I dont care really if people disagree with me I only wish they'd actually voice their own real well thought out and hopefully open minded opinions rather than just jumping on a band waggon.
I can supply you with my own very honest opinions, and I have always been referred to as open-minded. Also, I have never played F.A.T.A.L., so I have no comparisons that I can make to it.
Age Range of D&D: OD&D and 1E AD&D were written for players 12 and up. 2E AD&D was made for players age 10 and up. I don't know about 3E/3.5...I skipped those. 4E was, I believe made for ages 12 and up. The D&D game has always been engineered with the idea that young, preteen children will pick it up and play it. OD&D and 1E were rife with nudity, so I don't know how they came to the "12 and up" conclusion, but whatever. If it were a movie instead of a game, it would've needed an R-rating instead of the G-rating it was given.
The demons, devils, and angry mothers era: I was playing D&D only briefly when the D&D = Satanism craze erupted in my area. I was spoken to by preachers of various faiths. I had my books confiscated at school as they were considered "occult material". My principal suggested to my parents that I be psychologically evaluated for other "deviant" behaviors. Fortunately my parents were very cool about it and ignored the idiots. Their mindset was, "When he and his friends are playing D&D, they're in the den. They're not out roaming the streets. They're not out getting into God-knows-what. They're here, at home. We know where they are and what they're doing. We'll take that over the alternative any day." Still and all, the angry-mothers era was a very uncomfortable time to be associated with D&D. For some odd reason, we could play d6 Star Wars, RIFTS, and all of the other RPGs without anyone even batting an eye...but if they found out you played D&D, you were not trusted. Especially where I grew up (in the heart of the bible-belt), it was better to not even mention that you knew anything about D&D to avoid scorn.
Why I don't think overt sexuality and other "mature" themes should be pushed in D&D: First and foremost, I don't want my kids having to go through what I went through. One is 17 and one is 8, and both of them play D&D. The oldest has been playing for 8 years now. No one cares anymore that they play D&D. Teachers don't care. Preachers don't care. Other parents don't care. I'd like to keep it that way. If my oldest leaves his DMG open on a desk and someone walks by and sees "how to kill a demon", they wouldn't care. However, if they walk by and see "how an ogre raping a human can result in the infant tearing its way out of the womb and killing the mother", then they very likely WILL care. Since the front of the book will probably say "for ages 12 and up", there will be many questions raised. In this uber-delicate day and age of everyone getting offended by the slightest things, don't fool yourself into thinking that the angry-mothers era wouldn't or couldn't return with a vengeance. It most certainly could and would, if the right elements were there.
An acceptable comprimise: Leave the super-overt material out of the core books. The DMG and PHB are about the rules needed to play the game, not necessarily supplemental rules for specific play-styles. If they (and by "they", I mean WotC or third-party publishers) want to publish super-mature-related material, they can do so via splats. Those who want it can by it and enjoy it. Those who don't won't ever have to look at it. Parents buying books for their kids won't have to worry about them being judged because the DMG mentions "demonic rape and incest for fun and profit", because the mature books would be plainly labeled as such. I see this as a win-win for everyone involved. I'm not opposed to the inclusion of mature/adult-rated material at all, but I don't want it front and center in the core books.
Either way, DnD has been, and should be, just as much Adventure Time as it is Game of Thrones, and should certainly allow for Sherlock.
I personally think that people mistake what it is about Game of Thrones that makes it so intriguing. It's not the blood or rampant sex or violence (those are significant factors, but lots of shows have all of that). What makes it so intriguing is that once you know enough about a Song of Ice and Fire, you understand that the writer truly hasn't pulled punches, and you truly can't expect traditional narrative queues to protect characters or kill them. It's so intriguing because it's a story that is brutally fair to all parties. And it would be as powerful a story even if there wasn't nearly as much sex and violence, so long as it continued to be brutally fair. Sex and violence are merely very common factors in politics of human society. Adventure Time actually has a bit of this brutal fairness too.
And as for the main topic, branding D&D as "evil" is really dumb. Kids become interested in D&D because it offers them a cooperative storytelling experience. They'll feel like they have freedom to do all kinds of stuff you either aren't supposed to do or can't do in regular life. It's a joy. Framing that as something that's popular because it's wrong is unfair to the medium, and it's unfair to the kids. We shouldn't be teaching people that spending a night imagining a shared story with your friends is inherently wrong. It's one of humanity's oldest skills.
Exactly. Game of Thrones is dark fantasty taken just beyond what I would call realistic, to the point of "All the people are ****ty. No. Seriously. All of them. ", but not so far that it becomes a joke, but the point of the story isn't just to do that for it's own sake. The story is interesting because of the characters, and their struggles, and the sure knowledge that by the last book/season, every single character you've loved in the show/books could be dead, broken or become a villain.
