I'd take someone's concerns about sex, violence, horror, whatever at the gaming table seriously if they didn't also use language depicting those who do as immature, maladjusted, mentally ill, racist, sexist, insert -ist or -phobic of choice, etc.

Whenever someone does, they make it abundantly clear that the psychological issue in question belongs to them and not the mutually consenting adults who don't share their views.

Quote from: CRKrueger;970657Bleah, fuck that noise. Do a Masks of Nyarlathotep Tips thread here or in Design, Development and Gameplay forum.
Why take useable gaming information to PM?

Good point. I was thinking mainly about avoiding jacking this thread, but I'll start a new one shortly.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;970648I hear you.

When Paizo mandated a honeytrap and rape quota for their bestiaries, I was disgusted. D&D has a long history of monsters which lure/rape/eat people (orcs which rape human women, lamias which pretend to be gorgeous women, etc), but Paizo took it to new heights. This trivializes the very real horror of rape and making it a generic monster modus operandi is just plain crass.

Other publishers have been so much worse. That shouldn't absolve Paizo, however.

It's been a thing in all of the monster books released during the D20 boom. Paizo has been largely just reprinting and presenting old, already published material in their Bestiaries.

If you are going to call them out. You have to call out their sources as well.

But personally. I don't like the idea or push to make monster books politically correct. They are monsters. They are supposed to be frightening and predatory.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;970703It's been a thing in all of the monster books released during the D20 boom. Paizo has been largely just reprinting and presenting old, already published material in their Bestiaries.

If you are going to call them out. You have to call out their sources as well.

I thought I did when I mentioned D&D has a history of similar stuff. Again, Paizo takes it to new heights. Several classic monsters from the Monster Manual and the Tome of Horrors that did not originally have rape as a background had it added by Paizo writers. Several wholly original monsters have rape as a modus operandi.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;970703But personally. I don't like the idea or push to make monster books politically correct. They are monsters. They are supposed to be frightening and predatory.

What do you mean by "politically correct"? Writers are the ones who insert gratuitous references to rape. How is them refraining from doing so a bad thing? Being eaten by a dragon is not something people worry about in reality. Rape is a very real problem that people worry about in first world countries.

We are playing games involving copious amounts of violence that some have criticized as crime fantasy. These games are marketed to both children and adults. How does adding copious references to rape, pedophilia, and so forth make the games more enjoyable than copious references to slaughter and cannibalism?

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;970716I thought I did when I mentioned D&D has a history of similar stuff. Again, Paizo takes it to new heights. Several classic monsters from the Monster Manual and the Tome of Horrors that did not originally have rape as a background had it added by Paizo writers. Several wholly original monsters have rape as a modus operandi.

What do you mean by "politically correct"? Writers are the ones who insert gratuitous references to rape. How is them refraining from doing so a bad thing? Being eaten by a dragon is not something people worry about in reality. Rape is a very real problem that people worry about in first world countries.

We are playing games involving copious amounts of violence that some have criticized as crime fantasy. These games are marketed to both children and adults. How does adding copious references to rape, pedophilia, and so forth make the games more enjoyable than copious references to slaughter and cannibalism?

I don't follow Paizo much, but are these real rape monsters, or is this like the orcs=genocide argument?

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;970716What do you mean by "politically correct"? Writers are the ones who insert gratuitous references to rape. How is them refraining from doing so a bad thing? Being eaten by a dragon is not something people worry about in reality. Rape is a very real problem that people worry about in first world countries.

We are playing games involving copious amounts of violence that some have criticized as crime fantasy. These games are marketed to both children and adults. How does adding copious references to rape, pedophilia, and so forth make the games more enjoyable than copious references to slaughter and cannibalism?

Monsters by themselves are characatures of people's fears. Fear has just as much diversity as the rest of life does. Fear is not comfortable by it's very definition. It's triggery to begin with. That is pretty much the whole point of the ideas being coalesced in the form of a monster. Monsters are people's fears incarnate.

Watering them down to be inoffensive sort of kills the whole point of their existence to begin with. That is what I meant by 'being politically correct'.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;970717I don't follow Paizo much, but are these real rape monsters, or is this like the orcs=genocide argument?

This is the thread on Paizo forums which alerted me to the issue. Earlier threads about rape were locked, but that one has a detailed breakdown of relevant monsters.

A bogleech article explains how the classic adherer was turned into a rape monster by Paizo.

The orc genocide argument is an artifact of the game requiring guilt-free mass slaughter rather than offering non-violent solutions. Critics are treating the fantasy world as if it had verisimilitude when it is a theme park with no depth. Orcs are dolls placed by the dungeon master for the sole purpose of being slaughtered and providing loot, not fictional people with fictional families.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;970717I don't follow Paizo much, but are these real rape monsters, or is this like the orcs=genocide argument?

