Quote from: alexandroThere are some (myself included) who consider the "Book of Erotic Fantasy" a distasteful pile of shit. Yet that doesn't make me going around and claiming Wizards is in any way "morally inferior" because they published it.

Off topic, but how come I see a copy of the BoEF in every freaking big-box chain bookstore I go into?  It's always the latest from wizards, a few white wolf books, maybe a copy of BESM3, LoTR3 or Serenity (of all things) and a copy of the BoEF.  It's mind boggling that that's pretty much the only 3rd-party d20 supplement I see outside of specialty shops now.  Anyone else notice this, or is it just my area?

Melinglor, my reason for objecting to the idea of PCs rather than NPCs performing acts of a morally transgressive / "sick" nature is based on why I'm playing the game.

If I'm playing a game to portray people who overcome obstacles, the idea of the character overcoming obstacles while - or even, in the case of Poison'd, assisted by - doing vile, nasty things, I might well be repulsed. I don't want to watch Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom and have Indy go around brutalizing people - it makes it very hard for me to experience sympathy with the protagonist. If the underlying message is that this is supposed to be a cool, heroic type of guy, I'd even be offended on a personal level. Since this is the mode of gaming the majority of people play and are familiar with, I can see why it would sound distasteful.

If I'm playing a game to portray real people with real faults, where the story isn't necessarily about how they overcome those faults but the repercussions of the faults, and there may not even be a "happy ending", I'm far more forgiving. I might even go so far as to portray a rapist, though the idea certainly doesn't have any inherent appeal to me. I might be playing the game to see how my character's actions affect others, or how it affects myself, or how it affects the world.

Whereas fucked-up-beyond-belief evil NPCs are awesome antagonists in both types of game.

The first mode is an action-adventure film or maybe a comedy. The second mode is a twisted thriller, a dark drama or a tragedy. They're two different types of movies, one no "better" than the other. A single person can enjoy both in two different contexts, but when you start mixing up the premises people often get confused and sometimes angry. I know I do.

Quote from: BrantaiOff topic, but how come I see a copy of the BoEF in every freaking big-box chain bookstore I go into?  It's always the latest from wizards, a few white wolf books, maybe a copy of BESM3, LoTR3 or Serenity (of all things) and a copy of the BoEF.  It's mind boggling that that's pretty much the only 3rd-party d20 supplement I see outside of specialty shops now.  Anyone else notice this, or is it just my area?

Maybe they just don't sell.

I saw a hell of a lot of LotR books in all the B&N type stores for the longest time, but they were always the same copies on the shelf (usually pretty obvious from the shelf-wear).  

It wasn't that the game was selling well, it was that there was a lot of initial hype and expectation so a lot of stores ordered it, and then couldn't get rid of it.

Anything goes. I don't even hold their fantasies against the FATAL crew.

Quote from: MelinglorA lot of answers have focused on whether PCs or NPCs are the ones committing atrocious acts. In one sense this strikes me as odd: there's something sqickish or morally questionable when a regular player describes an act, but not when the Gamemaster does?

I think that's a fair question. I was wondering when someone was going to bring it up, unfortunately none of the Forgers are intelligent enough to see that possible hole in our arguments against players doing such things with their characters.

My response would be: with the players, your character is "my guy"; with the GM, the many thousands of characters, none of them are "my guy." The difference is the sense of investment a player has in their character, the "protagonisation" as people like to put it. Your individual character, you just have them to control, so they're very much an expression of something within you. Whereas the GM has a cast of thousands to play. The GM must play the caring mother, the callous guard, the dutiful servant, the stormy weather, the delicious food, the child-murderer - the GM has to play a wide variety of characters, describe many scenes and events. So the GM doesn't have that sense of investment. The GM doesn't have any particular one of those things as their own personal character.

When the players play their character, it's for themselves and it's personal. When the GM plays their characters, it's not for themselves and it's not personal, it's for the whole group.

Of course that's different when we see a GMPC, you know when the GM always has some NPC come in and save the day, annoying stuff that. Well, if the GMPC was one who was a child murderer and necrophiliac, I'd be as disturbed and disgusted by that as when a player does it - because the GM is treating that vile character as their protagonist. Or if several NPCs in a row did disgusting things, I'd start to wonder... But if the GM just presents a game world with the normal distribution of good, okay, and evil people, well then that's not a problem, that's just good GMing.