That's not what I want DnD to only be, but I'm glad that it's something DnD can be.
Adventure Time is the more "magic all over, the heroes are really cool and pretty much no chance of long term shifts to evil, or death, etc." sort of fantasy. Bad things happen to every character, but you always know that Fin and Jake are going to make it out in pretty much one piece. That's another thing that DnD has to be capable of, in order to remain DnD. In most DnD campaigns with that sort of feel, there's still not that same level of plot armor, of course.
You pretty much have to play 4e on easy mode (optimized parties never fighting above level monsters) to get that much plot armor. 4e played right (above level encounters being fairly common, but not super high) has just enough chance of death that it doesn't make sense to frontal charge the gigantic angry dragon with no strategy, but it's reasonable to devise a strategy, and use tactics and teamwork to take down that very challenging threat, for the good of...whatever thing you care about the good of.
And that's also something DnD has to be capable of.
Nevermind that 4e was capable of all of those, and did them each quite well...
More sex and gender equality and racial equality shouldn't even be an argument--it should simply be an assumption for any RPG that wants to stay relevant in the 21st century.
I dont care really if people disagree with me I only wish they'd actually voice their own real well thought out and hopefully open minded opinions rather than just jumping on a band waggon.
I can supply you with my own very honest opinions, and I have always been referred to as open-minded. Also, I have never played F.A.T.A.L., so I have no comparisons that I can make to it.
Age Range of D&D: OD&D and 1E AD&D were written for players 12 and up. 2E AD&D was made for players age 10 and up. I don't know about 3E/3.5...I skipped those. 4E was, I believe made for ages 12 and up. The D&D game has always been engineered with the idea that young, preteen children will pick it up and play it. OD&D and 1E were rife with nudity, so I don't know how they came to the "12 and up" conclusion, but whatever. If it were a movie instead of a game, it would've needed an R-rating instead of the G-rating it was given.
The demons, devils, and angry mothers era: I was playing D&D only briefly when the D&D = Satanism craze erupted in my area. I was spoken to by preachers of various faiths. I had my books confiscated at school as they were considered "occult material". My principal suggested to my parents that I be psychologically evaluated for other "deviant" behaviors. Fortunately my parents were very cool about it and ignored the idiots. Their mindset was, "When he and his friends are playing D&D, they're in the den. They're not out roaming the streets. They're not out getting into God-knows-what. They're here, at home. We know where they are and what they're doing. We'll take that over the alternative any day." Still and all, the angry-mothers era was a very uncomfortable time to be associated with D&D. For some odd reason, we could play d6 Star Wars, RIFTS, and all of the other RPGs without anyone even batting an eye...but if they found out you played D&D, you were not trusted. Especially where I grew up (in the heart of the bible-belt), it was better to not even mention that you knew anything about D&D to avoid scorn.
Why I don't think overt sexuality and other "mature" themes should be pushed in D&D: First and foremost, I don't want my kids having to go through what I went through. One is 17 and one is 8, and both of them play D&D. The oldest has been playing for 8 years now. No one cares anymore that they play D&D. Teachers don't care. Preachers don't care. Other parents don't care. I'd like to keep it that way. If my oldest leaves his DMG open on a desk and someone walks by and sees "how to kill a demon", they wouldn't care. However, if they walk by and see "how an ogre raping a human can result in the infant tearing its way out of the womb and killing the mother", then they very likely WILL care. Since the front of the book will probably say "for ages 12 and up", there will be many questions raised. In this uber-delicate day and age of everyone getting offended by the slightest things, don't fool yourself into thinking that the angry-mothers era wouldn't or couldn't return with a vengeance. It most certainly could and would, if the right elements were there.
An acceptable comprimise: Leave the super-overt material out of the core books. The DMG and PHB are about the rules needed to play the game, not necessarily supplemental rules for specific play-styles. If they (and by "they", I mean WotC or third-party publishers) want to publish super-mature-related material, they can do so via splats. Those who want it can by it and enjoy it. Those who don't won't ever have to look at it. Parents buying books for their kids won't have to worry about them being judged because the DMG mentions "demonic rape and incest for fun and profit", because the mature books would be plainly labeled as such. I see this as a win-win for everyone involved. I'm not opposed to the inclusion of mature/adult-rated material at all, but I don't want it front and center in the core books.
This entire discussion suffers from the idea that adding gore and porn somehow add depth to the game, or to anything for that matter. Happily, the market has already spoken on this. I don't know how many products D&D publishers have actually had to publicly apologize for, but it's not many. There will be no torture porn rules for the new edition. Dead topic.
