Quote from: droog;256172It's abundantly clear that D&D (and others) produce exactly what you guys are pleased to call 'fucked-up play'.

Or products. From upthread: from the start at Blackmoor on. Including the origin of Swine!



The recently released old-school supplement to OD&D, Supplement V: Carcosa is solidly based on pre-1984 D&D, with Deities & Demigods (early printings), Tekumel's Book of the Ebon Bindings, and the art of Erol Otus as prime gaming sources. Literary sources that are part of the bedrock of RPGs, the likes of H.P. Lovecraft, Robert E. Howard, Clark Ashton Smith, and Michael Moorcock. Solidy grounded stuff, direct from D&D's heart.

Carcosa, among many other "weird" things, has a PC class, Sorcerer, that uses human sacrifice to help power most of its spells. Children, exotic (including illegal) ingredients, torture & violence (both physical and / or sexual) are often involved.

"If any one is put-off by this sort of amoral cruelty and cold-bloodedness, Supplement V: CARCOSA probably won't be to his liking." - Geoffrey McKinney

Now I respect the author and his admiration to his sources. Yet I find this just as potentially offputting or moreso as anything in Maid. But Carcosa is a direct production from D&D & its roots. And is certainly not meant to be played as a light-hearted comedy game.

Quote from: Spinachcat;256146Threads like this one only result in selling more copies of Maid.

And more blog posts, some of which will be recycled back to here in about a year's time. :pundit:

This is why I called Pundit's actions like this a Mr. Hyde to Ron Edward's Dr. Jekyll. :hatsoff:

Quote from: -E.;256190On that scale, I suspect Japanese Anime Maids and Wizards and Elves are fairly harmless and Pirates-as-a-metaphor-for-a-dysfunctional-family-really-deep-stuff-seriously-it-was-like-psychology-no-I'm-not-kidding-with-Pirates! is more likely to result in howls of laughter.

If you introduced any game like that you'd get laughs, I imagine. But have you tried? I've drawn interest with My Life with Master, Bacchanal, It Was A Mutual Decision and Wuthering Heights. I think Poison'd might be a tough sell for some of the people I'm thinking of, but it's the pirates rather than the atrocities, I'm afraid.

Maid, on the other hand, I can only think of one woman who is likely to want to try, and she's definitely kinky.

Quote from: Elliot Wilen;256191Of course D&D has more incidents, but what proportion of D&D play is fundamentally screwed up compared to Poison'd--that ought to be your question, I believe.

Logic-chopping, Elliot. Can you deny that there is highly visible 'fucked-up play' at all levels in D&D?

Quote from: Casey777;256196Now I respect the author and his admiration to his sources. Yet I find this just as potentially offputting or moreso as anything in Maid. But Carcosa is a direct production from D&D & its roots. And is certainly not meant to be played as a light-hearted comedy game.

Yeah, it is really hard to read around all the stuff from that supplement that made it into every edition of the PHB that followed.

Oh, wait, that didn't have happened because Carcosa was only released last fucking week.

Someone could write up Paedophiles and Pederasty tomorrow as a direct production of 'D&D & its roots', but that would still mean someone currently wrote a fucked up set of rules by extending a ruleset that contained no such mechanics.  They are added on because there is nothing in the original rules to support them.

Did you seriously think for even a second that writing a supplement which features* a sodomy table, or charts for how many children should be molested and tortured to death to summon a demon over 30 years after the original was published is, in any way, a reflection of the original rules?


*examples are not necessarily indicitive of the content of the linked material.  I haven't read it, I can't comment on the supplement.  They are examples only.

Quote from: Serious Paul;256192However I think they show up at far fewer tables. I mean seriously until I started posting here I'd never heard of either, and I've gamed for two decades. And I try to snag new stuff all the time, even if I don't play it.

I think I'd take it a step further. Most people outside the hobby don't care about the hobby period. And their exposure to a game like "Maid" would be sheer shit luck, and certainly infinitely less likely than running across a D&D book at Barnes and Nobles, or something.

