# Book of Vile Darkness



## Son_of_Thunder (Aug 20, 2002)

Howdy fellow ENWorldites!!!

I'm not going to post a poll on this but I would like to know who plans on buying this book and why. Is it just because Monte wrote it? Is it for the feats, spells, prestige classes? Is it just for the Demons (this one tempts me)? Or, if you are not going to buy it why? Is it because you don't really need to have the depravities of evil spelled out for you? Are you sick of 'mature audience' books like what black dog puts out?

Anyway, I'm curious, tell me.

Son of Thunder


----------



## Nightfall (Aug 20, 2002)

Without a doubt, it's because of my favorite Demon Princes and Arch Devils being in the book.  

That said, Tome of Horrors will fill out the rest nicely.


----------



## El Ravager (Aug 20, 2002)

I am planning on purchasing it, although Kenzers Villian builders guidebook looks tempting as well.  I may opt to go with Kenzers rather than the BoVD.  I am just looking for a book that will help me to create really compelling villians and give me ideas and rules for really evil things for them to do.  Without seeing either book and just going by the blurbs, I would say that Kenzers book might give me more plothooks, background and other story ideas, while the WotC book will have rule mechanics for Evil things such as diabolica rituals and such and rules for the demons.  Not sure wich I want.  I will probably have to wait until they are both out and I can see what is actually in them.

Well okay.  I will probably buy the one that comes out first.

Or buy both.

I am not too worried about the "Mature Audience" thing.  I really don't see the book containing much content that is terribly offensive.  I don't know if anyone else is familiar with it, but I think it is kind of like Cartoon Networks "Adult Swim" programing.  They make a big deal about how it is not for kids, despite the fact that the content is not any worse than what is on most any other network at the time of night.  Cartoon Network just has to make more warnings because most people automatically assume cartoons = for kids.  Most of WoTCs products are pretty kid friendly (pokemon for example) so they just don't want any confusion that this is not a "kid thing" but I imagine for a teen or adult the content is likely to be fairly mild.

YMMV.  Could be wrong.  Won't know until it comes out I guess.  

=====
El Rav


----------



## thundershot (Aug 20, 2002)

I'm buying it because it's something DIFFERENT. Something D&D has never truly tried before... and they're not trying to make it "child friendly". Being the first D&D "Mature Audiences" book, I just have to give it a shot. My wife and other players will fear for their characters lives... BWAHAHAHAHAAA! <ahem>


Chris


----------



## ForceUser (Aug 20, 2002)

I intend to buy this book because I have trouble understanding and developing villains' plots. Also, I want to know how to effectively run cults and evil organizations. There are places in my campaign world where this book will come in quite handy, more's the pity for my players.


----------



## jester47 (Aug 20, 2002)

El Ravager Says:

I am not too worried about the "Mature Audience" thing. I really don't see the book containing much content that is terribly offensive. I don't know if anyone else is familiar with it, but I think it is kind of like Cartoon Networks "Adult Swim" programing. They make a big deal about how it is not for kids, despite the fact that the content is not any worse than what is on most any other network at the time of night. Cartoon Network just has to make more warnings because most people automatically assume cartoons = for kids. Most of WoTCs products are pretty kid friendly (pokemon for example) so they just don't want any confusion that this is not a "kid thing" but I imagine for a teen or adult the content is likely to be fairly mild.

Catalog Says:

 Elements such as moral dilemma, slavery, human sacrifice, and other sensitive issues will be treated in a mature fashion to allow players to add a level of complexity to their campaigns. 

Monte Says: 

Well, the book handles horrible things ranging from torture to drug addiction. Sadism, self-mutilation, and selling one's soul. Sacrifice and disease. Spells so awful that they corrupt you when you cast them--in body and/or soul. 

Some of these topics (and more that I haven't even mentioned) are "mature audiences" material. You'll find frank discussions of the evil that men (and women) do. This isn't there to encourage such things, even as player characters, but so that it can be used for villains. There is a section on playing evil characters, but that's not the main focus of the book.

I says:

I am getting it mainly because it is a book that deals with what the D&D writers have long been trying to deal with but were simply blocked from attempting to do.  That is truely understand evil and darkness.  I think this book was needed 20 years ago.  That is why I am buying it, and monte wrote it.  He has become a name I associate with very high quality and therefore trust.  He Sean and Bruce are writers whose things I disect and try to do better than.  If I can't do equal or better, its not good enough to be published.  Also I know it will give me some fuel to come up with some very original ideas. 

Aaron.


----------



## the Jester (Aug 20, 2002)

As a dm, if a published work aids my ability to make good games, I'm interested.  Conflict is essential to a good campaign, and evil is one of the main adversaries.  Ergo, books on evil may come in handy indeed; I'm always making evil npcs, societies, dungeons with vile stuff going on, etc.  

We've had demon worship for _ages_ in dnd, it's good to have 3e stat blocks for everything I've been assuming exists anyway.  We've had torture chambers in prolly as many published adventures as not and never _any_ rules for torture (except maybe in one of the old Dragonlance modules?).  Etc.

Yeah, I'm buying it; I wanna see Demogorgan 3e.


----------



## Alaric_Prympax (Aug 20, 2002)

Son_of_Thunder said:
			
		

> *I'm not going to post a poll on this but I would like to know who plans on buying this book and why. Is it just because Monte wrote it? Is it for the feats, spells, prestige classes? Is it just for the Demons (this one tempts me)?
> 
> ...
> 
> ...




Yes, for all of the above.


----------



## Bodah (Aug 20, 2002)

I want to buy it for just about everything about it. I'd like to see some of the evil prestige classes so I can further my own insidious goals in game  and I'd like the rest for when I am DMing..info is always good..I am also curious to see how it will turn out because of the whole 'mature' reader only thing.


----------



## kenjib (Aug 20, 2002)

El Ravager said:
			
		

> *I am planning on purchasing it, although Kenzers Villian builders guidebook looks tempting as well.  I may opt to go with Kenzers rather than the BoVD.  I am just looking for a book that will help me to create really compelling villians and give me ideas and rules for really evil things for them to do.  Without seeing either book and just going by the blurbs, I would say that Kenzers book might give me more plothooks, background and other story ideas, while the WotC book will have rule mechanics for Evil things such as diabolica rituals and such and rules for the demons.*




My impression from the pre-release hype around these books is that the Kenzer book focuses more on the complexity of villains -- their psychology, how a good aligned person can still be the party's villain, etc.  The WotC book is about truly evil villains and the despicable things they do.  It seems like both books focus on different types of villains.  I guess we'll find out for sure when the books hit the shelves, although I hear that the Kenzer Book was already available at GenCon so it should be showing up any day now.


----------



## Zarrock God of Evil (Aug 20, 2002)

It's evil.....

-Zarrock


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Aug 20, 2002)

I'm going to most definately buy it.  Sure the Mature Readers thing isn't new at all with all of that Black Dog stuff out there, and concepts such as the Seventh Generation from Werewolf, Sodomy Bikers from Hol and whatever else.  And I have plenty of ideas of how far my villians would go in their depravity.

I'm getting it because it's a first for D&D, it has new content that I feel will be useful, and it details and updates the Demon Lords for 3e (and I'm quite curious who they would be detailling in the book, Orcus and Asmodeus the only ones confirmed so far).  Plus there might be some evil things in there that I haven't thought of yet.


----------



## Dr Midnight (Aug 20, 2002)

I, for one, will not be buying the book. The main reason is that this product has no place in the kind of campaign I run. 

A second reason is that I'm a little tired of Monte's "evil" fascination. He's put out far too many evil, dark and drow-based books (and downloads) lately. This, of course, is my taste vs. his. He's the guy with publishers, so of course he's free to do as he wants, but... blechh.


----------



## Orclicker (Aug 20, 2002)

I will have to look at the book before I decide.  For the record I was the lead writter on Kenzer's Villain Design Handbook, which should be in stores this week, so I have strong opinions ooon what I would expect from BoVD and it would take a lot to impress me.  But if I am impressed I may pick up the book.

Andy


----------



## Henry (Aug 20, 2002)

Son_of_Thunder said:
			
		

> *..I'm not going to post a poll on this but I would like to know who plans on buying this book and why.*




I plan on buying it. Why?

1) It makes sense to pick up anything Midas touches. 

