WotC Responds!!!

[jdavis]

I think the press release and other releases make the nature of this work quite clear but that's beside the point. What I'm objecting to is the principle that it's always ok (or, as some people seem to think, praiseworthy) to blur the lines of acceptability as a previous poster put it. There are lots of lines of acceptability that should not be blurred and if a defense of this product--even if everyone is wrong and this is a good and valuable product for every game--cannot differentiate between lines that should and lines that should not be blurred then that defense is pernicious.



Improper for print (although I'd extend the concept to using in one's game too). I presume there are a number of things we would both consider to be improper for print (although from your post, most of the things you consider improper for print are probably also illegal to print). I think the idea of something being objectively improper (for me, you, or any other person) is one that is essential to society.



That's precisely the problem. I can guarantee that, no matter how vile the subject you wanted to print, if it were legal, there would be a significant market for it--heck, there's a significant market for a lot of things that are illegal to print. So being vile or destructive is obviously no obstacle to marketability. Lots of someones find the vilest kinds of illegal material [specifics left out due to moderation] valuable to them. That doesn't make such material fit to print. This is obviously not the same thing but if we come to believe that marketability=printability in this case, we are likely to continue to believe it in others.

The second part of the problem is this--in most western societies, it is the people (usually indirectly) who decide what is legal and what is illegal to print. Hopefully that decision is based on an idea of what is fit to be printed. In that case, having a defining what is fit for print as what is legal to print is a hopelessly circular bit of logic. It also offers no hope for increasing the justice of laws. By that logic, if it were illegal to print D&D books, we would have no way to argue that they were fit to print. (Illegal=unfit to print, if D&D books=illegal, D&D books=unfit to print). Nor would we have an argument to make something that IS legal [like the publication of digitally altered pornography that is made to look like the boys or girls involved are underage] illegal. The equation of legality with propriety (in any area--not just the area of printing) makes principled resistance to injustice impossible it also makes.

That is why I consider the incautious arguments used to defend this book to be far more dangerous than the particular book itself. If people buy a copy of the sex book it won't be the end of the world. On the other hand, if people seriously begin to think that ANYTHING that there's a market for should be legal, we're in a world of trouble. And a system of thought that equates illegality and wrongness so closely that saying it is illegal because it is wrong is functionally the same as saying "it's illegal because it's illegal" is likely to encourage that.



I don't see how saying that there are things that shouldn't be printed means that D&D is automatically one of them. When I explain to people why D&D is OK, I'm not telling them I approve of Big Breasts Small Waist or Nymphology. Saying that the publishers should have been better than to [plan to] print this goes against none of the efforts I've made to make the products I enjoy accepted in the marketplace.

I've been trying real hard to follow along on this and I just can't. Are you saying that because people support this book then they will support all books? Are you saying that the opinion I hold and post is incautious or unthought out, that I am just spouting off without thought to what the ramifications are by saying this book doesn't bother me? I am honestly wondering about this because it seems like you are promoting the belief that people who say that this doesn't bother them or that it's ok to print haven't thought about it enough and will have to support every product that comes down the line from now on regardless of wht they think becaus ethey supported this one? I'm actually wondering if this is your point. Anyway on to something else.

These people can print what they wish and not worry about the legality of it because they are nowhere near the legal limits of this kind of stuff, there is no legal arguement to be had and it is arguable that this would not even be considered pornogaphy in any shape or form (I haven't seen it yet, but rest assured that if it crosses the legal line nobody will end up seeing it). Yes it probably will be of a mildly pornographic nature in that it will contain nudity but so does a lot of movies and cable TV and those are not attacked as vigoruosly as this has been here. Anybody see Helen of Troy on the USA network? It had butt shots and sexual situations (including rape) and it was on basic cable. Any points or arguements on this book in this direction are moot until it actually comes out, it's too soon to call, even with what is been written other places. If it's offensive I'll be the first person to say so, and if it offends me then it's probably bad, but it's just too soon to say whether it will be offensive tastless or poorly written or anything like that right now, you can't tell from the press release because that was so poorly written and produced you can't even figure out who approves what or who is doing what. There are as many levels of offense and inpropriety as there are people, these are opinions, it will never reach the legal limit set because what is allowable for sexual content in publication is fairly loosly bound and set at a very high level of filth. Whether it's obsene or not is a non-issue that you will have to take up with yourself as the only measure that will count is your own personal opinion and that's not legally binding. Whether it is in good taste or not is also a matter of pure opinion. These points are out the window here they really don't matter legally.

