Quote from: RPGPundit;870792There's some parts of old-school play that seem to like to emphasize a certain amount of erotic content; usually of the slightly sophomoric 'sleazy' variety, without ever really going into full-on sordid, and generally acting much more 'dangerous' than it really is.  I mean stuff like some of what you see in some of James Desborough's stuff (Machinations of the Space Princess), or some of Venger Satanis' work.

But I've never actually met gamers who tend to like to get into that stuff in actual play.  If you read my DCC campaign logs, some of it certainly sounds really very sordid, but in actual play almost all of the erotic stuff is only implied and/or happens totally 'off-camera'.

These are different, almost unrelated matters.
A) The frequency of encountering an activity.
B) The share of table time it takes.
C) The share of screen time it gets with the players roleplaying it.
You can encounter sex often, have lots of escapades with sex workers, and it might take next to zero table time, and most of it not being screen time, but the GM rolling on a table for sex workers, associated problems, and the like.
Conversely, at freeform RP sites you can only encounter sex once, but it might well take the majority of both screen and table time (in freeform, of course, screen time and table time is equal).

I can guarantee that sexuality-related events have high frequency in my campaigns. The share of tabletime and screen time, however, depends on who I am playing with:).

If it's with my group that includes all kinds of friends, usually not long. I might ask some question about their approach during sex, in case it's relevant (there was once this hired killer who liked tying up her victims before the assassination, for example, and there was a prince who had slightly questionable tastes for modern players that were causing a scandal in his kingdom).

OTOH, when I'm playing with a group where I'm having sex with every other player, I'm not seeing a reason to avoid descriptions of sexual activities:p. And I've got such a group, too;).

QuoteWhat about everyone else here?  What do you think about this type of 'sleazy' play like Desborough seems to want to push?

Never read his work. What Venger Satanis seems to suggest can be played in a quite tame manner, though. Or it can go full steam. See above.

QuoteAlso, would your answer be any different if it was much more explicit and offensive stuff like the "rape an 11 year old virgin 11 times" stuff you see in Carcosa?

Carcosa was just boring to me. The rituals are usable, but I think I had nastier ones already from having run games in settings where this kind of stuff is expected from the antagonists.
Generally, I'd prefer to lower the amount of screen time, and usually I consider such rituals for NPC use only. Though there are exceptions to every rule.

Quote from: AsenRG;871397OTOH, when I'm playing with a group where I'm having sex with every other player, I'm not seeing a reason to avoid descriptions of sexual activities:p. And I've got such a group, too;).

How many players?(!)

Quote from: AsenRG;871397These are different, almost unrelated matters.
A) The frequency of encountering an activity.
B) The share of table time it takes.
C) The share of screen time it gets with the players roleplaying it.

I think you left out the most important part. The purpose or goal to the encounter.

As I point out, with the prostitute tables in the DMG, or the use of the term "Tongue Pad" in Canting Crew, there is an implication that the purpose to the players spending time on casual sex is to gain information. (I also argue the case that progeny in a dynastic campaign is the purpose behind seeking an ideal long-term mate).

I mean, you could have these sorts of encounters occur frequently, they can take up a majority of the table time, and it can involve heavy roleplay interaction from the players throughout. But if the purpose to the player is to gain valuable information (or better stats for offspring), that's going to be an entirely different thing if the goal is to produce erotica or simply role play the character with no bearing at all on tangible effects on the game.

Quote from: S'mon;871442How many players?(!)

It's solo play

Overall if a PC is motivated by horniness it can get really tedious after a while but it can be interesting for NPCs as it can throw the PCs for a loop and make the world seem more real.

I remember my Zorro-ish character going out of his way to become popular which resulted in him waking up tied to a bed wearing nothing but his signature giant black hat while the fangirl who had kidnapped him went on about her "machines."

Eroticism in games: A great concept in potential that nobody seems to do right.

It helps immeasurably if you do what Aaron Allston called "blue-booking."

JG

Quote from: Lunamancer;871460(I also argue the case that progeny in a dynastic campaign is the purpose behind seeking an ideal long-term mate).

Can be, sure.  But that can also be pursued with no in-game eroticism or explicitly-mentioned sex.  Take Pendragon, for example.  Heirs to carry on the dynasty are a huge deal, but finding a wife can vary from a mini-campaign unto itself (for an exceptional wife) down to simply asking your lord to arrange a marriage for you and then automatically getting an average wife within short order.  Once you have a wife, it's a d20 roll each Winter Phase to determine whether she gave birth and, if so, whether she died in the process.  It's obviously assumed that the knight and his wife are having sex, but there's nothing in the rules to even hint that you might want to openly acknowledge that this is happening, never mind going into details of what they're doing, when they're doing it, etc.

Quote from: Lunamancer;871460As I point out, with the prostitute tables in the DMG, or the use of the term "Tongue Pad" in Canting Crew, there is an implication that the purpose to the players spending time on casual sex is to gain information. (I also argue the case that progeny in a dynastic campaign is the purpose behind seeking an ideal long-term mate).

I think this is one of the things that really changes how a campaign develops too. PCs having children is something, where if it arises, the GM at least needs to address some of the basic details so he gets things right (i.e. are the characters even having sex, are they actively trying to conceive, etc). None of that has to happen on camera, but it has to be handled in some way so people are at least aware that there is a couple in the party (or at the very least the GM and the player are the same page). I've been more open to this sort of thing in recent years and really has made the PCs feel more like real people. Their family ties are not just fabrications before the play, they also emerge during play (which always seems to give them more weight).