2) It sounds like there will be some fascinating material in this book for use with villains in my campaigns. If the evil wizard wants a blood sacrifice of 1,000 virgins, then I'll finally have some solid game benefits he will get if he succeeds.

3) Call me crazy, but I always look for reasons to make the PC's hate the villains more.

4) The stat'ed Demons and Devil Princes are an added bonus.

Good enough?


----------



## Hand of Evil (Aug 20, 2002)

I will be picking it up.  

It is going to be an interesting read and I think sometimes darkness is needed in a game.


----------



## Leopold (Aug 20, 2002)

Zarrock said:
			
		

> *It's evil.....
> 
> -Zarrock *




exact reason i am buying it..that and i plan on just leaving it on the gaming table to inspire fear in my players...


----------



## jester47 (Aug 20, 2002)

Dr Midnight said:
			
		

> *I, for one, will not be buying the book. The main reason is that this product has no place in the kind of campaign I run.
> 
> A second reason is that I'm a little tired of Monte's "evil" fascination. He's put out far too many evil, dark and drow-based books (and downloads) lately. This, of course, is my taste vs. his. He's the guy with publishers, so of course he's free to do as he wants, but... blechh. *




_jester47 puts pinky to corner of mouth._

Do you have a problem with Eeevil?  Whats so wrong with eevil, just that its not good doesnt necesarily make it bad, hmm?  I think its quite fun, really.  Right Mini-Me?  


Aaron.


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Aug 20, 2002)

Dr Midnight said:
			
		

> *I, for one, will not be buying the book. The main reason is that this product has no place in the kind of campaign I run.
> 
> A second reason is that I'm a little tired of Monte's "evil" fascination. He's put out far too many evil, dark and drow-based books (and downloads) lately. This, of course, is my taste vs. his. He's the guy with publishers, so of course he's free to do as he wants, but... blechh. *




I'm not exactly sure what you mean. If all he put out was "The Guide to Happy Valley, vol. 1 - Harvest Time!" what use would that be? You have to have evil, or there isn't a game.


----------



## derverdammte (Aug 20, 2002)

ColonelHardisson said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I'm not exactly sure what you mean. If all he put out was "The Guide to Happy Valley, vol. 1 - Harvest Time!" what use would that be? You have to have evil, or there isn't a game. *




I'd be quite amused to see a guide to "happy valley" in D&D terms, but didn't that already get covered by a netbook?


----------



## thundershot (Aug 20, 2002)

> I'm not exactly sure what you mean. If all he put out was "The Guide to Happy Valley, vol. 1 - Harvest Time!" what use would that be? You have to have evil, or there isn't a game.




It Monte wrote that... I'd buy it. I mean, c'mon... It'd probably have loads of farming equipment with d20 stats and such... <grin>



Chris


----------



## jester47 (Aug 20, 2002)

Orclicker said:
			
		

> *I will have to look at the book before I decide.  For the record I was the lead writter on Kenzer's Villain Design Handbook, which should be in stores this week, so I have strong opinions ooon what I would expect from BoVD and it would take a lot to impress me.  But if I am impressed I may pick up the book.
> 
> Andy *




Your book is that good?   I would suspect that the books cover similar material in different ways and will both have quite a bit of merit.  Like the other poster said, it seems that your book will cover antagonists while monte's book covers evil people.  In which case I may buy both.  But since there is a level of quality associated with Monte's name and this book was wtitten soon after the release of 3e, and I have no idea of what other things you have written, I think I will buy his first if I am constrained to a budget.  Sorry but that is just the way it is...


Aaron.


----------



## Wolfen Priest (Aug 20, 2002)

First of all, Son of Thunder, very interesting name; I'm guessing (based on your name) we probably come from the same "angle" (if my interpretation is correct).

I will still probably buy the book, because as other posters have mentioned, it details things like drug addiction, soul-selling, and other things that I think are perfectly applicable to my campign world (I've always wanted rules about that kind of thing anyway).

Plus, I know having it will scare the bejeezus out of my players .


----------



## Dr Midnight (Aug 20, 2002)

ColonelHardisson said:
			
		

> *I'm not exactly sure what you mean. If all he put out was "The Guide to Happy Valley, vol. 1 - Harvest Time!" what use would that be? You have to have evil, or there isn't a game. *




I'm finding it hard to put into words. It's something like my distaste for anime (and let's not get into that). 

Monte's brand of evil has entertained me in the past, but now I feel like perhaps he's trying to outdo himself with every release. 

To me, having storylines with sanity-threatening, black, soulless evil is okay as maybe a once in a while thing. Having a fascination with things that just drip with evil gives me pangs of when I was fifteen and drew skulls on my notebooks. 

It boils down to the fact that I dislike drow and the kind of evil cults and plots that Monte enjoys. They have nothing to do with the fantasy feel I strive for, so I be avoiding the BoVD.


----------



## The Serge (Aug 20, 2002)

Nightfall:

I just thought about this.  We've both seen the anorexic "Asmodeus" stats that are supposedly going to be in the _Book of Vile Darkness_.  Are we expecting the stats in the _Tome of Horrors_ to be similar to these stats or more akin to the ones at the Creature Catalog?  If that's the case, there's going to be a lot of confusion because a lot of people use the Creature Catalog as much as they use the official D&D material.  I mean, Bael will be almost as strong as "Asmodeus."

Do you know?


----------



## Buttercup (Aug 20, 2002)

I'll be buying it.  I'm always looking for additional options to use when creating plots, villains and so forth.  I'll be getting Kenzer's book as well, because I really like the quality of their stuff.


----------



## barsoomcore (Aug 20, 2002)

You know, I don't really need inspiration for my villains. There's more than enough evil in the news every day to make the worst fiend of Barsoom look like a okay guy, once you get to know him.

Rules on drug addiction and so on, maybe useful. And Monte's a great writer, there's no question. But for inspiration, nobody can compete with the history of human nature.


----------



## Maraxle (Aug 20, 2002)

I'll flip through it, though I probably won't end up buying it.  I am a fan of using subtle evil, villains with real plots and motivations, and plausible situations.  If it contains this kind of material, I will get it.  However, from its description it sounds like it contains the kind of stuff that's better suited for death metal liner notes than my game world.


----------



## John Crichton (Aug 20, 2002)

*to be honest...*

I'd love to say that Monte writing it has nothing to do with my desire to purchase the BoVD, but that would be a lie.  However, it isn't the sole reason.  I want it simply because it's different than any other source material that I have.  Plus, WOTC is due for a good sourcebook any day now (after a few dissappointing releases).


----------



## Citizen K (Aug 20, 2002)

Dr Midnight said:
			
		

> *I, for one, will not be buying the book. The main reason is that this product has no place in the kind of campaign I run.
> 
> A second reason is that I'm a little tired of Monte's "evil" fascination. He's put out far too many evil, dark and drow-based books (and downloads) lately. This, of course, is my taste vs. his. He's the guy with publishers, so of course he's free to do as he wants, but... blechh. *




It's worth noting that Monte proposed a Book of Exalted Deeds at the same time - but Wizards chose to follow through on the BoVD.

-Shawn


----------



## kenjib (Aug 20, 2002)

Maraxle said:
			
		

> *I'll flip through it, though I probably won't end up buying it.  I am a fan of using subtle evil, villains with real plots and motivations, and plausible situations.  If it contains this kind of material, I will get it.  However, from its description it sounds like it contains the kind of stuff that's better suited for death metal liner notes than my game world. *




You might want to check out the Kenzer book then.  I believe it was written with these kinds of things in mind.  I'm going to check out both of these villain books and see if either one looks useful.


----------



## Balsamic Dragon (Aug 20, 2002)

I'm not planning on buying it.  I like Monte Cook as a writer, but I don't think it's necessary for my game.  

That said, I would be much more likely to buy it if it were written as a Call of Cthulu supplement, or perhaps a new D&D world with darker tendancies.  I just don't think that most D&D games need things like torture, drug addiction, baby eating, whathaveyou.  

And the "mature audiences" thing?  Marketing gimmick and an excuse to put in pictures of naked chicks.  Could be wrong, but that's my prediction.  And I will be _extremely_ surprised if 1) there was no female nudity and 2) there was any male nudity to speak of!  Sigh.

Balsamic Dragon


----------



## Tharkun (Aug 20, 2002)

Howdy fellow ENWorldites!!!

