Quote from: Omega on February 24, 2024, 02:25:35 AM

Quote from: honeydipperdavid on February 22, 2024, 11:55:17 PMHe also hired that idiot harpy who went after him non-stop. 

Gygax did not hire Loraine. The Blumes did and gave her shares in the company so they could oust Gygax. Loraine eventually booted them as Kevin Blume was the root of many of TSR's financial troubles.

Gygax bought Lorraine in and hired her.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorraine_Williams

Quote from: Omega on February 24, 2024, 02:33:11 AM

Quote from: Grognard GM on February 24, 2024, 12:29:44 AM

Quote from: Angus MacDeth on February 20, 2024, 06:28:26 PM
Of course Wizards of the Coast can't resist reminding their "fans" that all D&D books published before 2014 are "problematic." They've been doing it in the disclaimer to their "legacy content" on DriveThruRPG for years, while continuing to sell those products. This is no different.

The whole thing reminds me of Fate of Cthulhu from Evil Hat, which begins with a multi-page screed condemning H.P. Lovecraft (and anyone who enjoys his work) as an unrepentant racist and admonishing the reader against actually enjoying the stories without which the game they're peddling WOULD NOT EXIST.

Apparently, it's okay to profit off the imagination and talent of people you claim are abhorrent, as long as you condemn them loudly enough.

They're also one of those companies that want to use the Pulp setting, but make the gumshoes and adventurers women, because verisimilitude or respect for the genre loses to 2024 politics.

There were female pulp heroes way back.

Thing is modern WotC can not even imagine things like that and so instead they will find something with a guy in it and defile it.

Please don't be obtuse.

They were plucky secretaries, hot femme fatales, and the occasional jungle gal in a bikini. They weren't burly lesbian engineers, female PI's punching gangsters out, and Indiana-Jones-but-with-tits characters.

The D&D/Modern Audience effect has every game system having female Sheriffs, Female Special Forces, and female Knights. Hell even in setting where there ARE rarish females in those professions, why use outliers for the pregen sheet art and blurbs if not for ideology? They're supposed to be representative, not exceptions.

Another common Pulp trope was the female reporter, but, as you said, such characters didn't duke it out with a villain, but instead used their wits to escape dangerous situations. Modern writers want women to be brawny and dumb. The villains have to be even greater idiots, so the women can win.

It doesn't bother me when a game presents female heroes. What is irritating is when an established personality is replaced with Folgers crystals as if had always been that way. Leftists do not have any talent or ability to create brand new culturally relevant characters that resonate with mainstream society so they endlessly try to re-define established beloved characters.Hollywood is so overflowing with leftist shits that all they can do anymore is endless sequels and remakes based on the original work done by someone with creativity. 

Quote from: jhkim on February 24, 2024, 01:55:20 AM
Trying to catch up here some. Does anyone have a timestamp or transcript about the attack from WotC that's being referred to in this thread? Pundit doesn't give a link with his video. I think the link below is the video in question, but it's forty minutes and I haven't watched it yet.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhxVlgehNpc

  It's at the 35-minute mark.

  On a note related to another part of this thread, did anyone else see that Evil Hat got the Tomb Raider license? I have only a passing familiarity with the franchise, but that seems like something of a mismatch of company and property ...

Quote from: Grognard GM on February 24, 2024, 03:31:28 AM

Quote from: Omega on February 24, 2024, 02:33:11 AM

Quote from: Grognard GM on February 24, 2024, 12:29:44 AM

Quote from: Angus MacDeth on February 20, 2024, 06:28:26 PM
Of course Wizards of the Coast can't resist reminding their "fans" that all D&D books published before 2014 are "problematic." They've been doing it in the disclaimer to their "legacy content" on DriveThruRPG for years, while continuing to sell those products. This is no different.