I think some people are way over estimating the effect these goofy ass games can have.

I think the same thing about the players!

Pretty much agree with all of this, I think the relative obscurity of the material only matters for some versions of the damage argument.

If the damage comes from people looking for (physical) evidence (e.g. Actual Play reports, rules books, etc.) then yeah -- the existence of narrow-focus, perverted games do the damage.

If the damage comes from actual human interaction with roleplayers, then

a) The rules are much less relevant than the actual demeanor of the people involved (System Doesn't Matter) (i.e. if you sit down at a con and play Poison'd with a bunch of cool, non-throat-raping-people, I doubt most folks will walk away with an impression of roleplayers as raging perverts)

b) The fact that no one knows about these games makes it less likely that you'll run into someone pushing them

Can someone making the damage argument clarify how it happens?

Cheers,
-E.

Quote from: droog;256205Logic-chopping, Elliot. Can you deny that there is highly visible 'fucked-up play' at all levels in D&D?

I'll deny it.  Unless by 'fucked up' you are referring to petty theft and going up from there.

The rest of us are using 'fucked up' to mean molesting children.  Point out the pages in either the DMG or the PHB in any edition where there is a trait or characteristic similar to 'Likes them Young'.

Elliot and I are bantering more about Poison'd than Maid.

Quote from: Elliot Wilen;256141This isn't a bum rap, so all walkerp's left with is cries of "Prude! Censor!"

This is a misreading of my position, and I suspect a deliberate mislabelling.  If someone were to say, "I find the topics in Maid and/or Poison'd to be offensive and it's not something I really want to play" and then I were to criticize them, that would be a fair case of me doing the above.  But I have no problem with someone saying that.  That's their personal judgement.  

What I am objecting to, is taking that personal judgement to a level of prescription for the entire hobby. RPGPundit and Kyle Aaron are saying "these games are morally reprehensible and they should be expunged from our hobby and the people that play them should also be expunged from our hobby."  Note that they don't actually give any specifics on how they can be expunged.  But that is the implication.  What they want is some kind of safe, middle ground (as defined by them) of content which offends nobody and keeps the hobby safe from outside criticism.

I have already gone into why they want this (their own social insecurities, basically).  Basically, they feel that it is okay for them to decide what games fall outside the boundaries of what is "proper" (a word Kyle actually used) and to expect that those games and the players that like them be driven out of the hobby.

I argue primarily that their entire position is based on a deliberately exaggerated misreading of the content (as has already been established with Maid and is most likely the case with Poison'd).  I don't want to get into the next level of argument (whether roleplaying out immoral acts is not as bad as actually doing them or not) because then we go into off-topic, but it has been my experience that the roleplaying of immoral subject matter, if it even exists, is so inconsequentially small that it doesn't even touch the hobby and certainly nobody outside of it even has a clue.

I feel that the fear-mongering and hate that is their reaction is far more negative to the hobby than any vaguely sexually or morally deviant gaming that might go on in a session of Maid or Poison'd.

Can somebody show me an actual example of a single negative thing that has actually happened to the gaming scene because of these games?  A single newbie who was turned off who would have otherwise been into it?  A single individual feeling bad and freaked out because of these games?

I knew a girl back in '81 whose chr got killed in her first session of D&D. She never played again!

Quote from: droog;256203If you introduced any game like that you'd get laughs, I imagine. But have you tried? I've drawn interest with My Life with Master, Bacchanal, It Was A Mutual Decision and Wuthering Heights. I think Poison'd might be a tough sell for some of the people I'm thinking of, but it's the pirates rather than the atrocities, I'm afraid.

Maid, on the other hand, I can only think of one woman who is likely to want to try, and she's definitely kinky.

My point wasn't that these games are un-sell-able -- I have no problem imagining how someone could present all of those games in a way that was intriguing.