Quote from: MelinglorAnother example that springs to mind: My wife and I went over to Jake Richmond's house recently to play Shock with a mostly unfamiliar group of players. In the game, a fellow participant was describing an attempt by a sleazy character to victimize my wife's Protagonist. A lot of the pertinent details are specific to the Sci-Fi setting we created, but the basics are: he was attempting to molest and emotionally dominate a drugged and disoriented woman. And Jake stepped in with: "whoa, back up, is everyone OK with this?" and asking my wife specifically if she was OK with having this kind of scene with her character. She assured Jake and her antagonist, David, that she was fine with the scene, (hadn't even considered that it might not be) and off we went. But Jake was right to ask a player he's never gamed with before if she was comfortable with that level of character vulnerability. All relative to the group.

Ok...

Is it something about Forge / Storygames that leads to this kind of play?  I mean, it's not my experience at all, and most of the forums / podcasts about "traditional" RPG gaming I've seen and heard say they don't go anywhere close to stuff like that.

Does anyone who has not played and been influenced by Forge / Storygames type games play like this?

Stuart - yes. Seventies and eighties D&D culture has really fucked up stuff all over its margins. Not everywhere of course, but I've seen, heard about, and been in some games with really amazingly wretched content, going back to the seventies.

People start fantasizing, shit happens.

Yes, I found the "Evil DM" in the documentary "The D&D Experience" to be pretty vile.

What I'm wondering though, is that today how many of the people on this forum who are not from the Forge / Storygames end of the hobby -- how many have games with lots of kink in them?

"ME" - definitely  NOT part of the Forge/indie crowd.

 As I said in a previous post, there has been kinky sex and sexual situations referred to in my games - but its usually on private notecards between the players and me the GM.

 Although, aloud amongst the group there has been some playful teasing of an NPC that maybe she flirts too much and she should settle down with just one guy or girl.  The starship's navigator can be a bit of a flirt.*


- Ed C.








* ...and No , she is NOT a "lesbian-stripper-ninja". She is a veteran of the Imperium Navy, but not yet 30 yrs old...she looks like she is constantly smiling and is pretty affectionate with people that she already knows. Doesn't like to get into fights and brawls - but sometimes can't help it, tho she usually manages to come out of brawls mostly okay.

It ain't today, but it also ain't the seventies -

You heard of White Wolf's "Black Dog" imprint? You know, for "mature" gamers?

Not Forge/SG. Rather mainstream, as far as RPGs that aren't Hasbro property can be mainstream. Rather kinky, though.

@Kyle:

QuoteThere can be evil in games. But the PCs don't do pure evil, they avenge it.
...
That's what heroes do.
...
Sometimes the PCs aren't heroes, sure. But they should never be villains. Or at least, their villainy should not be like true sociopathic villainy.

Most games don't work under the assumption, that PCs are heroes (because being a hero carries a lot of baggage and is already one step into the realm of the dramatic "PCs shouldn't die because of a die roll, because that wouldn't be HEROIC" argument).
They often aren't really villains either, because to be villains the players need to identify more strongly with the NPCs their characters oppose, than with their characters themselves.
Sociopathic...yeah, that's a problem. If the players are doing things "just because" they can do so, without giving a flying fuck about what their actions actually MEAN in the context of the game (whether you see "game" as a story or as a simulation of a fictional society or...etc.pp.)
The poster at leat doesn't deny this ("You will have long term ambitions..."), suggesting that some meaningful content has to happen, not just random rape, without relation to what is actually going on. That would be lame. And it wouldn`t qualify as a "story" either.

QuoteThere's a difference between representation and reality. But what you choose to represent says something about you. If a roleplaying game session is "art", then like all art it's an expression of the artist. When you have your character murder a child and molest his corpse and you laugh about it, what are you trying to express? What are you telling us about yourself?

So what is an artist (I doubt RPGers count here, but lets run this argument through to its logical conclusion) really telling us about himself, when he is condoning an atrocity in his fiction? Is Tarantino telling us, that dousing a guy in gasoline is a fun thing to do, just because there are no moral repercussions in his work?
Do you want a Comics Code for art, where "in every instance good must triumph over evil" and no evil deed must go unpunished?
Is the fact, that no (immediate) repercussions occur for the vile act, that even (for the moment) the characters seem to actually be "better off" by acting the way they did, in any way causing the PLAYERS to feel BETTER about what their characters did?

I daresay not.
You can't classify players as "sociopathic", because their characters do sociopathic stuff.

And considering your argument of "character identification" from the other thread: it's a sad day to see you quoting the exact rationale politicians are citing time and time again for banning "violent" computer games.
Fact is: even if you have just one character, you don't play him 100% the same way all the time. If you end up doing vile shit with him, than you do it, because it felt right at the moment. Maybe next time doing the morally right thing will be more consistent with how you want to portray him. It's your choice and not "the game is set up this way to make me do it".

