Is the hobby really THAT fragile

StormBringer · October 14, 2008, 09:47:59 AM

Quote from: Casey777;256246However since you're wearing wideass blinders that weigh a Tmf & obviously aren't bothering to read a thing I've linked to or look at the covers and art from OD&D and Tekumel books, good night and may God bless. :hatsoff:

No, no, I have read and seen all of that. You are trying to say that Carcosa is some direct re-print or exact copy of elements in the original rules, and I am here to tell you that despite your insistence that sick fuckery be tolerated, the only correlation between the drawing of an Amazon baring her breasts and the number of children that need to be molested and murdered to summon a demon exists entirely in your head.

StormBringer · October 14, 2008, 09:50:44 AM

Quote from: walkerp;256282It's the sexual thing that freaks out their puritan natures, GrimGent.

Yes, because no one has thought to mention that pretending to sexualize an eleven year old is a problem. Only Puritans have a problem with that, because they are prudes trying to censor Art.

The Yann Waters · October 14, 2008, 09:53:07 AM

Quote from: Age of Fable;256296Uh-huh. And with the use of special abilities you, ie your Sexy Lolita ten-year old character that other people describe as curvy, can get XP by having sex with the Master, right?

Practically everything involving romance or sex is strictly optional and at player discretion, including the Comfort and Seduction rules. Special abilities would include tricks like "Passionate Gaze" which earns the maid a few points of Favour just for looking at the Master in a certain way, at the cost of some additional Stress. Also, Favour functions more like drama points than experience during play, as it's spent for rerolls and triggering random events.

The Yann Waters · October 14, 2008, 09:57:37 AM

Quote from: jgants;256291Uh, if that's what they intended to mean, then somebody made a really big translation error because in US English the word "lolita" is pretty much used exclusively to refer to a highly-sexualized pubescent girl (or someone who can pass for under 18).

Hey, if you wish to suggest a reprint which replaces the term with "Innocent" or "Ingenue" or some such, go right ahead. But the Maid Types still have no bearing on the character's age: she can be as young or old as you want.

StormBringer · October 14, 2008, 09:58:58 AM

Quote from: JimLotFP;256244uhhh, 3 of the 4 things in the graphic I posted are from the original 1974 rules... one was from the third (1976?) supplement.

And? Are you also going to conflate 'inspiration from' with 'present in'?

QuoteDeities and Demigods is a D&D supplement. Book of Ebon Bindings is for a 1970s D&D variant. Surely I don't need to explain the relevance of Blackmoor... and surely the importance of Weird Tales as a direct and primary inspiration for D&D doesn't need to be explained?

Scantily clad women leads to sexualizing children?

QuoteCarcosa will be arriving in my mailbox any day now, so I haven't read it, but I have had some correspondence with the author (since I've got a similar project in the works). He's taking some prime source inspirations from D&D and highlighting their horror aspects.

This is how your argument runs: An authour claims inspiration from a few boob shots and some text about demons, therefore, pre-pubescent tentacle rape has been present since the original rules! Why is everyone being a prude?

StormBringer · October 14, 2008, 10:00:02 AM

Quote from: GrimGent;256302Hey, if you wish to suggest a reprint which replaces the term with "Innocent" or "Ingenue" or some such, go right ahead. But the Maid Types still have no bearing on the character's age: she can be as young or old as you want.

I think that is the critical part.

The Yann Waters · October 14, 2008, 10:05:19 AM

Quote from: StormBringer;256304I think that is the critical part.

And Rook Catchfly from Nobilis remains "eternally underage" which mostly poses a problem because she has a terrible crush on a man who never even realizes her feelings since in his eyes she's just a child. Playing teenagers or even younger characters than that isn't unprecedented, as said before.

Caesar Slaad · October 14, 2008, 10:12:53 AM

Quote from: StormBringer;256298Yes, because no one has thought to mention that pretending to sexualize an eleven year old is a problem. Only Puritans have a problem with that, because they are prudes trying to censor Art.

I was about to say. You don't need to be a puritan to find this a bit creepy.

But then, like other games that evoke a big brouhaha over being "oh so edgy", I expect this game is a flash in the pan. Threads like this only delay their inevitable demise.

Engine · October 14, 2008, 10:13:42 AM

So, do any of you spend this much time campaigning against actual child abuse against actual children? It just strikes me that the level of outrage and disgust conveyed here give the impression that some of you must be ultra-dedicated champions of anti-abuse activities, if the fantasy version sets you off in such a way. How much time this week did you spend keeping real-world children from being abused? As much, or more, than you spent complaining about a game in which it is possible for underage children to experience sexual activities?

RPGPundit · October 14, 2008, 10:25:58 AM

Quote from: Age of Fable;256264

Exactly!

RPGPundit

RPGPundit · October 14, 2008, 10:26:44 AM

Quote from: GrimGent;256269So? Short of writing in explicit rules for underage sex, there's no way to account mechanically for the possibility that people might play teenagers who might end up in a raunchy scene (with the consent of everyone involved, naturally enough, and player comfort taken into consideration). That could well prove problematic if the system actually revolved around trading sex for the Master's Favour; but as things stand and with everything else that the character might do affecting Favour as well, why would you ever include anything like that in a session if you don't specifically want to? There are only young kids making out in the game if you put them there. As always, it's all about what the players bring to the table.

"Likes 'em Young"?

RPGPundit

RPGPundit · October 14, 2008, 10:33:23 AM

That random Maid generator is very interesting. You can randomly generate a 10-year old Sexy Maid who has a transparent uniform, freckles, smokes, has the quality of "former prostitute", and has the "stress" that "when she's extremely upset, will drink alcohol or drugs until she can't remember anymore".

Yes, this sounds like a perfectly wholesome game.

The Yann Waters · October 14, 2008, 10:36:00 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit;256313"Likes 'em Young"?

...Which leaves it completely up to the players to decide what "young" means and never mentions any age range. 16, 18, 20? It's your choice.

(As for the generator, if you didn't switch off the "darker relationship" option, then that was your choice too.)

RPGPundit · October 14, 2008, 10:38:17 AM

Quote from: GrimGent;256289The "Lolita" type means nothing more than that the maid is childlike, naive and innocent in personality: it's not connected to actual age. Your character could be a sixty-old-year Lolita if you prefer, in other words. Also, under the basic core rules and without the use of special abilities, the Master hands out Favour as he wills. You can gain the same "XP" just by being really good at polishing the silverware.

That's bullshit and you know it. Yes, the "lolita" concept isn't specifically tied to age or indicating that someone is underage, but it is connected with being "childlike". Its childlike dress and attitude. So yes, you could be a sixty-year old lolita if you looked like you were were prepubescent and acted childlike.

And of course, its not just "childlike". Its "childlike and sexy".

RPGPundit

The Yann Waters · October 14, 2008, 10:40:51 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit;256316And of course, its not just "childlike". Its "childlike and sexy".

Not according to those Types. A "Lolita & Pure" character could be a perfectly wholesome nun.