Quote from: WarthurI don't buy the "all publicity is good publicity" line. Vincent Baker gains nothing from his new status as the indie Byron Hall, and more than those Republicans in those recent sex scandals got boosts to their careers by being busted for soliciting sex with strangers in public restrooms.

I believe the difference between real life politics and fictional entertainment is huge in this case. I can't think of a single novel, film or play in the developed world that has actually lost it's audience through moral outrage. If anything it's the opposite.

The best and only functional response I can think of to a game like this is to ignore it. Deprive it of the oxygen it so desperately needs. Let it starve to death in the same wilderness as FATAL.

And that's all I'm willing contribute to this thread. Two posts and I'm done.

Quote from: DrewI believe the difference between real life politics and fictional entertainment is huge in this case. I can't think of a single novel, film or play in the developed world that has actually lost it's audience through moral outrage. If anything it's the opposite.

Except that the reason moral outrage works is that it brings the game to the attention to an audience who would otherwise have completely overlooked it. Look at where the outrage is happening: RPG.net, where there's a sizeable posse who pick up everything Vince Baker puts out anyhow, and here, where the local Culture Warriors seize on anything which can help them rip the Forge a new one.

It's an obscure RPG being discussed on fora for obscure RPGs. If it was an obscure RPG being discussed on, say, the national news, you might have a point.

QuoteThe best and only functional response I can think of to a game like this is to ignore it. Deprive it of the oxygen it so desperately needs. Let it starve to death in the same wilderness as FATAL.

Because, of course, FATAL has never inspired discussion or flamewars at all. :rolleyes:

Breaking silence for one more post...

Quote from: WarthurBecause, of course, FATAL has never inspired discussion or flamewars at all. :rolleyes:

No, but once they died down it disappeared off the map pretty quickly. I expect a similar thing will happen with Poison'd (or whatever the fuck it's called).

And as far as the online gaming world is concerned sites like RPGnet, ENWorld and the RPGSite are the national media. I think it's a little shortsighted to idly dismiss the impact of these discussions, even on a site as relatively small as this.

And that really is me done with the subject. I won't be responding any further. No hard feelings.

Quote from: DrewI believe the difference between real life politics and fictional entertainment is huge in this case. I can't think of a single novel, film or play in the developed world that has actually lost it's audience through moral outrage. If anything it's the opposite.

Novels, films and plays usually involve many people and companies.  Respectable companies are unlikely to suddenly create works that has people saying WTF and lose their audiences.  There are too many checks and balances that stop things from getting to that point.  There are exceptions though.  There was definite fallout from the Janet Jackson / Superbowl incident -- although in that case I'm sure MTV thought it was an acceptable risk -- appear "edgey" and increase their audience at the expense of burning bridges with advertisers.

Individuals, such as performers, are another matter altogether.  There are far fewer checks and balances to prevent individuals from saying or doing things that can damage their reputations.  For example, Paul Reuben's career fell apart after "moral outrage" over his personal life.  

I think Vincent Baker's choice to create this game was poorly thought out on his part.

Quote from: DrewAnd as far as the online gaming world is concerned sites like RPGnet, ENWorld and the RPGSite are the national media. I think it's a little shortsighted to idly dismiss the impact of these discussions, even on a site as relatively small as this.

No. The national media is the national media, in my analogy.

Let's look at the GTA case. GTA: San Andreas would have been discussed widely on the computer gaming websites even if there hadn't been any controversy, because - surprise - it was the latest instalment in a popular and critically acclaimed series. But thanks to the sterling efforts of Jack Thomspon, GTA got talked about in prime-time news slots - and as such got vastly more exposure than Joe Uncontroversial Computer Game could have ever expected.

Poison'd got coverage on RPG.net and therpgsite, and was controversial. Dogs In the Vineyard got coverage on RPG.net and therpgsite, and didn't spark a moral panic. I don't see how the controversy surrounding Poison'd has materially increased the coverage it would have otherwise received. There's a total of two fucking threads about it here, and only one or two threads about it on the Big Purple. By our standards, it's nigh-irrelevant (4e is getting way more attention); by RPG.net's standards it's a fucking drop in the ocean.

QuoteAnd that really is me done with the subject. I won't be responding any further. No hard feelings.

"I'm not going to respond further" is a coward's way of saying "I'm write, you're wrong, and I'm not going to engage with your arguments". Coward. If you're not willing to actually stand by what you say be a dear and don't fucking say it.

OK....so...after reading Vince's statements, I am no longer certain Vince and the Gen-Con group are just really immature (not that I mind irreverent humor per se, but the particular expressions of it in the AP reports was a bit too adolescent).

But now it seems that there is at least a possibility that the man is actually psychologically disturbed and created a game that will appeal to like-minded individuals so they can share their fantasies with each other.  And that's just creepy, in a MBLA sort of way.

I'm no prude.  And I even liked movies like Saw and Hostel.  But if you consider a several-hour marathon of indulging in those kind of fantasies on a personal level to be a really great way to spend your time (so much so that you hate for the experience to end), then I think its safe to say it might be time to check in with a psychologist.

Quote from: Warthur"I'm not going to respond further" is a coward's way of saying "I'm write, you're wrong, and I'm not going to engage with your arguments". Coward. If you're not willing to actually stand by what you say be a dear and don't fucking say it.

It might also be a principled, and I would say rational, response to the fact that these huge flamefests are exactly what certain self-promoting Internet Warriors want.  I agree with him on this point. The more people didn't take the bait and kept this going page after page of absolutely nothing being accomplished, the better.