This is the thread on Paizo forums which alerted me to the issue. Earlier threads about rape were locked, but that one has a detailed breakdown of relevant monsters.

A bogleech article explains how the classic adherer was turned into a rape monster by Paizo.

The orc genocide argument is an artifact of the game requiring guilt-free mass slaughter rather than offering non-violent solutions. Critics are treating the fantasy world as if it had verisimilitude when it is a theme park with no depth. Orcs are dolls placed by the dungeon master for the sole purpose of being slaughtered and providing loot, not fictional people with fictional families.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;970722Monsters by themselves are characatures of people's fears. Fear has just as much diversity as the rest of life does. Fear is not comfortable by it's very definition. It's triggery to begin with. That is pretty much the whole point of the ideas being coalesced in the form of a monster. Monsters are people's fears incarnate.

Watering them down to be inoffensive sort of kills the whole point of their existence to begin with. That is what I meant by 'being politically correct'.

This is a game, not a literary criticism course. Rape does not belong at a gaming table.

"Watering them down"? The writers inserted rape monsters to be edgy without putting any critical thought into the design.

It's like I just want to say - "Hey, you know *none* of this is real right?"

But then if i say that, it sounds condescending. As if I'm implying that you as the reader of these words are too stupid to understand that fairy-elf-games aren't real. It also implies that you are too ignorant to have any ability to discern reality from non-reality, or prioritize ethical conundrums presented to you in a real or virtual manner. It also implies that you have no capacity to enact the will to actively *choose* to not engage with things that disturb you. All of which is a red-flag that you have far more problems than the content of my words, and the intent on playing a game that both challenges normal people with healthy imaginations that do have these aforementioned capacities which clearly you do not is beyond your ability. So maybe don't do that?

But you know... WHO want's to say that?

Dang... there it is.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;970727Rape does not belong at a gaming table.

But rampant slaughter is just fine? Good wholesome family fun?

I've seen games collapse because of rape monsters getting rapey in games... it's best to warn players up front... but I'm not bothered by it myself, despite having friends and family who have suffered the real thing. Am I callous or can I just separate fact from fiction while some people appaently can't?
Also, I don't give any fucks for the, 'but what about the CHILDREN?!!!' bullshit. YOU spawned them, protecting them from the naughty bits is YOUR obsession... don't hamstring my entertainment because of your prudery.

The person running this website is a racist who publicly advocates genocidal practices.

I am deleting my content.

I recommend you do the same.

Quote from: tenbones;970734It's like I just want to say - "Hey, you know *none* of this is real right?"

But then if i say that, it sounds condescending. As if I'm implying that you as the reader of these words are too stupid to understand that fairy-elf-games aren't real. It also implies that you are too ignorant to have any ability to discern reality from non-reality, or prioritize ethical conundrums presented to you in a real or virtual manner. It also implies that you have no capacity to enact the will to actively *choose* to not engage with things that disturb you. All of which is a red-flag that you have far more problems than the content of my words, and the intent on playing a game that both challenges normal people with healthy imaginations that do have these aforementioned capacities which clearly you do not is beyond your ability. So maybe don't do that?

But you know... WHO want's to say that?

Dang... there it is.

I think a bigger problem are the people who can distinguish reality from fantasy taking the fantasy too seriously. At one extreme we have people decrying the game as offensive because it revolves around pointless, bloodless, guiltless fantasy violence. At the other extreme we have people defending their inalienable right to insert gratuitous sexual violence into a game meant to be enjoyed by a group of people.

Quote from: Simlasa;970741But rampant slaughter is just fine? Good wholesome family fun?

The difference between sexual and non-sexual violence is that the former is pervasive in first world countries, whereas the latter is not. Depicting sexual violence for the purpose of shock value and high ratings is offensive and crass.

Quote from: Simlasa;970741I've seen games collapse because of rape monsters getting rapey in games... it's best to warn players up front... but I'm not bothered by it myself, despite having friends and family who have suffered the real thing. Am I callous or can I just separate fact from fiction while some people appaently can't?
Also, I don't give any fucks for the, 'but what about the CHILDREN?!!!' bullshit. YOU spawned them, protecting them from the naughty bits is YOUR obsession... don't hamstring my entertainment because of your prudery.

How often have you actually been entertained by detailed sexual violence happening on-screen as opposed to using vague mentions that it happened off-screen as a lazy excuse to kill the rapist? "We must kill these savage humanoids/cute monster girls/whatever because they are rapists (as opposed to murderers/cannibals/thieves/whatever)!"

Carefully avoiding explicit mentions of sexual violence when writing monster descriptions does not prevent game masters from inserting mentions of sexual violence when running adventures. Anything capable of sexual intercourse is capable of rape. You do not need to write in books that a particular monster commits sexual violence as a profession, reproduces by literally raping its victims, or whatever.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;970745Cite, please.

