Why is The Book of Exalted Deeds for Mature Readers?

Trainz said:
Maybe, but I doubt that this is WotC's main motive. The OP's question is "Why is The Book of Exalted Deeds for Mature Readers?".
Okay, I think a better-expressed version of this question which I should have used from the start is, why is it labeled for Mature Readers Only?
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

On a certain level, it is just marketing. However, reducing it to that would be oversimplifying IMO.

I think that the warning serves a purpose, in that it means "If you're just looking for better ways to kill monsters and take their stuff, know that there's material here that you won't have a use for". In some way, it warns the audience that this isn't the usual D&D content.

Of course, if one starts from the assumption that "mature" equals "potentially offensive" and/or "violence and sex", then I don't think one can understand why the BoED bears this label. Starting from misunderstanding, you can only go downhill. This would also explain several flame wars about the BoVD and BoEF... :D
 

Zappo said:
Of course, if one starts from the assumption that "mature" equals "potentially offensive" and/or "violence and sex", then I don't think one can understand why the BoED bears this label. Starting from misunderstanding, you can only go downhill. This would also explain several flame wars about the BoVD and BoEF... :D
Well, there's rarely the need to warn people off of advanced philosophical debate. WARNING! DESCARTIAN MIND/BODY QUESTIONS AHEAD. PROCEDE AT YOUR OWN RISK.

Warning implies threat, danger, scariness. I find it ludicrous that writing about sex and violence in a hobby that very few minors particpate in (and even fewer of an age young enough to be scarred by it all) needs this kind of histrionic label. But I've resigned myself to the fact that I live in America and that's the way it is.

To get back on topic, though, it really appears that barring the bisexual thing (I'm still disgusted that's considered a threat), there is no content in here that rates a warning. It seems like they maybe wanted to keep the label to keep it as part of that Book of X "brand".

I'm looking forward to the Book of Indifferent Neutrality. "What makes a man turn neutral? Lust for gold? Power? Or were you just born with a heart full of neutrality?"

Funniest. Futurama. Evar.
 

I suspect that the decision to make it "mature" was made for marketing reasons - to make it match the BoVD - and that this was done well before the book's content was decided. So basically Wyatt was given permission to put whatever mature content he wanted to in the book - the fact that he didn't was a writer's call.
 

RobNJ said:
Well, there's rarely the need to warn people off of advanced philosophical debate.
Yeah, that's where the marketing comes in. :D

Anyway, the talk about real-world religion can be offensive to some. I know that there's nothing wrong with talking about religion, but nevertheless several people do believe that real-world faith should never be addressed in an RPG.
 

Jeremy757 said:
Well one tidbit right off the top of my head is that the book features a hero who is a bisexual. Some parents may not like the idea of a game book teaching their 13 year old what to think about sexual behavior. Most parents like to reserve the right to pass on their own social mores to there progeny. That's one reason for the "mature" sticker. Its a parental head-up. In reality its WOTC doing a PR and legal CYA.

I don't think so: FRCS also features a female character with a consort, and it isn't labled "for mature audiences." (Even though my DM has contested the meaning of the word "consort." We are actually working for the consort in question and he doesn't want to face facts.)
 

Urbannen said:
I don't think so: FRCS also features a female character with a consort, and it isn't labled "for mature audiences." (Even though my DM has contested the meaning of the word "consort." We are actually working for the consort in question and he doesn't want to face facts.)
dict
Word (? for help): consort
Concise Oxford Dictionary, 8th Ed., Copyright 1991 Oxford Univ. Press

/consort/1 n. & v.

n. <<"kQnsO:t>>
1. a wife or husband, esp. of royalty ("prince consort").
2. [Naut]a ship sailing with another.

--

Then we cut to the verb-definitions, so your DM is WRONG!

:)
 

Two words: Angel Pr0n.

Seriously, though, there are three major reasons, IMHO.
One: Marketing.
Two: Synchroncity with the BOVD.
Three: CYA mode. While not particuarly offensive, per se, the material is controversial, for a number of reasons. How, you ask?
  • Angels represented as 'monsters'.
  • Common icons and themes from real-world religions presented in a manner that some members of said religions might find patently offensive, especially in the treatment presented within
  • It is a book for a game that is already notorious in the general public mindshare as being associated with devils/demons and negative conotations for some religious conservatives or zealots
  • It's a book who's content could otherwise be sold to minors with no coverage presented to the seller, who could be the subject of potential backlash from angered parents
Are these necessary real or serious legitimate issues? That's a subject for debate, I'm sure. But I can see more reasons to put it there than not. It's been almost 24 years since the original DMG came out, with it's gory cover, prostitute tables and listings of the Archdukes of Hell. It's a different world. For better or worse is your own call. :)
 

Kai Lord said:
FATHER: "Take your sister on up to bed now, your mother and I are going to have a little chat about whether or not orc babies are really evil."

You know, as a parent I would have to say that I wouldn't necessarily include small children in such a discussion. NOT because it is scary or disturbing, but because it deals with concepts that are likely to be a bit over their heads. Plus, they would get bored and want to talk about something else. :)

1984 isn't a d20 product, it's a book. Most books are not rated.
 

The roleplaying industry is in the worst-of-both-worlds position of not attracting enough new players while pointlessly keeping a Comics Code-level content norm, so that anything unbowdlerized or that asks for some amount of thought needs to find ways to advertise that. The American-cant blood-and-nipples use of 'mature' needs to fall out of use this instant.

Re Yanseldara's consort, Ed Greenwood has recently said,
Sexual relations in general have been a taboo subject [in D&D] (another example: in an early DRAGON article dealing with matters Arthurian, the explanation for the breakup of the fellowship of the Round Table was made very difficult after the editorial decision that Lacelot and Guinevere couldn't be described as "lovers"), and I see the Elversult FRCS entry as being a "let's be politically correct and give the Realms something for everyone, but VERY quietly, so the bigots won't notice" approach.
And please let's not equate maturity with moral realism, which is a genre, not a term of approbation.
 

Remove ads

Top