Shouldn't it be Eninites? 

Is Wizards putting out this book or is Montes people doing the Honor?

I won't just grab it, but I'll do so if it's got them loving crunchy bits!


----------



## John Crichton (Aug 20, 2002)

Tharkun said:
			
		

> *Is Wizards putting out this book or is Montes people doing the Honor?*



Wizards is the publisher.


----------



## William Ronald (Aug 20, 2002)

I will likely by the book, to see its treatment of evil and the benefits (and penalties) that such things as the sacrifice of sentients might bring.

Some of the monster stats might be useful, but if I don't like them, I can change them.

I think if the book looks at truly evil organizations and entities, and helps explain them, it can work well.  Of course, Kenzer's Villain Design Handbook sounds interesting as well.

Of course, my campaign has dealt with "mature themes" for some time.  I think  what is important is the type of game that the DM and players want.  

I expect in a world of magic and active deities, there would be room for both the soul-selling cultist and villains who are more closely akin to what we have seen in our own world.


----------



## grimwell (Aug 20, 2002)

I'll buy it  for two reasons:

1) I want to see how the systems/rules for drug use, torture, sacrifice, selling of the soul, etc. work out in an "official" D&D product.

2) I've just about had it with the campy soft punch that stock D&D villians have been given for the last two decades. I don't want every product to go completely dark and twisted, but I would like to see Wizards publish a line of products that is dark and adult. So I'll buy this product and hope that high sales encourages more products of the same sort.

Who said White Wolf should have the corner on the mature themes?


----------



## Mithriltooth (Aug 20, 2002)

I buy everything 3e anyway


----------



## Voadam (Aug 20, 2002)

I think I would like the book, for the addiction rules, for the demons, for the spells, for the sacrifice and sould selling rules, and for a general good read. However, the hefty price of hardcovers and lack of bookshelf space will probably stop me from getting it.


----------



## greymarch (Aug 20, 2002)

Three words: "Wand of Orcus"


----------



## Nightfall (Aug 20, 2002)

The Serge said:
			
		

> *Nightfall:
> 
> I just thought about this.  We've both seen the anorexic "Asmodeus" stats that are supposedly going to be in the Book of Vile Darkness.  Are we expecting the stats in the Tome of Horrors to be similar to these stats or more akin to the ones at the Creature Catalog?  If that's the case, there's going to be a lot of confusion because a lot of people use the Creature Catalog as much as they use the official D&D material.  I mean, Bael will be almost as strong as "Asmodeus."
> 
> Do you know? *




Agreed on the point that the BoVD Asmodeus will be kind of weak compared to most epic things. But I guess I'm just going to extropolate some of the powers and abilities but change up a few things, like his stats and DR if I want to use him as persistant threat. The BoVD version will be more like an "avatar" of sorts for mid-level, near high end PCs to deal with.  As for him being in Tome, no he's NOT in Tome but Orcus will be and so will his former boss, Lucifier.  I just plan on using both to help add more to my campaigns.


----------



## Lady Dragon (Aug 20, 2002)

Balsamic Dragon said:
			
		

> *
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Right you are on that one. The owner of my FLGS told me that several of the artists for the books are regulars and they told him that WoTC kept sending the artwork back saying more gore,more nudity.

I will buy the book however,since I think it will be useful and I want the Devil/Demon stats.


----------



## Tiefling (Aug 20, 2002)

I don't see what I would need a "mature discussion" of things like slavery, sacrifice, soul-selling, torture and drug addiction for. There's nothing that an LCD D&D book (if they keep sending pictures back asking for more nudity, it's for the LCD) could tell me about those things that I don't already know. And the association of drug-use with evil strikes me as odd.

That said, if they were to skip the "discussion" and just give me rules for sacrifice, soul-selling, torture, and drugs, as well as new evil spells and stats for Big Baddies, then I'd like it fine.


----------



## Carnifex (Aug 20, 2002)

I have no intention to pick up this book; not because of any problem with the 'mature content' but because, frankly, I'm quite capable of creating some truly evil villains and if I feel the need to use a demon lord in a campaign (which I've done before) I create one from scratch and make them unique (hence Lord Shauku, the Ice Demon, a huge, three-wolf-headed winged fiend with vorpal claws ). I'm going to be spending quite enough money on the MM 2 and Tome of Horrors; I don't need this as well.


----------



## Sammael99 (Aug 20, 2002)

Carnifex said:
			
		

> *I have no intention to pick up this book; not because of any problem with the 'mature content' but because, frankly, I'm quite capable of creating some truly evil villains and if I feel the need to use a demon lord in a campaign (which I've done before) I create one from scratch and make them unique (hence Lord Shauku, the Ice Demon, a huge, three-wolf-headed winged fiend with vorpal claws ). I'm going to be spending quite enough money on the MM 2 and Tome of Horrors; I don't need this as well. *




I guess it's different stuff for different people. I feel that I have more monsters in the MM than I will ever use playing D&D (unless my playing frequency goes up drastically, which is unlikely ). The BoVD, however, promises to allow me to give villains a different twist without me having to work it out. If it seems to hold its promise, i'll get it...

I guess though, that your argument could be put forward for every single 3e/d20 supplement apart from possibly the three core rulebooks. It's always possible to do everything yourself (and it's usually better) if you have the time to do it...


----------



## shadow (Aug 21, 2002)

I definately won't be picking up the BoVD.  Frankly I'm a little worried about it.  Although I have no problem with "dark" themes in my campaign, I see no need to write an entire book on it.  Sure cultists, perverts, and serials killers can be used as villians, but do we really need special rules for how much power a person gets by selling his soul?  Also I'm a little worried about WotC going down the path of White Wolf.  I'm not saying D&D should be "kid friendly".  I enjoy D&D very much the way it is right now.  A game doesn't have to push the boundaries of good taste to avoid being "kiddie".  Moreover, after explaining D&D, most people I know see it as a harmless hobby.  With the BoVD (an official D&D suppliment) giving rules for human sacrifice, torture, and selling one's soul, this view could change.
I think that Monte is a good game designer, and respect his writing, but I really hope he hasn't overstepped the boundaries of good taste with this one.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Aug 21, 2002)

This is the one 3e book coming out I have really high hopes for.


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Aug 21, 2002)

Salutations,

I will wait to see the reviews on the book, but I am not worried.

MC loves d&d, and I have trouble seeing him doing something foolish that would threaten it.

Hasbro loves its public image, and I have trouble seeing them allowing anything that would cause a public backlash- especially in the form of parents boycotting hasbro products for their children.

FD


----------



## Mark Plemmons (Aug 21, 2002)

Yes, I think the BoVD and our VDH (Villain Design Handbook) will cover mostly different territory.  Of course, I can't get any  news on exactly what's IN the BoVD, so I'm not 100% sure.

Here's what I posted on another related thread, just a few seconds ago.  It'll give you an idea of some of what's in the VDH.

=================

Of all the Kingdoms of Kalamar products, this one is the most "Kalamar-light" of any of them.  I'll do a brief chapter by chapter run through.

*Villain Design Process* - details the step-by-step process to creating a villain using the Villain Record Sheet, like the Player's Handbook details creating a character.

*Introduction*

* Chapter 1: Stereotypes and Beyond*

This chapter begins by explaining what it means to be a villain.  it also provides suggestions for how to create villains using various combinations of races and classes.  It also details possible villain alignments and information on how to avoid obvious stereotypes.  You will also learn about variant game rules specifically related to villains, such as experience points, power levels, good-aligned and supernatural villains.  

Sections include:

   What is a Villain?
   Stereotypes
   Choosing Race and Class
   Villains and Alignment
   Experience
   Familiars
   Power Level
   Supernatural Villains
   Beyond This Book

*Chapter 2: Archetypes*

Lists the six primary villain archetypes and includes detailed examples and explanations of each.  Within each archetype, a range of subtypes are set out with personality profiles.  This chapter is rich with basic villain concepts useful in any DM's campaign.

Kalamar character backgrounds are written up as as examples of each.  Their stats are in Appendix A.  

Sections include:

   Deviants
   Devoted
   Fallen
   Inhuman
   Power Mad
   Visionary

*Chapter 3: Inside the Mind of a Killer*

Deals with the psychology of villains, their motivations and their obsessions.  Such details help the DM determine a particular villain's schemes and objectives as the plot thickens for the player characters.