What does matter with this, well the legal ramifications of the press release and the WoTC response to it for one. I must say that was a horrible press release but it did exactly what they intended it stirred up attention for the book. There is no such thing as bad press, this book will sell 10 times better because of what press it's gotten. Is WoTC behind this? Well I doubt it, all conspiracy theories aside do you think Hasbro (a toy company) would allow them to risk this kind of backhanded deception in order to print questionalbe material? The possible gains for WoTC are so small and the possible repercussions of this are huge. They are not involved and probably are horrified and may felt they were misled intitally by this project. You can draw no correlation between this book and the BoVD, the BoVD is actually pretty tame even by generally accepted social standards, it has 4 or 5 pages top that can even be agrued about, the rest was pretty tame by comparison to mainstream D&D products throughout the years. I actually felt sort of misled by the adult warning on the cover as the book wasn't all that. This new book on the other hand will definatly be questionable and will definatly be for adults only, it's not a marketing ploy, it actual adult content. The people at WoTC don't want this book because it could really hurt their buisness, they are not secretly behind it. There will be a big difference if this book has D20 or the D&D logo on it or not. They can't stop it but they can ask that their logo not be on it and they should, furthermore they should be very worried and angry about the press release as it makes it sound as if they are the driving force behind this project and that their top officials are promoting a alternative lifestyle under the guise of D&D. It's their right to do what they will but the press release was very poorly done and was very questionable. No body should get fired over this but there should be a discussion about how this press release damages WoTC credibility and could be seen as them actually supporting several things they probably wish to distance themselves from. I would expect a retraction on the press release and it being changed to something that doesn't sound like it was written by Vince McMahon to promote Wrestlemania. The press release was very very poorly done and I refuse to judge AV, WoTC or this project based on what was written in that piece of silly propaganda. I have nothing against this project or against adult content, heck I am for more adult content, but the press release for this project made them all out to be crazy loons who support D&D based orgies, it just seemed very unprofessional (many people thought it was a bad joke initially) and goofy. I think that is the real issue here, not wheter it's a dirty book or not but whether somebody on the inside is trying to take advantage of the system to gain free press for his private book release.

 

[fusangite]

I think I'll have another go at stating my position in the hopes that it comes across more clearly this time.

1. What do I want?

(a) I want the publishers of this supplement to scrap their plans to publish it and make it commerciall available.
(b) If the publishers won't do that, I'd like WOTC to request that stores which wish to stock its books not stock the supplement.
(c) If neither the publishers nor WOTC are willing to do these things, I'll just refrain from buying the book.

2. Why do I want to use voluntary measures to restrict this supplement's circulation?

(a) Because I don't feel that WOTC and D&D should be in any way associated with selling sexual materials to minors. There are many families and communities which will develop a more adverse opinion of this game as the result of such an association. I know it's unfair and everyone should just be open minded and free but WOTC and the rest of us operate in the real world, where exercising our constitutional right to free expression nonetheless has consequences.
(b) Because I feel the people most likely to purchase this supplement are young men whose appetite for pornography is large and whose access is restricted. I don't want parents to come into rooms where D&D is being played and see their kids' faces turn red and books slam shut any more frequently than this already happens.
(c) Because, like it or not, the mere publication of a book will lend legitimacy to its contents and make it seem more appropriate for inexperienced young DMs to attempt to include sexually explicit material in their games. I believe that most adolescents, community leaders and parents will not make the subtle distinction between D&D material and D20 material. It will become more "OK" and viewed as more reasonable for sex to become a central part of a game.
(d) Because I don't want adolescent D&D games to develop any more of a sexual dynamic than they already have. Such a dynamic will contribute to fewer girls becoming involved in the game at a young age. Such a huge portion of those playing RPGs start in their teens and such a small portion of gamers are female, I don't want any more teenaged girls turned off by their first D&D experience than already are.

3. Given that there is so much sex in fantasy literature, why can't I tolerate sex in D&D?

(a) Sex in games and sex in books are completely different things. Very few games -- and absolutely no games marketed to teenagers (as D&D is) -- involve sexuality. Most games that do involve sex are drinking games and games like strip poker -- barely games at all but pretexts for drunk people to get frisky with eachother.
(b) Sex in commercially available games is abnormal in this society. Like it or not. We can lament the fact that we must live in a society that doesn't sell commercial sex games and complain about how unhip mainstream western civilization is but that doesn't alter the fact that this is the society in which we are situated. Games about sex are and will be viewed as abnormal and something that people should discourage. There are plenty of parents who are not part of the Christian Right and don't give a crap about Satanism who are going to be upset by their 13 year old son buying D&D game aids full of pornographic pictures, and suggestive material.
(c) I have yet to hear of a game that has considerable sexual content whose primary function is not increasing the probability of physical intimacy amongst its participants.

WOTC has a responsibility to ensure that D&D survives in this society; that means making compromises and ensuring that a subsidiary of a children's toy company does not is not associated with a product parents want to keep away from children.

Yes, we North Americans are all terrible hypocrites because we apply one standard to sex and another to violence. Unfortunately, that's the society in which D&D is operating. WOTC are not candidates for public office nor are they a church -- that means that the important work of creating a society which accepts the sexualization of childrens' games will have to be carried out by you clever open-minded people and your post-patriarchal values. Good luck with that.

