bad for "the children of America" or something, I think that's pretty unlikely.  Who's going to go after D&D when you've got Grand Theft Auto to target instead?And since the children of America aren't really the target audience of D&D anyway, and despite the fact that many of us began playing as children, it never has been, the issue is easily sidestepped by saying, "well duh---this isn't marketed for children; if you don't want your children to have it, don't let them.  Do you buy them R-rated movies or M-rated video games?  Same thing here."Anyway... like I said, I'm being a bit devil's advocate.  I don't want to see another BoEF anymore than you do.  However, I'm a bit more uneasy with WotC specifically trying to forbid.. I dunno.  Something kinda nebulous.  Who knows what they'll later decide doesn't live up to "community standards?"</blockquote>

Verification