Sections include:

   Thought Processes
   Motivations and Obsessions
   Goals, Schemes and Dreams of Darker Things

*Chapter 4: Where Monsters Dwell*

Setting the stage for a great adventure demands careful consideration.  This chapter discusses ideas for placing your villains and their lairs in cities, dungeons and wilderness areas.

Sections include:

   Setting
   The Urban Underground
   Pieces of the Urban Pie
   The Savage Wilderness
   Lairs and Strongholds

*Chapter 5: The Head of the Serpent*

This chapter describes the villain's place in secret societies and other organizations.  Here you will learn about villains who have an organization to back up their nefarious doings, and how the relationships within that organization affect the villain, as well as how they affect your PCs and your entire campaign.

Organizations from KoK are given as examples only.

Sections include:

   Independent Organizations
   Placement Within the Organization
   Building Levels of Intrigue

*Chapter 6: New Villainous Rules*

Obviously, these are just new rules for adding personality to your villainous characters.  Also included are details on usin gthese rules as player options.

Kalamar-specific mentions are rare.

Sections include:

   New Feats
      Enhanced Familiar Feats
      Metamagic Feats
   Variant: Anti-Feats
      Acquiring Anti-Feats
      Player Anti-Feats
   Variant Combat Maneuvers

*Chapter 7: Prestige Classes*

This chapter describes new prestige classes that are available to all characters, though they have certain qualities that make them particularly attractive to villains.  

The majority of these focus on independent organizations specific to the Kingdoms of Kalamar campaign setting.

Sections include:

   Villainous Prestige Classes

*Chapter 8: New Spells*

This chapter details new spells that you may make available to your villains of appropriate classes.  After your players get a taste of them, you  may feel free to make them available to player characters as well.

I'd say the only Kalamar-specific bits are the Basiran Dancer spells, and some mentions of characters and locations within the spell descriptions.

Sections include:

   New Basiran Dancer Spells
   New Bard Spells
   New Cleric Spells
   New Druid and Shaman Spells
   New Paladin Spells
   New Ranger Spells
   New Spellsinger, Sorceror and Wizard Spells
   Detailed Spell Listings

*Chapter 9: Wicked Things*

The items here are magical tools that a DM can use to arma villains, his lackeys or henchmen.  They often convey a useful benefit but are just as likely to come with some significant baggage.  As a DM, this is advantageous because it might make the PCs think twice about taking and keeping these spoils for their own use once they have defeated their nemesis.

Almost all of these items are Kalamar specific, though I have no doubt a DM with any ounce of talent could port them to other worlds.  

Magic circles and summonings is not Kalamar-specific, however.

Sections include:

   Magic Items
      Armor and Shields
      Weapons
      Potions
      Rings
      Rods
      Staves
      Wondrous Items
      Minor Artifacts
      Major Artifacts
   Magic Circle and Summoning

*Chapter 10: Dangerous Denizens*

This chapter discusses two new dungeon guardian-type creatures, and details several templates to add to your villains, including ghouls, mummies, skeletons, wights, wraiths and zombies.  There are details on how to perform the rituals leading to each template.

They do have Kalamaran names (the "self-willed greater mummy" translates as "kyseth," for example).  There are references to places on Tellene where such rites and rituals are found/were discovered.

Sections include:

   New Monsters
      Darkling Snatcher
      Guardian Effigy
   New Undead Templates
   Becoming Undead

*Appendices*

This is pretty straight-forward, so I won't bother to say anything other than that the adventure (a small encounter) is Kalamar-specific.

   Appendix A: Non-Player Characters
   Appendix B: Glossary of Terms
   Appendix C: Villain Record Sheet
   Appendix D: Adventure
      A Change in Plans
      NPCs (the soldiers)
      NPCs (the slaves)

*Index*

===================

Hope that clears up some of the confusion and gives you some idea what to expect.  

Mark Plemmons
Kenzer and Company
www.kenzerco.com


----------



## KB9JMQ (Aug 21, 2002)

I want the extra help to run evil villians and cults.
Monte wrote it so that is a huge plus to me.
I will get the Kenzer book also and take ideas from both.


----------



## Buttercup (Aug 21, 2002)

Mark Plemmons said:
			
		

> *Here's what I posted on another related thread, just a few seconds ago.  It'll give you an idea of some of what's in the VDH.
> *




Wow.  I'm salivating now.  I already had high hopes for this book, given the overall stellar quality of Kenzer's products, but this description makes me *really* need the VDH!


----------



## Samnell (Aug 21, 2002)

shadow said:
			
		

> Sure cultists, perverts, and serials killers can be used as villians, but do we really need special rules for how much power a person gets by selling his soul?




Yes, and as soon as possible. I'm ready to open bidding, but I want to know what I get before I set a starting price.


----------



## Blackwind (Aug 21, 2002)

I'm buying it for sure.  The campaign I'm currently running has several evil characters in it, and the subject matter is somewhat dark (a new island is discovered by Calie sailors, and the underground ruins hint at a lost civilization destroyed by an unspeakable evil).  I also need the stats for the demon princes and whatnot.  But most importantly, I want 3e systems for drug addiction (although we've seen some of this Lords of Darkness).  Monte will probably do a good job with that kind of thing, that Robert Anton Wilson fan.  Not to imply anything.


----------



## Son_of_Thunder (Aug 21, 2002)

*WOW!!! Thanks for the replies!*

Thanks for the replies gang.

I would add that I will not get the book. I agree with Dr. Midnight. Monte seems to have an unhealthy fascination with evil. On Monte's boards I asked him what his feelings were like while writing the book. His reply was that he had a tough time as it was dark subject matter.

As another poster put it, just look in the local and national news to get good ideas for evil and villians. Take local news for example. An eleven year old girl was taken from her room at three in the morning, raped, then her assailant was caught in the act of bludgeoning her trying to kill her. The police showed up just in time. The girl is still in critical condition with every bone in her face broken.

As a side note, some want to know where my moniker comes from. It comes from The Good Book, St. Mark chapter 3 verse 17 to be exact.

Son of Thunder


----------



## William Ronald (Aug 21, 2002)

I suspect the additional powers will have several drawbacks.  This would fit in well with folklore, where those in the service of dark powers are sometimes marked by them.  In my campaign, cheap power always comes with a high price .... in the end.  

As for real world evil, Son of Thunder, I agree that human history and current events provide a lot of insight into human evil.  Possibly the Book of Vile Darkness will explore how human evil is modified when it comes into contact with supernatural evil. 

I think both the Villains Design Handbook and Book of Vile Darkness may be valuable for DMs to gain an insight into their villains.  As such, they may make campaigns more enjoyable.  (Great heroes need adversaries.)


----------



## Tiefling (Aug 21, 2002)

Additionally, I'm P.O.'d about the name of the book! In a world with tons of races that can see in the dark, and gods who don't care about the little dark=unknown=scary=evil association of humans, darkness shouldn't be constantly associated with evil, and there shouldn't be so many "dark" creatures that actually ARE evil.


----------



## William Ronald (Aug 21, 2002)

Tiefling,  the book is named after an old magic item from 1st edition.

With that said, it is always interesting to turn a stereotype on its head.  For example, Sepulchre II's demon seeking to repent.  (Here's a question for the BoVD and the VDH.  How to handle a villain who wants to repent.  Sometimes a person will realize he has made a mess of things and wants to make amends.) It is always fun to make the characters think.


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Aug 21, 2002)

Citizen K said:
			
		

> *
> 
> It's worth noting that Monte proposed a Book of Exalted Deeds at the same time - but Wizards chose to follow through on the BoVD.
> 
> -Shawn *




Is this true? I've never heard this before. Did Monte mention this on his site?


----------



## Nathanael (Aug 21, 2002)

I agree with several posters that the BOVD is unnecessary and simply a marketing gimmick for WOTC to attract attention to the game. Attention that will do more harm than good. And despite what peolpe think about Hasbro and Monte's intentions, it will hurt the hobby. The maxim 'any publicity is good publicity' is wrong in the extreme. 

Everyone says they don't want to play Evil, but they want the rules to define it. Why do you need to know how powerful the villain gets by sodomizing and killing a slew of people when the characters are supposed to stop it? If they succeed, it won't happen. If they fail, they'll most likely die and not see the results. The rest is gratuitous in the extreme.