I have no intention to offend, but you are grossly oversimplifying. Mature themes doesn't mean gore and porn any more than evil automatically means chaotic stupid. Also, the existence of mature themes in no way dictates that they must be played out in graphic detail (though some will likely want to). For example, an evil PC torturing an enemy for information doesn't need to include graphic descriptions of the actual acts of torture. The DM and group can easily be comfortable with cutting away from the action where menacing words and actions become actual torture.
so why even play a fighter if you can play the paladin the exact same way behaviorally and get added power to boot. "Paladin" is about accepting better game-enhancing mechanics at the price of more rigid in game behavior.
Really? So it goes something like this?
Fighter: "I want to be a paladin." NPC: "Really?" Fighter: "Yes." NPC: "Very well." Starts reading from a holy book while still in-character "Do you accept having to choose and stick to the lawful good alignment, eventhough neither of us actually knows that it exists or what it is?" Fighter: "I do." NPC: "Do you reject good game balance because you accidentally rolled a high Charisma?" Fighter: "What?" NPC: "I don't know what it means either." Fighter: "Oh. Umm, ok I do." NPC: "In the name of all that is metagamey and broken, accept these better game enhancing mechanics." Fighter: "These what?" NPC: "Just get out there and try to fulfill a million different people's notion of good while not violating and part of any of them."
So the system is designed such that every single hit needs to be described to avoid confusion? Here's a scenario. The players are nudists, everybody in the world are nudists, it's not weird, it's totally normal in this land. They are naked and they fight drakes taking damage throughout, but healing up with surges. Later they meet the guy who raised the drakes.
Part 1: I didn't describe any of the hits. What does he see?
Part 2: Lets say I described the drakes as biting the players, yet they healed up. What does he see?
you guys got any thoughts on this? will there be another "book of vile darkness" or have we seen the end of adult themed D&D books?
I certainly hope so. The so-called 'mature/adult' books were invariably the most immature, childish, rancid things I'd ever encountered.
If you want to play F.A.T.A.L., go play F.A.T.A.L.
Actually, the BoEF was pretty good until it got into applying mechanics to sex. It would have been much better if those pages had been replaced with advice about how to incorporate romance (and I do mean romance, not just the down-and-dirty) into adventures/campaigns.
so why even play a fighter if you can play the paladin the exact same way behaviorally and get added power to boot. "Paladin" is about accepting better game-enhancing mechanics at the price of more rigid in game behavior.
Really? So it goes something like this?
Fighter: "I want to be a paladin." NPC: "Really?" Fighter: "Yes." NPC: "Very well." Starts reading from a holy book while still in-character "Do you accept having to choose and stick to the lawful good alignment, eventhough neither of us actually knows that it exists or what it is?" Fighter: "I do." NPC: "Do you reject good game balance because you accidentally rolled a high Charisma?" Fighter: "What?" NPC: "I don't know what it means either." Fighter: "Oh. Umm, ok I do." NPC: "In the name of all that is metagamey and broken, accept these better game enhancing mechanics." Fighter: "These what?" NPC: "Just get out there and try to fulfill a million different people's notion of good while not violating and part of any of them."
So the system is designed such that every single hit needs to be described to avoid confusion? Here's a scenario. The players are nudists, everybody in the world are nudists, it's not weird, it's totally normal in this land. They are naked and they fight drakes taking damage throughout, but healing up with surges. Later they meet the guy who raised the drakes.
Part 1: I didn't describe any of the hits. What does he see?
Part 2: Lets say I described the drakes as biting the players, yet they healed up. What does he see?
".... the existence of mature themes in no way dictates that they must be played out in graphic detail (though some will likely want to). For example,an evil PC torturing an enemy for information doesn't need to include graphic descriptions of the actual acts of torture. The DM and group can easily be comfortable with cutting away from the action...."
If it's going to be that vague then it doesn't need to be covered in official game materials at all. Good.
you guys got any thoughts on this? will there be another "book of vile darkness" or have we seen the end of adult themed D&D books?
I certainly hope so. The so-called 'mature/adult' books were invariably the most immature, childish, rancid things I'd ever encountered.
If you want to play F.A.T.A.L., go play F.A.T.A.L.
Actually, the BoEF was pretty good until it got into applying mechanics to sex. It would have been much better if those pages had been replaced with advice about how to incorporate romance (and I do mean romance, not just the down-and-dirty) into adventures/campaigns.
Now THAT's something I'd like to see. Romance is a quintessential part of heroic fantasy, but as a DM I've never had any idea how to deal with in it a campaign.
you guys got any thoughts on this? will there be another "book of vile darkness" or have we seen the end of adult themed D&D books?
I certainly hope so. The so-called 'mature/adult' books were invariably the most immature, childish, rancid things I'd ever encountered.
If you want to play F.A.T.A.L., go play F.A.T.A.L.
Actually, the BoEF was pretty good until it got into applying mechanics to sex. It would have been much better if those pages had been replaced with advice about how to incorporate romance (and I do mean romance, not just the down-and-dirty) into adventures/campaigns.