The whole thing reminds me of Fate of Cthulhu from Evil Hat, which begins with a multi-page screed condemning H.P. Lovecraft (and anyone who enjoys his work) as an unrepentant racist and admonishing the reader against actually enjoying the stories without which the game they're peddling WOULD NOT EXIST.

Apparently, it's okay to profit off the imagination and talent of people you claim are abhorrent, as long as you condemn them loudly enough.

They're also one of those companies that want to use the Pulp setting, but make the gumshoes and adventurers women, because verisimilitude or respect for the genre loses to 2024 politics.

There were female pulp heroes way back.

Thing is modern WotC can not even imagine things like that and so instead they will find something with a guy in it and defile it.

Please don't be obtuse.

They were plucky secretaries, hot femme fatales, and the occasional jungle gal in a bikini. They weren't burly lesbian engineers, female PI's punching gangsters out, and Indiana-Jones-but-with-tits characters.

The D&D/Modern Audience effect has every game system having female Sheriffs, Female Special Forces, and female Knights. Hell even in setting where there ARE rarish females in those professions, why use outliers for the pregen sheet art and blurbs if not for ideology? They're supposed to be representative, not exceptions.

1936 Domino Lady
1937 Sheena
1944ish Señorita Scorpion
1937 Gerry Carlyle, Interplanetary Huntress

There's a few more, not many it's true and never as popular as the male heroes but they existed beyond the damsel in distress, secretary or femme fatale tropes.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer on February 24, 2024, 09:20:24 AM

Quote from: jhkim on February 24, 2024, 01:55:20 AM
Trying to catch up here some. Does anyone have a timestamp or transcript about the attack from WotC that's being referred to in this thread? Pundit doesn't give a link with his video. I think the link below is the video in question, but it's forty minutes and I haven't watched it yet.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhxVlgehNpc

It's at the 35-minute mark.

Thanks, Armchair Gamer. In case anyone is like me and doesn't like sitting through long videos, here's a transcript of that section:

QuoteI have a a lot of fond memories of these early years of the game. It felt like I was the right person to be making this. It's important that this is a historical document. It was a different time.

We've had an inclusivity review of all these materials. Let's take a step back here and clarify. There are materials in original Dungeons and Dragons that would never pass yeah our inclusivity reviews today. Some of it you can understand like... these are a bunch of war gamers and they're using armies from history. So when they create a warrior class for Dungeons and Dragons they call it the fighting man, because that's what they were used to. They were all men... they were all white dudes from Lake Geneva and the Twin Cities.

That's just the tip of the iceberg. A lot of material in this book -- and I won't go over all of it -- but it would not pass our inclusivity reviews today. We couldn't change it... it's history. What we can do is acknowledge it and show how far we've come because that's not D&D anymore. D&D gets more diverse and has a larger audience every day. The more diverse the game becomes, the more people of different genders and ethnic backgrounds and and faiths see themselves in the game. Then they go make their own versions of the game and more players start to see themselves represented in the game. The more diverse the creators get, the more diverse the players become. That's the way it should be. So this book is very interesting because I think it really highlights how far the audience has come.

How the game has changed over the 50 years -- like we were talking about earlier. How it's played, who plays it, and how it's created... In many ways the way that it's created is the part that changed the least because a huge driver in early DND was fan creations. That's still true today still true today. I find it very interesting and and very exciting to see how the game has grown, how the audience has grown, how we as creators as designers have learned from the past. Both what to do and what not to do.

I think this book has a lot to teach us, but it's also just fun to see. There is a a kind of grognard collector's desire for these materials, but also I honestly believe -- and you know you can blame my ears in the classroom for this but -- I honestly believe that people just want to know more about this thing that they love. Most of our players have never played any addition of D&D other than fifth. This is the only version of D&D they've ever known. Where did this cool game come from how was it made? What's the story? I got your story right here.