As an example, I had one character as the sole surviver in the final fight of a campaign against dark elves trying to conquer the surface world. She was taken prisoner at 0 HP. I started a new campaign intead of telling her how her character would be brutalized by the Dark Elves in graphic fasion and making her play it out until she died. The rest of the characters had horrors enough imagining what the Evil bastards did to the losers in that war without any extrapolation by me. 

And just what is wrong with peoples imaginations, anyway. Why do you need definate rules for the damage caused by rape? Isn't it degrading enough in a story sense without attaching mechanics to it? And what, exactly do those have to do with the characters anyways? Are a lot of you so creatively dead that your villians have to personally inflict these things on the characters to seem 'bad enough.' How friggin unimaginative are you and how jaded are your players?!

A good DM can roleplay the after-effects of such activity without describing the act itself in gruesome detail: A catatonic woman who has had horrors unkown to common folk visited upon her. A family terrorized by a viscious father with an otherworldly agenda. The despair of an NPC who is destroying his life and those around him due to an unhealthy addiction. All of these things are better explored from the human side and emotional after-effects than by vivd description of the acts themselves. These things invoke a human, emotional attachment to the situation and characters, which is the the focus of any good fiction as opposed to appealing to lewdness and voyerism. The difference between a thriller like Se7en and a slasher flick like Friday the 13th.

Had to cut something out here...  Such rude and condescending behavior is not appropriate in EN World; please don't do it again.
- Darkness
I personally don't see any other good reason to release this book with graphic content that has been sent back again and again as 'not naked and bloody enough.' Fiend Folio is going to be filled with demons and devils. Kenzer and Company have created a book that deals with the story elements of being a villian without delving into the gruesome mechanics of torture, human sacrifice. rape, etc. The creature Catalog is available for anyone who wants coverted deamon princes. The television is overloaded with atrocities enough to inspire a lifetime of sleepless nights. If I were so seriously lacking imagination and my players were so bored that I needed someone else to spice up my villians for me in such an unsubtle way, I would have enough in those areas alone to inspire me. Failing that, I'd just turn over DM'ing to someone with a little more creativity...


----------



## kenjib (Aug 21, 2002)

Monte Cook has already explicitly said that the book does not cover rape nor prostitution.  I think rules for a villain selling his soul are very useful.  The demonic pact is a staple of fantasy and mythological villany and well within the bounds of good taste when confined to an adversary for the party to struggle against in the name of goodness.  However, there is currently very little support for this in any books, anywhere -- is the Mongoose Demonology book the only book that has this?  Likewise, sacrificing victims to a god is another staple.  This one even transcends literature and enters the realm of real life -- Aztecs for starters.  The book is a tool and it sounds like it will have some good uses.  It covers many of the classic literary themes of the genre.


----------



## Numion (Aug 21, 2002)

Tiefling said:
			
		

> *Additionally, I'm P.O.'d about the name of the book! In a world with tons of races that can see in the dark, and gods who don't care about the little dark=unknown=scary=evil association of humans, darkness shouldn't be constantly associated with evil, and there shouldn't be so many "dark" creatures that actually ARE evil. *




Well, the book _is_ marketed towards the human population of planet earth, and not the fantasy folk who don't fear the dark.


----------



## Numion (Aug 21, 2002)

Nathanael said:
			
		

> *
> Not to point fingers at anyone in particular, but I think that many  people are salivating over this book as something that they can defend as 'frank and mature' gaming material instead of what it really: old fashioned, can't get laid, take it in the bedroom with a box of kleenex Porn. *






Don't you think that those people would rather spend their money on, well, porn than an expensive book? I'm sorry to invoke logic in this oh-so-emotional thread, but come on.


----------



## Roderick (Aug 21, 2002)

I`ll definitly buy it, in order to see, if this book can teach this cynical, jaded, forty years old GM a few new tricks to frighten his players.

I doubt it, but you never know.


----------



## Maraxle (Aug 21, 2002)

kenjib said:
			
		

> *I think rules for a villain selling his soul are very useful.*



I think that having rules around this is weak.  Something like this should be done with imagination instead of consulting a chart.  You say it's a staple of literature and stuff, but has it ever been handled the same way twice?  I'd guess not.  The *big evil entity* can do whatever it chooses.  If it wants to give one villain 1,000,000 XP and another a bucket of fried chicken for the villain's soul, it can.  If you mean how the villain contacts the *big evil entity*, that should be left to interpretation as well.

I think the book should be renamed The Book of Vile Lack of Imagination.


----------



## Buttercup (Aug 21, 2002)

Since the moderators removed the content from the post I was complaining about here, I thought I should delete my comments.  Thanks for cleaning it up, Darkness!


----------



## Lady Dragon (Aug 21, 2002)

To those like Nathanel who are screaming that we don't need a book like this I say what do you know that I don't? Did you get a private preveiw and are aware of the exact content, because I missed that preveiw. I hate to break your wild imagination but the book's not going to be that bad. The art will feature some barely dressed babes and some violence and the content will be mild. The will stay away from sexual topics and stay mostly to violence,any one who thinks otherwise is dreaming. I think there will be a great deal on things like demonology and evil rituals and the like. In fact I think a lot of people will be very disappointed with the mild content since they seem to be expecting something X-rated.


----------



## Numion (Aug 21, 2002)

Maraxle said:
			
		

> *
> I think that having rules around this is weak.  Something like this should be done with imagination instead of consulting a chart.  You say it's a staple of literature and stuff, but has it ever been handled the same way twice?  I'd guess not. *




Magic is a staple of literature and stuff, but has it ever been handled the same way twice? I'd guess not. 

Still D&D has rules for magic. Go figure.


----------



## Hakkenshi (Aug 21, 2002)

Oddly enough, it seems that only the detractors of this book are the ones all excited about the alleged X-rated content of the book, and about accusing others of trying to find some unhealthy pleasure in reading it. Err...it's a GAMING book.

Monte Cook wrote it, just as he wrote the Book of Eldritch Might. I don't know about you, but I got no Eldritch Might myself from the book, do you expect us to succumb to Vile Darkness from reading this one?

I must say I love how people condemn UPCOMING books without having read a single page ("Vile Lack of Imagination???"). Where do you people GET this stuff???


----------



## Zaukrie (Aug 21, 2002)

I'm pretty offended (not easy to do) by the comment that this is some kind of porn book.  I'm sure Monte and anyone else who worked on it is too.

I'm interested in this book because I've tried to write rules over the years on how to give people power from sacrificing things.  Those who say these rules aren't needed:  how did you feel about the Demonology rules?  How did you feel about the rules in the Green Ronin book (kind remember if it was Abyss or Hell) where a (N)PC could "bond" with an evil entity?  How did you feel about Defilers, Blood Mages, or Blight Magic?  I think that rules on the power that evil gets from doing evil helps explain why they do it.  Understanding your enemy is always a powerful tool.  As for those who say you can just imagine this, and that this is a tool for those without imagination, you could say that about Occult Lore, Alchemists and Herbalists, Spells and Magic....Do you feel the same about those books?

BTW, if there are rules for sacrifice, couldn't you flip those and give power for sving things?  How about for sacrificing gold?  What about converting a Demon to Good?  I'd think it would be easier to extrapolate how to give good power, if I had rules on how evil got more power.  That's part of my plan, anyway.


----------



## Wolfspider (Aug 21, 2002)

> Not to point fingers at anyone in particular, but I think that many people are salivating over this book as something that they can defend as 'frank and mature' gaming material instead of what it really: old fashioned, can't get laid, take it in the bedroom with a box of kleenex Porn.




Man, there's too much free porn on the internet for me to use an expensive gaming book as masturbatory material and risk getting it all messed up.  (I learned that lesson with some of my high school yearbooks.)

Sheesh.  You've got to think practically about these things.


----------



## Xarlen (Aug 21, 2002)

Oh, yes, I'm going to get all hot and bothered by gory, violent pictures with half naked chicks. Probably some witches and hags swimming in blood. Yep, and those rules for soul-sacrifice and demon summoning right there just add the icing on the cake. Oh Baby. 

Infact, all the D20 art just gets my blood flowing. Whoo boy. 

Please make a Will Save vs. a DC 12 to sarcasm.