Now THAT's something I'd like to see. Romance is a quintessential part of heroic fantasy, but as a DM I've never had any idea how to deal with in it a campaign.
I'd want that as well, but romance is hardly "Evil" as Baalbamoth wants. It seems like what he wants, based on his description of how he got into D&D, what he wants out of D&D isn't a more "mature" game, but a game that has controversy. At least the way I'm reading into his posts, D&D seemed to be his way of rebelling against his ultra-strict, ultra-traditional Mormon household, and it's that sense of rebellion that he wants back.
Coming from someone a bit younger, who only barely had to deal with the "D&D is Satanic" mindset, and even then, it was more of a legacy than a contemporary thing, what I want out of D&D is a game that is more grown up. By now, D&D shouldn't be the rebelling teen. It should be grown up enough to recognize that more "mature" concepts can be added without requiring rules for STDs or stuff like that, and, even more than that, that these "mature" concepts are best handled, outside any codified rules. They require significant care, in their implementation, that is best handled by a DM and not by standardized rules.
I am currently raising funds to run for President in 2016. Too many administrations have overlooked the international menace, that is Carmen Sandiego. I shall devote any and all necessary military resources to bring her to justice.
I dont care really if people disagree with me I only wish they'd actually voice their own real well thought out and hopefully open minded opinions rather than just jumping on a band waggon.
I can supply you with my own very honest opinions, and I have always been referred to as open-minded. Also, I have never played F.A.T.A.L., so I have no comparisons that I can make to it.
Age Range of D&D: OD&D and 1E AD&D were written for players 12 and up. 2E AD&D was made for players age 10 and up. I don't know about 3E/3.5...I skipped those. 4E was, I believe made for ages 12 and up. The D&D game has always been engineered with the idea that young, preteen children will pick it up and play it. OD&D and 1E were rife with nudity, so I don't know how they came to the "12 and up" conclusion, but whatever. If it were a movie instead of a game, it would've needed an R-rating instead of the G-rating it was given.
The demons, devils, and angry mothers era: I was playing D&D only briefly when the D&D = Satanism craze erupted in my area. I was spoken to by preachers of various faiths. I had my books confiscated at school as they were considered "occult material". My principal suggested to my parents that I be psychologically evaluated for other "deviant" behaviors. Fortunately my parents were very cool about it and ignored the idiots. Their mindset was, "When he and his friends are playing D&D, they're in the den. They're not out roaming the streets. They're not out getting into God-knows-what. They're here, at home. We know where they are and what they're doing. We'll take that over the alternative any day." Still and all, the angry-mothers era was a very uncomfortable time to be associated with D&D. For some odd reason, we could play d6 Star Wars, RIFTS, and all of the other RPGs without anyone even batting an eye...but if they found out you played D&D, you were not trusted. Especially where I grew up (in the heart of the bible-belt), it was better to not even mention that you knew anything about D&D to avoid scorn.
Why I don't think overt sexuality and other "mature" themes should be pushed in D&D: First and foremost, I don't want my kids having to go through what I went through. One is 17 and one is 8, and both of them play D&D. The oldest has been playing for 8 years now. No one cares anymore that they play D&D. Teachers don't care. Preachers don't care. Other parents don't care. I'd like to keep it that way. If my oldest leaves his DMG open on a desk and someone walks by and sees "how to kill a demon", they wouldn't care. However, if they walk by and see "how an ogre raping a human can result in the infant tearing its way out of the womb and killing the mother", then they very likely WILL care. Since the front of the book will probably say "for ages 12 and up", there will be many questions raised. In this uber-delicate day and age of everyone getting offended by the slightest things, don't fool yourself into thinking that the angry-mothers era wouldn't or couldn't return with a vengeance. It most certainly could and would, if the right elements were there.
An acceptable comprimise: Leave the super-overt material out of the core books. The DMG and PHB are about the rules needed to play the game, not necessarily supplemental rules for specific play-styles. If they (and by "they", I mean WotC or third-party publishers) want to publish super-mature-related material, they can do so via splats. Those who want it can by it and enjoy it. Those who don't won't ever have to look at it. Parents buying books for their kids won't have to worry about them being judged because the DMG mentions "demonic rape and incest for fun and profit", because the mature books would be plainly labeled as such. I see this as a win-win for everyone involved. I'm not opposed to the inclusion of mature/adult-rated material at all, but I don't want it front and center in the core books.
This.
My character is called Ryotto Tyrannicide, wich comes from "tyrannicidal riot".
He wields two magic swords: King Beheader (as in "Beheader of Kings", not "King the Beheader") and Chain Splitter. He's also a bit of a skirt-chaser.
So yeah, I REALLY hope you have some Lawful Evil bad guys prepared for me. Government/trade/church conspiracies are optional, but highly recommended.