What stands out to me is that the one example is something that Gygax himself turned around on. Yes, original D&D had "Fighting Man" -- and there was Len Lakofka's embarrassing article on adding women to D&D in The Dragon #3 (1976). But by 1978, Gygax had changed "Fighting Man" to gender-neutral "Fighter" and wrote the Player's Handbook using "he or she" throughout, as well as text references like "Patriarch or Matriarch" for an 8th level cleric.

People often forget that Little Orphan Annie had a mean right hook in the comic strips.

Quote from: honeydipperdavid on February 22, 2024, 12:14:33 AM


I think the better part of corporate loyalty is millenials wearing Nikes with their airpods on protesting for a $30/hr minimum wage.  While just about everything they are wearing is made by child labor who would be lucky to make $30/mo.  They could fix that if they fought against globalization and outsourcing and fought to have American factories going again.  But such is clownworld.

This right here. 

Stupid people are their own worst enemies.

Quote from: jhkim on February 24, 2024, 12:47:38 PM
What stands out to me is that the one example is something that Gygax himself turned around on. Yes, original D&D had "Fighting Man" -- and there was Len Lakofka's embarrassing article on adding women to D&D in The Dragon #3 (1976). But by 1978, Gygax had changed "Fighting Man" to gender-neutral "Fighter" and wrote the Player's Handbook using "he or she" throughout, as well as text references like "Patriarch or Matriarch" for an 8th level cleric.

Vader: If only you knew the power of the OSR. Obi-Woke never told you the truth about Gygax, did he?

Luke: He told me enough. He told me has was a sexist and a racist!

Vader: No. Gygax changed "fighting man" to "fighter" and used "he or she" in the books.

Luke: [shocked] No. No. That's not true! That's impossible!

Vader: Search your feelings. You know it to be true.

Luke: NOOOO! All of my friends who have never read those books TOLD me Gygax was a Nazi! He must be!

Vader: Luke, you can destroy the Wizard of the Woke. He has foreseen this. It is your destiny. Join the OSR, and together, we can gatekeep the hobby!

[Luke looks down the shaft and then back at Vader]

Vader: Come with me. It is the only way.

[Luke lets go of the projection and falls into the shaft]

Luke: REEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

Quote from: Armchair Gamer on February 24, 2024, 09:20:24 AM
...

  It's at the 35-minute mark.

  On a note related to another part of this thread, did anyone else see that Evil Hat got the Tomb Raider license? I have only a passing familiarity with the franchise, but that seems like something of a mismatch of company and property ...

Not really.

Crystal Dynamics is internally woke as fuck. They've been slowly "de-sexualizing" Lara Croft ever since they gained control of the IP.

Going to Evil Hat for the RPG is just par for the course at this point.

Quote from: jhkim on February 24, 2024, 12:47:38 PM
What stands out to me is that the one example is something that Gygax himself turned around on. Yes, original D&D had "Fighting Man" -- and there was Len Lakofka's embarrassing article on adding women to D&D in The Dragon #3 (1976). But by 1978, Gygax had changed "Fighting Man" to gender-neutral "Fighter" and wrote the Player's Handbook using "he or she" throughout, as well as text references like "Patriarch or Matriarch" for an 8th level cleric.

Yeah but Gary was still awfully White and heterosexual.

The MONSTER!!!

Quote from: Aglondir on February 26, 2024, 07:03:01 PM[Luke lets go of the projection and falls into the shaft]

Luke: REEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

Luke: "I may appear to be descending a slippery slope, but let me assure you that it's just a conspiracy theory..."

Quote from: Jaeger on February 26, 2024, 07:44:07 PM
Not really.

Crystal Dynamics is internally woke as fuck. They've been slowly "de-sexualizing" Lara Croft ever since they gained control of the IP.

Going to Evil Hat for the RPG is just par for the course at this point.

   OK, that makes a lot more sense. Like I said, I only have a passing familiarity with the property, and even then, I'd noticed some of the 'evolution' of the character, so I should have considered it was part of a general trend.