----------



## Sammael99 (Aug 21, 2002)

Wolfspider said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Man, there's too much free porn on the internet for me to use an expensive gaming book as masturbatory material and risk getting it all messed up.  (I learned that lesson with some of my high school yearbooks.)
> 
> Sheesh.  You've got to think practically about these things. *




What do you know, some people just HAVE to mesh their hobbies...

Wolfspider, that's the most sensible reply to this whole ridiculous "scandal" !


----------



## Wolfen Priest (Aug 21, 2002)

*ANYway...*

Back to the actual subject material of this book (i.e., _not_ porn)...

My little nephew who takes after me and is only 9 and a half, is literally counting the days until he turns 12, when I told him I would teach him to play D&D.  I figure since he is that excited, I'll probably cave and teach him sooner.

Now I know for a fact that his mom, my sister, would not let him play D&D at all if she even knew that a book was coming out about selling one's soul, dark pacts with demons, human sacrifice, drug addiction, etc.

I'm glad the book is coming out and I will probably buy it; but, do I think WotC is making the right decision in releasing this book to the public?  Nope.  I always figured this kind of thing would be better tackled by a 3rd party; heck, Monte could still write the dang-blasted thing to keep everyone happy.

I just _really_ hope they keep the release of this product nice and quiet, otherwise my nephew won't be learning to play D&D.


----------



## Wolfspider (Aug 21, 2002)

> Now I know for a fact that his mom, my sister, would not let him play D&D at all if she even knew that a book was coming out about selling one's soul, dark pacts with demons, human sacrifice, drug addiction, etc.




Would his parents really care if this book was published by WotC or some other d20 publisher?  I think all they would care about would be the fact that it was a D&D book (because that would probably be the extent of their understanding of the entire OGL/D20 business).  

I think that it may actually be better if WotC DOES publish a book of this kind first, so they can set a (hopefully tasteful) precedent for the rest of the industry to follow concerning the description of such evils.


----------



## JeffB (Aug 21, 2002)

I don't plan on getting BoVD myself...I don't find much of the purported subject matter interesting or useful for my games..

However, Im really curious why people want rules for these sorts of things. Rules for selling your soul? For sacrifice? (what, does the evil cultist score an automatic crit because the victim is bound? what kind of rules are needed here?) I could see rules for drugs themselves, but not drug-use...Ok...make your will save..Oh no..your addicted!How hard is that to figure out? Do the demon lords/princes show up enough in people's games that they need to know what there BAB cross clas skills and AC are?  Are your players fighting these guys? 

IMO a book that detailed the organization of the Demon Princes and Devils, ie. their lackeys and dogma would be much more useful;not rules related issues..again unless some sort of combat was involved...

And I'm serious here...I just don't understand why one would need RULES for these things...

On the other hand I feel the Kalamar book would be a much better DM resource...and I do plan on getting it


----------



## Ristamar (Aug 21, 2002)

Teh b00|< oF V1L3 pr0n o\/\/Nz j00!   

*cough*

Yeah, anyway...   considering the author and publisher, I'm pretty sure I'll find plenty of stuff both useful interesting in this upcoming release.  The potential for cool feats and/or prestige classes is off the charts.  I can even imagine characters selling their souls (or other services) for additional powers, only to have the denizens of hell come to forcefully collect later down the road.  As for gaining power via sacrifice/rituals, heck, that's been a staple of fantasy for centuries.  Obviously this is primarily a DM's sourcebook, though I could see it being used now and then by players in less 'heroic' campaigns.

The sort of evil alluded to by the credible previews of BoVD has permeated throughout a myriad of adventures and campaigns since the birth of D&D.  It's just never had a published set of rules* to govern it.   All I can say is...   It's about frickin' time. 

*_I've heard there were certain 1e  materials dealing with sacrifice and other 'vile' acts and were considered highly controversial, but I've never had a chance to see them._


----------



## Wolfspider (Aug 21, 2002)

> However, Im really curious why people want rules for these sorts of things. Rules for selling your soul? For sacrifice? (what, does the evil cultist score an automatic crit because the victim is bound? what kind of rules are needed here?)




I think you're being facetious here.  These kinds of rules would not necessarily detail HOW you sacrifice someone but what the benefits of such sacrifice are.  Why exactly does that necromancer want to sacrifice so many virgins?  What's in it for him?  What powers and benefits do you get from willingingly damning yourself?  There must be some tangible benefit or else villians wouldn't do it.



> Do the demon lords/princes show up enough in people's games that they need to know what there BAB cross clas skills and AC are? Are your players fighting these guys?




Well, yes, actually.  Demon princess and lords like Orcus and Lolth are CLASSIC D&D villians.  Characters in my campaigns have fought the likes of these two countless times...both battling to foil their schemes (at lower levels) and actually confronting the vile beings themselves (at higher level).


----------



## Sammael99 (Aug 21, 2002)

JeffB said:
			
		

> *However, Im really curious why people want rules for these sorts of things. Rules for selling your soul? For sacrifice? (what, does the evil cultist score an automatic crit because the victim is bound? what kind of rules are needed here?) I could see rules for drugs themselves, but not drug-use...Ok...make your will save..Oh no..your addicted!How hard is that to figure out? Do the demon lords/princes show up enough in people's games that they need to know what there BAB cross clas skills and AC are?  Are your players fighting these guys?
> *




Let me explain what I expect from the book (whether it is actually what I get or not is another matter entirely...)

On the subject of sacrifices, for example : I like villains who do sacrifices. Well, like is not the word. I find them interesting antagonists for the PCs. First of all beacuse it's vile. Second because it usually puts the PCs in situations and confrontations when they need to wipe out some participants while protecting others. Always more interesting than a straight-ahead fight.

Now in the actual D&D rules, there is no need and no gain from sacrificing anyone to your deity. So why would evil cults do it ? Why would mad wizards do it ?

Similarly, NPCs who make pacts with evil entities are a classic of RPGing. What are the mechanics for this ? It would be nice to know.

In my current campaign, the PCs will be confronted to a resurgence of an evil devil cult. I think if the book is done well, I might pick quite a few ideas from this.

Now you may be right in saying that DMs could invent these things themselves. I agree with this, but DMs could design their monsters, game worlds, PrCs and everything else as well. WHy do we need these rules ? Because we're too lazy to design them ourselves, and because it's nice to have a common set of rules for elements that may appear relatively frequently in RPG plots.

As for the arch-devils and arch-demons stats, you might as well ask : why did they releases "Deities and Demigods". I myself didn't get it because I have no need for stats of gods. Similarly, I have no need for stats of arch-ds. But then again, there's much stuff in most RPG books I purchase that I don't need...


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Aug 21, 2002)

Push that envelope Monte!!!!   I hope I have to make a fright check when I hopen the book.   Since I could care less what little Bobby's mom thinks of the book,  I'm hoping it's pushing the envelope of good taste.  

Whey do people say idiotic stuff like, "Monte has a unhealthy facination with this material..."?  Are horror authors sick twisted men becuase they write morbid tales of horror and evil?  Please...


----------



## Hakkenshi (Aug 21, 2002)

> Do the demon lords/princes show up enough in people's games that they need to know what there BAB cross clas skills and AC are? Are your players fighting these guys?




You mean my 6-7 PC party of level 23+ characters? Yep, definitely.

So the book is multi-purpose; it also has epic-level support. Is this a BAD thing somehow? I think that having books cover a wider range of challenges and encounters can only be a positive change.


----------



## Tsyr (Aug 21, 2002)

Flexor the Mighty! said:
			
		

> * Are horror authors sick twisted men becuase they write morbid tales of horror and evil?  Please... *




Sick? Probably not. Twisted? Hell yes. How else do you explain Lovecraft?


----------



## Psion (Aug 21, 2002)

I'll get it. Why? Because heroes need contemptable villains. It's a fantasy tradition!

Is it possible that the book will step over the bounds of good taste? Certainly. But we'll have that flame war when it comes to it.


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Aug 21, 2002)

I think people who are criticizing the book (without it being released yet) must be unfamiliar with Monte Cook's work. I very much doubt that Monte would ever write the masturbatory human sacrifice instruction manual people seem to be afraid BoVD will be. Matter of fact, I'm certain it will be far less "adult" than some of the most hysterical speculations seem to indicate it will be.