We enjoy playing villains at times, and have done so several times over the years. I can't imagine artificially restraining my games with some sort of arbitrary morality.

i voted the first option, but now the last entry fits me better.  consider it flopped if anyone is bothering to re-tally.

I'm gonna echo Calithena on this one.  If everyone in the group is a consenting adult and is okay with it, do whatever the hell you want.

Quote from: J ArcaneWhat an incredibly loaded way of putting it.  Wow.  Could you've possibly come up with a more inflammatory way of stating that?  I can't think of one.

Sorry, man, I'm not sure what it is you're objecting to. Apologies if I offended, but I stated the concept the only way I knew how.

Quote from: lachekMelinglor, my reason for objecting to the idea of PCs rather than NPCs performing acts of a morally transgressive / "sick" nature is based on why I'm playing the game.

[SNIP]

The first mode is an action-adventure film or maybe a comedy. The second mode is a twisted thriller, a dark drama or a tragedy. They're two different types of movies, one no "better" than the other. A single person can enjoy both in two different contexts, but when you start mixing up the premises people often get confused and sometimes angry. I know I do.

I can totally buy that. That's a quite reasonable standard, and pretty parallel to what I was, more clumsily, trying to convey above.

Quote from: Kyle AaronMy response would be: with the players, your character is "my guy"; with the GM, the many thousands of characters, none of them are "my guy." The difference is the sense of investment a player has in their character, the "protagonisation" as people like to put it.

That's an interesting perspective. I can definitely see your point, though it seems somewhat individual: different roleplayers are probably going to feel the investment level differently. What you describe IS pretty common, I'd say. But even within that framework folks are going to feel that GM-detatchment on different levels. For instance, when I GM, I certainly don't feel the same investment with (most) NPCs as with a PC, but I still care a great deal about how the NPCs act and what acts I depict with them. . .I would not feel, if an NPC were to commit rape, any less (or more) like "I raped [so-and-so], than if I had done it with a PC.

So on that level I'd say it goes right back to "it's individual to the group."

I think perhaps the real meat of your point lies in the assumption that the PCs are going to be Capital-H Heroic, or at least non-villainous. To be sure, if I had the understanding that we were going to play Heroic (in the modern, non-classical sense) PCs, I'd be horrified at acts of brutality, rape, torture, and what-not on their part. I'd wonder what the fuck was wrong with my fellow-players that they found that "heroic." But I don't think all games employ the assumption that the PCs are heroic. There's about six D&D alignments that speak otherwise, and the bulk of my personal RPG experience besides. Hell, I think perhaps I've tended to play noble and upright characters myself so much over the years in part just so someone would. We've never broached the topic of rape in my long-standing group, but we've had plenty of brutal violence.

So I think it's important to get your assumptions straight. Not all gaming (even within the same group) need emply the same assumptions about PC action. And to be absolutely clear, I'm 100% OK with your holding that particular comfort level for yourself and/or your group. I certainly wouldn't be comfortable exploring rape or brutality issues with everyone I game with; it's a maturity thing.

Quote from: StuartIs it something about Forge / Storygames that leads to this kind of play?  I mean, it's not my experience at all, and most of the forums / podcasts about "traditional" RPG gaming I've seen and heard say they don't go anywhere close to stuff like that.

I just wanted to clarify, in the example I cited above, there was not one hint of "kink" or "fantisizing" going on for any participant of the scene. There was simply a mature atmosphere of safe exploration of any issue that may confront our various protagonists.

In this case, it involved molestation, but there was nothing titilating or purient about David's portrayal. The situation involved Annie's Protagonist coming out of a VR existence into the real world and experiencing the sensory and emotional shock of separation, and being victimized by a sleazeball scammer who poses as a sort of "integration counselor" to help you adjust to physical life, and takes advantage of you in that vulnerable state. David described him bathing, soothing and massaging Annie, and we had a roll to see if she succumbed to his emotional influence in her drugged state. She didn't, and pulled away from him. If she had succumbed, we would have stopped well short of verbal porn, believe me (The guy was more about domination than sex, anyway).

I don't know if this sort of thing is peculiar to story games or not, but I'll take this incedent any day over my old D&D experience where my and another player's characters saw our Dryad fellow-PC unconscious and naked and the DM told us "roll Wisdom to see if you resist raping her."

Peace,
-Joel