Quote from: nDervish;871517Can be, sure.  But that can also be pursued with no in-game eroticism or explicitly-mentioned sex.

Which is besides the point. The point I was making is that if you do have sexual content in the game, including sex scenes, that doesn't make it eroticism. It's been mainly the haters over the years who claim juvenile or offensive erotic content in old-school games. If there is a vital game purpose to it, it doesn't carry all the baggage of mouth-breathers and awkwardness.

If the giant bearded fat guy wants to flirt in character, he does. And if he's eloquent, and amusing, the table enjoys listening to it. Anyone who can't visualize the actual scene and divorce the player and the character when the dialogue is good can leave my table. (If s/he sucks at dialogue, I diplomatically push to a roll-for-it resolution).

The action leaves off when the encounter is resolved. Did you impress the man/woman? Are you trying to woe them or sucker them into a roll in the hay? Was this just fun reparte between two characters? When the scene becomes boring, I either fade to black or roll it out and push to resolutions, much like debates in character.

I've had a two players who were vehemently squeamish about anything quasi erotic or romantic entering game, and both I eventually kicked from the table. To limit this entire vein of potential plot because you can't separate RL emotions from fictional ones is not my problem. When I'm GMing and have my bud's character whispering sweet nothings to my NPC, it's the game. Sheesh.

Kefra and Jan are pretty blase about it all for RPG book content. Kind of a shrug and "Yeah? So?" or a "Are there people really that stupid as to think -that- is a problem?"

Kefra is pretty pragmatic about anything going on with the characters. RP what needs to be RPed, roll what needs to be rolled, move on. Jan though loves to goof off in character. And out of character at the table during the occasional downtimes.

With both my local groups of 15 years now nothing erotic has happened with the characters.

The single biggest reason there is a "Random Harlot Table" in the AD&D 1st Ed DMG is that Gary Gygax really liked Lankhmar.

That is all.

Quote from: Coffee Zombie;871542If the giant bearded fat guy wants to flirt in character, he does. And if he's eloquent, and amusing, the table enjoys listening to it. Anyone who can't visualize the actual scene and divorce the player and the character when the dialogue is good can leave my table. (If s/he sucks at dialogue, I diplomatically push to a roll-for-it resolution).

I'm somewhat reminded of the Dragon "What's New" cartoon where they showed the one fat bearded guy playing a beautiful Elven maid and then in the next panel showed him with the makeup kit they were advertising.

"But that's amazing!  You've gotta be at least two feet shorter!"
"Special shoes."

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;871576The single biggest reason there is a "Random Harlot Table" in the AD&D 1st Ed DMG is that Gary Gygax really liked Lankhmar.

That is all.

Well, that's good enough reason.

JG

Quote from: Lunamancer;871460I think you left out the most important part. The purpose or goal to the encounter.

As I point out, with the prostitute tables in the DMG, or the use of the term "Tongue Pad" in Canting Crew, there is an implication that the purpose to the players spending time on casual sex is to gain information. (I also argue the case that progeny in a dynastic campaign is the purpose behind seeking an ideal long-term mate).

I mean, you could have these sorts of encounters occur frequently, they can take up a majority of the table time, and it can involve heavy roleplay interaction from the players throughout. But if the purpose to the player is to gain valuable information (or better stats for offspring), that's going to be an entirely different thing if the goal is to produce erotica or simply role play the character with no bearing at all on tangible effects on the game.

Sure, we could add it. But why does that matter to the discussion? I mean, sex isn't something people do just to get information, or just to speed up healing (as I seem to remember some games actually requiring it). Then again, people do it for those reasons, too, so it's not necessarily out of character, either...

And if you engage in any sexual encounter, I'd argue that at least one NPC's attitude to you is going to depend on what you're doing in bed (hopefully, it would be always a positive bonus to the reaction roll:D). Hence, it could potentially matter, even if the goal of the player was "to simply play my character".

Quote from: S'mon;871442How many players?(!)

Does it matter:)? Let's say it's a small group, and leave it at that.

Quote from: TristramEvans;871464It's solo play

Maybe that would be the case in your group, but the question was to me, as far as I can tell. And you simply can't answer for me;).

Quote from: RPGPundit;870792There's some parts of old-school play that seem to like to emphasize a certain amount of erotic content; usually of the slightly sophomoric 'sleazy' variety, without ever really going into full-on sordid, and generally acting much more 'dangerous' than it really is.  I mean stuff like some of what you see in some of James Desborough's stuff (Machinations of the Space Princess), or some of Venger Satanis' work.

But I've never actually met gamers who tend to like to get into that stuff in actual play.  If you read my DCC campaign logs, some of it certainly sounds really very sordid, but in actual play almost all of the erotic stuff is only implied and/or happens totally 'off-camera'.

What about everyone else here?  What do you think about this type of 'sleazy' play like Desborough seems to want to push?

Also, would your answer be any different if it was much more explicit and offensive stuff like the "rape an 11 year old virgin 11 times" stuff you see in Carcosa?

RPGPundit

I think eroticism in the game is great, but only as insinuation and to add texture to the environment and situations. I generally describe fey creatures in this light, which adds a strange dichotomy of repulsion and desire. You have no idea of its motivations, adding a sense of danger. As far as explicit sex and fulfilling sexual fantasies through gameplay, I don't know about everyone else, but unless I was with a group of swingers (and it was my thing) or just playing with my wife, I'd find it odd and frankly disconcerting. If you like erotic fiction, I suggest 4 play or writing/reading it yourself.