 

[hunter1828]

BoEF

This book is not going to be anymore available to children than a non-gaming related book on Erotic Fantasy, of which their are tons.

As a former child myself (though it has been many...many...years) I can say that children don't need a book like this. Their imagination works just fine without it. When I first started gaming as a pre-pubescent in 1979 my games were full of nekkid elf girls and lusty succubi and ever-so-grateful-for-the-rescue-how-ever-will-I-repay-you maidens. I didn't need a book to introduce those things to me and neither do young gamers today. Whether they get their hands on the book or not their games are likely to be full of such stuff, and having the book in hand will most likely not change anything or give anyone an idea they didn't already have.

Or maybe I'm just a pervert and have been from the tender age of 10.

Anyway...I doubt that Barnes & Noble or B.Dalton or Waldenbooks will stock this book on their shelves. I also doubt that many gaming shops will actually carry it, but rather order it for people they know to be of age. This book will most likely be extremely hard for a child to come by...unless some adult buys it and is dumb enough to leave it lying around where a kid can pick it up. But that's their problem, not the publishers.

hunter1828

 

[Bendris Noulg]

Is purchase of those products and this book mutually exclusive? I don't see how this relates to my point.

If someone is going to by a book "for jollies", he'd be by far better of either purchasing actual porn, followed by erotica, followed by erotic literature... Buying this book will present the reader with imagry, sure, but also with a lot of game-related information and numerical information that won't serve such purposes.

 

[Pirate Queen Eliza]

absolutely no games marketed to teenagers (as D&D is) -- involve sexuality.

Gigantic, throbbing bollocks. You must not know the password to your own copy of Net Nanny or something, because this is the most false out of all the statements I've read in conjuction with this book, and that's saying a lot.

V: tM springs instantly to mind. D&D books all feature large, glossy illustrations of sexually attractive, sexily-clad, phallic-object-waving and idealized characters, often in alluring poses.

Not to mention stuff like GTA: Vice City or hell, even Postal (shudder). Sheesh.

 

[Kai Lord]

If someone is going to by a book "for jollies", he'd be by far better of either purchasing actual porn, followed by erotica, followed by erotic literature...

All three of those are "actual porn". The game related content in the upcoming Book of Erotic Fantasy will no more reduce its status as pornography than the articles printed in Playboy or Penthouse.

I find it sad that embracing such material in a public forum or commercial industry is considered "courageous" and worthy of praise.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

All three of those are "actual porn".

I would differ in this view. A reminder: The film-version of Heavy Metal received (in America) an "R" rating, not X, and it was far from watered-down from the print version of the tales it contained. Eyes Wide Shut and 9 Days also are Erotica, and also received R ratings.

It would seem that, while entitled to your opinion in the matter, you have more stringent guidelines than the MPAA as to what constitutes as porn and what doesn't.

 

[SemperJase]

Eyes Wide Shut and 9 Days also are Erotica, and also received R ratings.

Which goes to show the foolishness of the MPAA. Eyes Wide Shut did actually receive an X rating its first time through. It wasn't until digital images were inserted to strategically block the viewing of specific body parts that the movie got an R rating. As if an additional statue in the room changed the nature of the scene.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

Similar actually happened with Natural Born Killers. There was some debate over what scenes needed to be cut in order to reduce it to R, and it ended up not being any of the scenes. Rather, it was the graphic "flashes" that occured throughout the movie at seemingly random times to heighten the sense of the Knoxx's chaotic and violent nature.

 

[Kai Lord]

I would differ in this view. A reminder: The film-version of Heavy Metal received (in America) an "R" rating, not X, and it was far from watered-down from the print version of the tales it contained. Eyes Wide Shut and 9 Days also are Erotica, and also received R ratings.

It would seem that, while entitled to your opinion in the matter, you have more stringent guidelines than the MPAA as to what constitutes as porn and what doesn't.

The MPAA doesn't give ratings based on what's porn and what isn't, but on degrees of pornography.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=pornography

Pornography:

1. Sexually explicit pictures, writing, or other material whose primary purpose is to cause sexual arousal.
2. The presentation or production of this material.

So while all pornography might not be erotica, all erotica is most certainly porn. As well as many beer commercials, music videos and so on.

In entertainment and game material and such, we (or at least I) tend to rate things by what the overall product is trying to convey. And from what has been released by the creators of the BoEF, the point of the book is to arouse with its "flavor text" and erotic imagery, as well as provide game mechanics for situations that are arousing.

To that I say, alas....

And again I just think its a sad state of affairs, both that the product is getting released and that many are embracing it, some apparently just to spite those who whose morals simply state that certain material is unacceptable.

I'm not judging anyone, it would be equally sad if I did, and I'm definitely no paragon of virtue myself. I'm just disappointed that such explicit pornography is getting such attention and interest, particularly in the context of such an endearing hobby.