----------



## Lady Dragon (Aug 21, 2002)

Exactly Psion why is every one fighting over a book that we have one paragraph of promo material on? When the book comes out then we can fight over it.


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Aug 21, 2002)

Lady Dragon said:
			
		

> *Exactly Psion why is every one fighting over a book that we have one paragraph of promo material on?  *




Sssh! They are pretty funny to read.

FD


----------



## Scott814thmpco (Aug 21, 2002)

Howdy-
Question to all the great EN world sages; will BoVD be like Relics and Rituals I & II? I have both those books and they are very mature in their content. And I really dont want to go out and buy something I already have.



Scott


----------



## Dr Midnight (Aug 21, 2002)

Flexor the Mighty! said:
			
		

> *Whey do people say idiotic stuff like, "Monte has a unhealthy facination with this material..."? *




Nice.


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Aug 21, 2002)

Scott814thmpco said:
			
		

> *Howdy-
> Question to all the great EN world sages; will BoVD be like Relics and Rituals I & II? I have both those books and they are very mature in their content. And I really dont want to go out and buy something I already have.
> *




I can't recall thinking R&R 1 was "mature", but the first book was mostly a spell book with some PrC's and magic items.

The BoVD is supposed to be a DMG-like book about running villians. It will most likely have PrC's, items, and spells- but a lot of it will be suggestions on running evil in a campeign.

FD


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Aug 21, 2002)

Scott814thmpco said:
			
		

> *Howdy-
> Question to all the great EN world sages; will BoVD be like Relics and Rituals I & II? I have both those books and they are very mature in their content. And I really dont want to go out and buy something I already have.
> 
> 
> ...




I don't think there's any way to tell; the book won't be out until October. My opinion is this: first, that it won't be like either R&R, and, simply because Monte wrote it by himself, it'll be, at the very least, a much more focused work.


----------



## Psion (Aug 21, 2002)

> *
> It will most likely have PrC's, items, and spells- but a lot of it will be suggestions on running evil in a campeign.
> *




Actually, IIRC Monte has said that they don't spend a whole lot of time on that topic.


----------



## Wolfen Priest (Aug 21, 2002)

Wolfspider said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Would his parents really care if this book was published by WotC or some other d20 publisher?  I think all they would care about would be the fact that it was a D&D book (because that would probably be the extent of their understanding of the entire OGL/D20 business).
> 
> I think that it may actually be better if WotC DOES publish a book of this kind first, so they can set a (hopefully tasteful) precedent for the rest of the industry to follow concerning the description of such evils. *




Yes, actually.  If WotC is publishing it, you can be sure it's going to be displayed at your nearest local Barnes & Noble bookstore, (or Waldenbooks or whatever).  If it just said "d20" on the cover, most mom's wouldn't understand what it was for.

And for those who simply don't give a rat's you-know-what about the next generation of players, do you ever think about what will happen to our little hobby if people stop playing it?  I for one don't want to see it taken over by CRPG's.  Flexor, how old were you when you started playing D&D?  I was 12; my parents had to buy me the books.  If it starts to scare away soccer moms with fears of satanism and dark rituals, guess what?  The hobby will lose gamers, period.  Or else the people who take it up will become even more distanced from 'mainstream' society.


----------



## JeffB (Aug 21, 2002)

I’ll admit my “examples” were a bit tongue-in cheek…no offense was intended.

I reckon it’s just different schools of thought. I think the why’s and “what-gained’s” are things that are easily enough decided through story, or if necessary , a minor stat adjustment on the fly. If I was running a game with this sort of villain, I would not be really concerned for what new feat or power, or whatnot he got with every sacrifice. If I thought that the sacrifcer needed an in-game boost, I’d simply give him a few more HPs (for the vitality he’s gained through sacrifice), or perhaps the effects of a bless spell for a longer period of time (from his diety/devil, etc being pleased).  It’s simple and quick, I personally just don’t see why anyone would want a whole book with charts, tables, systems, etc to detail things that are EASILY made up on the fly. I won’t begrudge anyone who does want it of course, I just don’t understand the need for detailed rules systems about it.

Now regarding the Demon Princes, etc..again different schools of thought…although as  kid my brother ran games where my high level paladin took on Orcus and such (I killed him too!), as I’ve grown older I’ve come to see these entities as foes, but not necessarily combatants for the PC’s. I liken them to any of the evil Gods in my games… a re-occurring villain that you won’t ever get rid of, but can thwart and cause them to hide under a rock for awhile. The lackeys are the combatants the PC’s face; hence my comments on providing game material regarding their priest-hood and organization.  Again I don’t begrudge anyone their style of play, I just didn’t realize that this sort of thing was “common” , judging by the number of people who want the stats.

And I’ll also agree with the comments regarding the D&DG (and F&P for that matter) by another poster. I don’t see ever needing stats for these folks, and since so much of these two books WAS stats and less about the churches, etc. I passed on D&DG , and I sold F&P..it seemed just to be the Monster Manual of gods to me. Things to kill.

IMO of course


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Aug 21, 2002)

Dr Midnight said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Nice.  *




Were you one of those who said that?  That's like people telling me I was sick because I read a lot of Steven King and other horror authors.   Idiots.   To say that writing of the macabre is "unhealthy" reveals one as a moron.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Aug 21, 2002)

Wolfen Priest said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Flexor, how old were you when you started playing D&D?  I was 12; my parents had to buy me the books.  If it starts to scare away soccer moms with fears of satanism and dark rituals, guess what?  The hobby will lose gamers, period.  Or else the people who take it up will become even more distanced from 'mainstream' society. *




Around the same age.  My parents had a little more faith in me than most of the "soccer moms" I guess.   But I'm being honest when I say I don't care what people like "soccer moms" in thier SUV's think of gaming or my hobbies.   I gave up striving for "acceptance" a long time ago.  I guess I'm distanced from it as everyone I game with is over 30.


----------



## Wolfspider (Aug 21, 2002)

> Flexor, how old were you when you started playing D&D? I was 12; my parents had to buy me the books. If it starts to scare away soccer moms with fears of satanism and dark rituals, guess what? The hobby will lose gamers, period. Or else the people who take it up will become even more distanced from 'mainstream' society.




I was about ten when I started gaming.  As I recall, the Monster Manual (at least) had quite a bit of nudity in it.  The other books had violent imagery as well.  My mother bought it for me without even flipping through it.  Even if she had, she probably wouldn't have said anything about it.

I doubt that the BoVD will exalt in these kind of images (nudity, violence) to a degree previously unseen.


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Aug 21, 2002)

Psion said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Actually, IIRC Monte has said that they don't spend a whole lot of time on that topic. *




I thought he said that about playing evil characters. Unless that is what you thought I meant, sorry about that if so. I meant dm tips on running evil and the mechanics of different aspects of mwuhahah evil.

FD


----------



## Dr Midnight (Aug 21, 2002)

Flexor the Mighty! said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Were you one of those who said that?  That's like people telling me I was sick because I read a lot of Steven King and other horror authors.   Idiots.   To say that writing of the macabre is "unhealthy" reveals one as a moron. *




Whether or not you believe that, it's just not a sweet happy nice thing to blanket people on ENworld with terms like idiotic and moron. 

My thing, to clarify, is not that Monte has an UNHEALTHY fascination with this material. I say I'm a little tired of Monte's fascination with this material. I don't really care about the porn angle, although Wolfen Priest is absolutely right: the game industry, particularly WotC, doesn't need this kind of attention-getter. It may sell books, but are we taking a risk of flaring up the Jack Chicks of the world? 



> I'm being honest when I say I don't care what people like "soccer moms" in thier SUV's think of gaming or my hobbies. I gave up striving for "acceptance" a long time ago.




the classic gamer approach.
Do you "care" what these "soccer moms" can do to the "industry"?


----------



## JeffB (Aug 21, 2002)

Cmon folks..let's keep this civil....

Another serious question...does anyone forsee the local bookstores who carry WOTC product shrinkwrapping the item? I know in mine, all the D&D stuff is mixed up with all the comic books...errr..excuse me..graphic novels...


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Aug 21, 2002)

So be it.  I have long ago stopped caring what others think of music I listen to, books I read, movies I watch, and games I play.  I don't care.  I've heard every comment and every slander.   People will think what they want to, I couldn't care less.   If you are constantly thinking, "what will the soccer moms of the world think!" then I suggest you reexamine things.  I don't strive for acceptance,  they day I do that I may as well start listening to pop music and watching network TV.  A scary thought.