Also, to be clear: I have no problem (moral, aesthetic, or otherwise) with what people do in the privacy of their own (or their parent's) basements. I wouldn't necessarily think of less of someone for playing Poison'd.*

But part of the "damage" argument (as I understand it) hinges on publishing something -- either a rules-set, an Actual Play report, or just gaming in public. My "too serious" comment was aimed at some of the Poison'd discussion where the tawdry, exhibitionistic and frankly repulsive Actual Play was defended as being a serious examination of a dysfunctional family (or something -- it's been awhile).

Cheers,
-E.

*There are games I would think less of someone for playing -- that racist holy war game, for example... or anything that trivializes real-life atrocities

Quote from: StormBringer;256206Yeah, it is really hard to read around all the stuff from that supplement that made it into every edition of the PHB that followed.

Oh, wait, that didn't have happened because Carcosa was only released last fucking week.



but that would still mean someone currently wrote a fucked up set of rules by extending a ruleset that contained no such mechanics.  They are added on because there is nothing in the original rules to support them.

I suggest you go read the blog for Carcosa where the author gives examples from Deities & Demigods, Book of Ebon Bindings etc. including rules that were direct inspirations on his work. Or go over some of the novels & stories cited by the author and listed in my previous post. Or the examples from First Fantasy Campaign (Blackmoor) and OD&D upthread. Or take a look at Margaret Brundage's Weird Tales covers. All that's 20+ years old.

Quote from: walkerp;256214What I am objecting to, is taking that personal judgement to a level of prescription for the entire hobby. RPGPundit and Kyle Aaron are saying "these games are morally reprehensible and they should be expunged from our hobby and the people that play them should also be expunged from our hobby."  Note that they don't actually give any specifics on how they can be expunged.  But that is the implication.  What they want is some kind of safe, middle ground (as defined by them) of content which offends nobody and keeps the hobby safe from outside criticism.

Please, walker, don't misinterpret me! I am certainly not saying that what I want is a hobby that offends nobody and is safe from outsider criticism.

I just want the right people offended and criticizing it.
Like you, for example.

If, on the other hand, it offends people who aren't social retards, or brings legitimate criticism from people who were part of the hobby and now feel they have to leave it because it has become rife with Lawncrappers (rather than insipid pseudo-intellectuals and people who have no real interest in regular roleplaying), then there's a problem.

RPGPundit

I really hope that the hobby isn't that fragile.  Yet games like Maid or Posion'd do shed a bad light and bring  negative press to the RPG world.  Sure RPGing may not seem too mainstream, but because it isn't mainstream,  people think they can get away with bringing those elements into this media.

I understand that other media display this content already but like OHT said...this is an interactive media, and involves an intentional effort to create the offensive material

Sure, sure...I know...no one wants to be censored, but rape, molestation, and abortion are pretty bad elements to bring into gaming. (Even though sexual content was brought into the game before.)

We are role playing these games, and what better way to get your rocks off without really being noticed, yet advertising it enough to bring in more sick fucks to add to the coarsening of the hobby.

Quote from: -E.;256207Can someone making the damage argument clarify how it happens?

Cheers,
-E.

I'll take a stab at it, but I don't wholly support the argument:

GenCon '07, big table, lots of people playing a translated anime game.  Someone sits in, and gets to play some goofy servant who runs around making sure the mischievous sentient cats don't interrupt an important business meeting, or have to cover up for the malfunctioning robot butler.  Good fun is had by all, and I doubt the promoters point out there is a trait called 'Likes them Young'.

Fast forward four months, player is familiar with said game, and perhaps a few others.  A group is advertising in the area for another couple of players for a campaign.  Maid is tops on the list, but maybe some Poison'd.  Well, our example player hasn't heard of Poison'd, but if it's anything like Maid it should be pretty fun, right?

Naturally, this group doesn't turn out to be as light-hearted as the demo at GenCon.  Now this player has a skewed view of the hobby because of this group.  It would hardly take more than one session of D&D with a similar group murdering children and raping their way across the countryside to turn them off to RPGs, and encourage them to badmouth RPGs to anyone they come in contact with.

Or so the argument runs in my mind.  Others may not agree on all the points, but certainly, this would be the heart of the matter to me.  Word of mouth is always touted as far more powerful than any advertising scheme.