What is there now to add to the fact that Vincent Baker, whose previous work I thought was interesting, has a vastly different idea of fun than myself, and I would contend, the vast majority of gamers?  That his idea of "fun" and the game he designed that encourages it is potentially a huge black eye to our hobby?  That the outrage felt by many is legitimate and that the "Indie" crowd had better reconsider their apparent deep need to be relevant even if that means that they appeal to the basest of human urges to gain notariety?

Feel free to flog the dead horse some more.  I can't stop you.  I've said what I wanted to say here, so with that I'm not going to respond further...


TGA

Quote from: The Good AssyrianIt might also be a principled, and I would say rational, response to the fact that these huge flamefests are exactly what certain self-promoting Internet Warriors want.  I agree with him on this point. The more people didn't take the bait and kept this going page after page of absolutely nothing being accomplished, the better.

If Vincent Baker is really intent on the whole world hearing about how freakish his roleplaying sessions are, I'm not about to stand in his way.

If Vincent Baker reckons he can get lots of people to buy a game by posting horrible accounts of actual play online... I'm utterly unconvinced that it's going to work. How many people, here, have actually said they're going to buy the game because of this thread? How many people have said "Well, I liked Dogs, but this is too far - I'm not going to buy this?"

Quote from: WarthurPoison'd got coverage on RPG.net and therpgsite, and was controversial. Dogs In the Vineyard got coverage on RPG.net and therpgsite, and didn't spark a moral panic.

DitV should have, that is didn't is somewhat telling in itself.


Time to set down a few of my final thoughts on the matter I think.

First is that I said we'd be here a long time ago, back during my RPGNet exchanges about another Forge game Little Fears. My thought then was that elements of that system design (under the same System Matters PoV) would encourage role-play of child abuse and start a trend towards even more open 'porn' style play in rpgs.

The general decision of the posters at RPGNet was that I was over-reacting. Heck, the elements of abuse in that game were even healthy as all adhoc psychological non-professional therapy is (?!). In any event, we'd never get to the point of open rpg porn, let alone open child abuse in rpgs- look at how people greeted FATAL. That's was stuff of small unknown sick little groups.

Well, here we are. And I wonder where we'll be in another 5 years.


The second point concerns the Forge itself. The people there have always come across to me as damaged goods.

Intensely unhappy with the rpg hobby, they couldn't begin to deal with the thought that the fault may be in themselves. So they explained in detail how that hobby was a victim of delusion and traditional games were counter-productive in their goals, and harmful to their players even to the point of mental damage.

GNS and all that followed was an attempt to gain approval they couldn't gain from the normal gaming geeks. And online, there's alway enough examples of damage goods to reach a critical mass. So they got their acceptance at long last. And got to look down at the rest of the hobby from behind their loftly walls.

Success is never enough however, finding acceptance of GNS and the like- they wanted more. And they've been turning up the dial for more for quite some time. From Little Fears, Sex and Sorcery, DitV, and now Poison'd- now they want you to accept their sexual fantasies as valid gaming.

Again, the Net is large and they will find enough people to agree with them. We've seen them in this thread. They will count themselves as winners, and continue on.

So the question is much the same- where will the Forge be 5 years from now?


Last thought is that of a philosopher that I have little agreement with, but the words seem apt: "And if thou gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will also gaze into thee".

Quote from: The Good AssyrianI've said what I wanted to say here, so with that I'm not going to respond further...

I'm not going to respond further, either. -E's last post in reply to mine was interesting, but if I continue the discussion, I think I'll take it up in another thread (and probably much later).

Quote from: droogSounds like a good game to me. You guys are like a bunch of old ladies.

Yeah, because if you're not interested in roleplaying anal rape, pedophelia, and necrophelia in loving detail, and speaking in hushed tones about how beautiful it all is, then your'e pretty much an old lady.

If these guys were snickering and high-fiving as they played out the brutal scenarios they describe, I wouldn't be bothered so much. Just a bunch of juvenile jack-offs having a few laughs. But it's the fact they say they're doing some sophisticated, beautiful, and meaningful that exposes them as some seriously fucked up nutbars.

Good thing I don't attend conventions. If I did, I'd want to check out some pictures of these creepy fuckers before-hand so I'd know to steer well clear.

Quote from: gleichmanSuccess is never enough however, finding acceptance of GNS and the like- they wanted more. And they've been turning up the dial for more for quite some time. From Little Fears, Sex and Sorcery, DitV, and now Poison'd- now they want you to accept their sexual fantasies as valid gaming.

Last thought is that of a philosopher that I have little agreement with, but the words seem apt: "And if thou gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will also gaze into thee".

This is awesome.  Now you've created a historical movement devoted to slowly perverting our hobby into a cesspool of pornographic perversion.

The next step is obviously Satanism.

Chick was right.

I have to admit that I do draw the line at the post-game special feeling where they all sat around in a circle feeling all glowing and special and particularly attuned to one another and not wanting anybody to break their little circle.  I find that aesthetically repugnant.

Quote from: Erik BoielleIs that better than being a dirty old man?

I bet you buy it, you pervert.

I'll check into this thread briefly, since I haven't seen anyone sharing my view.

I might play Poison'd at some point. But: the original AP example seems horrifying and grotesque, and I see no reason that the material should enter my gaming table; if I heard the kinds of things while playing, I would definitely put the brakes on and just walk away. Or, if these were people I thought were friends, I'd be upfront: "This is unnecessary. Cut that shit out now, or we're done."

I think I could play a game where the characters do bad things while keeping the actual, awful details offscreen. Because I don't think that kind of overt detail is needed, even if you're trying to tell a fancy-pants thematic story about that sort of thing. (I do think there are good non-wanker pirate stories you can tell with the Poison'd engine, from what I've heard, but I've heard only piecemeal.)

But, that's how I'd play it. People have their own judgements to make. And I personally shy away from gruesome fiction more than most people. (i.e. I just say the hell away from Saw and movies like that.)