That was hyperbole.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;970746The difference between sexual and non-sexual violence is that the former is pervasive in first world countries, whereas the latter is not. Depicting sexual violence for the purpose of shock value and high ratings is offensive and crass.

What fantasy land do you live in? I hear about murders and attempted murders every day on the news. My gun fondling friends practically jizz themselves over fantasies of using their weapons to protect someone. We drive huge hunks of metal at high speeds and just about any time I leave the house I see one or two or more of them twisted up on the road. I know people who have been raped but I know even more who have been beaten and mentally abused.
The world around me is pretty violent. Why should rape get special dispensation? Is it just the 'sex' angle that gets people feeling all squicky? It's OK if the Deep Ones beat my wife, just don't dare touch her junk?

QuoteHow often have you actually been entertained by detailed sexual violence happening on-screen as opposed to using vague mentions that it happened off-screen as a lazy excuse to kill the rapist?

I'm generally not entertained by any sort of violence just for the sake of violence. Most modern action movies... ala John Wick... put me off. The voluminous killings seem to carry no weight or consequence. The average horror movie has far fewer deaths but each one likely to be presented as more significant than the hordes of anonymous drones cut down by the Bonds and Bournes and Jason Statham.
I'm fine with subtle horror as in The Haunting (still my favorite horror movie). But sometimes the story is served by having the nasty bits on stage on stage. The rape scene in Irreversible felt necessary but I didn't find myself at a loss for not witnessing Stanley rape Blanche in Streetcar Named Desire.

I'd rather have the writer/director/gaming group decide what 'belongs'... vs. some guy making blanket statements because he is afraid his kid might see some nudity or hear a swear word.

Quote from: Simlasa;970756What fantasy land do you live in? I hear about murders and attempted murders every day on the news. My gun fondling friends practically jizz themselves over fantasies of using their weapons to protect someone. We drive huge hunks of metal at high speeds and just about any time I leave the house I see one or two or more of them twisted up on the road. I know people who have been raped but I know even more who have been beaten and mentally abused.
The world around me is pretty violent. Why should rape get special dispensation? Is it just the 'sex' angle that gets people feeling all squicky? It's OK if the Deep Ones beat my wife, just don't dare touch her junk?

It may seem impossible, but crime in the first world is at an all time low.

The "deep ones are rapists" meme is only circumstantially supported by the text of Shadow over Innsmouth. Implied rape was removed in the final draft. Marsh sold his indoctrined sons into marriage to millenia old fish women. Deep ones were metaphors for black people. "The Litany of Earth" deconstructs Lovecraft's racism by portraying deep ones as an unjustly persecuted minority.

RPGs typically employ rape for shock value, stuff victims in refrigerators, and portray rape itself in an unrealistic manner. If an ogre tried to rape a human, said human would be torn in half. Given that contraceptives existed in medieval times, most babies died before their first year, and unwanted babies (like the disabled and rape babies) were typically killed at birth, half-orcs should never exist in human communities. Historically rape victims were evenly split along gender lines, but this is never mentioned in media. Most ancient societies brutally executed rapists and occasionally rape victims too.

QuoteI'm generally not entertained by any sort of violence just for the sake of violence. Most modern action movies... ala John Wick... put me off. The voluminous killings seem to carry no weight or consequence. The average horror movie has far fewer deaths but each one likely to be presented as more significant than the hordes of anonymous drones cut down by the Bonds and Bournes and Jason Statham.
I'm fine with subtle horror as in The Haunting (still my favorite horror movie). But sometimes the story is served by having the nasty bits on stage on stage. The rape scene in Irreversible felt necessary but I didn't find myself at a loss for not witnessing Stanley rape Blanche in Streetcar Named Desire.

I'd rather have the writer/director/gaming group decide what 'belongs'... vs. some guy making blanket statements because he is afraid his kid might see some nudity or hear a swear word.

I gloss over combat rather than painstakingly describing the gore. Don't most people?

I don't care about protecting kids. We got the Raping Storm and the rapist cat girls in Cthulhutech, the child rape contests in Exalted: The Infernals, and everything in FATAL. I have already seen dozens of literal, unironic rape tournaments in the roleplaying market. I am sick of it and never want to hear about it ever again. I especially don't like having it shoehorned into the non-pornographic media I consume with friends and family. At least have the decency to include an "adults only" warning label when you feel like being an edge-lord who thinks casually mentioning rape is fashionable.

All I want to do is commit bloodless, guiltless massacres of soulless puppets the DM churns out by the truckload. I don't want to worry about ethnic cleansing or rape tournaments. Is that too much to ask?

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;970799I gloss over combat rather than painstakingly describing the gore. Don't most people?

So violence in any given media is OK as long as you gloss over and sanitise the gory bits, and ensure there is no visceral impact on the audience?