----------



## Ristamar (Aug 21, 2002)

Wolfen Priest said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Yes, actually.  If WotC is publishing it, you can be sure it's going to be displayed at your nearest local Barnes & Noble bookstore, (or Waldenbooks or whatever).  If it just said "d20" on the cover, most mom's wouldn't understand what it was for.
> 
> And for those who simply don't give a rat's you-know-what about the next generation of players, do you ever think about what will happen to our little hobby if people stop playing it?  I for one don't want to see it taken over by CRPG's.  Flexor, how old were you when you started playing D&D?  I was 12; my parents had to buy me the books.  If it starts to scare away soccer moms with fears of satanism and dark rituals, guess what?  The hobby will lose gamers, period.  Or else the people who take it up will become even more distanced from 'mainstream' society. *




I think you're being a bit too reactionary.  Realistically, if all the Vampire, Werewolf, Ravenloft, and other 'evil' books sitting at Borders and Barnes & Noble haven't alarmed the conservative parent(s) yet, I doubt the BoVD will either.

Secondly, I have no doubt the book will be tasteful considering it is Monte and WotC that are releasing this work.

I agree that the game needs to maintain a positive image, but that doesn't mean the industry needs to walk on egg shells.  If a publisher releases tasteful material dealing with evil beings and their doings, yet parents pull their child out of the hobby due to a book cover/title they see at the local bookstore, then that is not the fault of the hobby.  That is simply the result of ignorance and poor parenting and/or extremist beliefs.  

If most concerned parents had a smidgen of factual knowledge relating to RPG's, they'd likely be thrilled that their child is embracing an arguably enriching hobby.  Instead of worrying about 'little Billy' playing D&D, parents should be more concerned with what music he listens to, what movies he watches, where he's hanging out after school, etc.  Chances are he's not going to hurt himself or anyone by using his imagination, sitting at the table with some friends, pretending to thwart the plans of evil wizard who plans to sacrifice the kidnapped maiden.  Hell, they might even learn something while they're at it...   imagine that.


----------



## Sammael99 (Aug 21, 2002)

Tsyr said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Sick? Probably not. Twisted? Hell yes. How else do you explain Lovecraft?  *




Well, old Howard Philips was likely sick as well as twisted, but not necessarily in the way people think (rather the opposite, actually...)


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Aug 21, 2002)

JeffB said:
			
		

> *Cmon folks..let's keep this civil....
> 
> Another serious question...does anyone forsee the local bookstores who carry WOTC product shrinkwrapping the item? I know in mine, all the D&D stuff is mixed up with all the comic books...errr..excuse me..graphic novels... *




The cover pics that are floating about right now are pretty silly looking. I doubt there will be any mass move to do anything special with the book.

FD


----------



## Buttercup (Aug 21, 2002)

Please, people!  Can we stop sneering and sniping at each other?  Nothing is gained by it.  

I suspect that parents who are inclined to see satanism hiding everywhere don't let their children play D&D anyway.  Those who are less fearful about passtimes that rely on imagination aren't going to be phased by this book.  This whole issue is most likely a tempest in a teapot.  But even if BoVD turns out to realize the worst fears expressed in this thread, each one of us has a way to send a message that we don't like it.  Just don't buy it.

None of us can control what other people think, we can only try to influence others' opinions by logical argument.  For those segments of the public lost to logic, there is no hope.  So don't lose sleep over them.  Life is too short.

Now, let's lower the hostility quotient, ok?


----------



## Hakkenshi (Aug 21, 2002)

> the classic gamer approach.




At least he's being consistent, since he IS a gamer 

The fact of the matter is that soccer moms (or dads, for that matter) won't sink the industry. Gamers beget more gamers somehow. The geeks of the world congregate one way or another.

I started gaming when I was 12 as well (although that only means 10 years' experience in my case  ), and my mom didn't care, despite the fact that I played soccer. Her only concern was (and still is) that I make sure not to play D&D to the exclusion of everything else. She still wouldn't have spontaneously bought the books for me.

Yet somehow I hooked up with some friends who turned out to be gamers. There was no planning to it, it just happened. And many others I know have had the same experience.

To take a bad example (and I know it is one), most soccer moms wouldn't approve of their kids looking at internet porn either. But every male teen still does it somehow. Go figure.

As long as there are gamers who want to game, the game itself can't fail. The industry could come crashing down around us, and we'd still go online to bitch and moan and praise and argue about so-and-so's take on this-and-that.

We geeks are like that 

*Oh, and as a side-note, I'm MUCH more worried about what blatant exploitation like Afghanistan d20 can do for the "industry" than the BoVD. Gimme a friggin' break.*


----------



## Tiefling (Aug 21, 2002)

Sammael99 said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Well, old Howard Philips was likely sick as well as twisted, but not necessarily in the way people think (rather the opposite, actually...) *




Hmm. Cancerous and scoliotic?


----------



## Henry (Aug 21, 2002)

Tiefling said:
			
		

> *Hmm. Cancerous and scoliotic? *




poikilothermic, actually.


----------



## Sammael99 (Aug 21, 2002)

Tiefling said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Hmm. Cancerous and scoliotic? *




I was thinking along the lines of xenophobic, extreme puritan and mysoginistic (sp ?). Not exactly the definition of "sick" that people usually imagine.

At least until the last few years of his life. Fortunately, these traits do not appear much in his short stories, although they are readily apparent in his letters. 

Fascinating character, that Lovecraft. And a brave enough man to face his faults later in his life and actually study the cultures he had dismissed as "inferior" earlier on...


----------



## Dr Midnight (Aug 21, 2002)

Hakkenshi said:
			
		

> *The fact of the matter is that soccer moms (or dads, for that matter) won't sink the industry.* [/B]



D&D's initial surge of popularity went wild for a few years, and then died off. There are many reasons for the trend, but ONE of those was the soccer moms and dads of the world launching a full-out assault. This of course prompted some people to buy the books- BECAUSE of the controversial nature- but overall it was damaging. D&D is now a closet hobby for most players, just because they've been distanced and stereotyped. 

Plus, some of them don't bathe.


----------



## barsoomcore (Aug 21, 2002)

Wolfspider said:
			
		

> *Man, there's too much free porn on the internet for me to use an expensive gaming book as masturbatory material and risk getting it all messed up.  (I learned that lesson with some of my high school yearbooks.)*




Man, I wish I'd gone to YOUR high school!


----------



## CBS Brian (Aug 21, 2002)

*Monte Obsessed?  I don't think so!*

Dr. Midnight, you say MC has an unhealthy fascination with evil.  OK, let's look at the "evil" products he's produced.

DMG?  Not evil

BOEM I &II? Not evil

Demon God's Fane? No more evil than any other high-level adventure produced by either WotC or another d20 publisher.

Call of Cthulhu d20?  OK, evil.  Or at least scary enough to be called evil.

The Banewarrens?  OK, evil.

Book of Vile Darkness?  Yes, evil, evil, evil!

Now let's look at those three products.  Both CoC d20 & BoVD are Wizards products he had already started while employed at WotC.  When he left, all the projects he wound up having to finish his projects as a freelancer (read his message board posts, website articles, and interviews with Morrus).

Did he choose to do them?  Well he's a huge CoC fan by his own admission, so he probably jumped at the chance to do a d20 version.  But the product itself was created by Wizards & Chaosium, not Monte.

Yes he pitched BoVD to Wizards.  He also pitched a Book of Exalted Deeds.  If you read his interviews he thought instead of class splatbooks (Sword & Fist, Song & Silence, etc.) that Wizards should try something new and go for alignment splatbooks.  Didn't pan out that way, but Wizards dug evil.  So again, he wound up doing that.

The Banewarrens, the least evil of these three (OK, I haven't seen BoVD, but I the title alone makes it more evil than the Banewarrens).  I own it.  It's not that evil.  And it seems to have been an adventure he designed to run his victims-I mean players-through.

Add to that the facts that in one of his interviews he actually said he was looking forward to NOT doing any more evil products, and how they just kind of snowballed up on him, I'd say that adds up to proof that he's not obsessed.

Simply put, you're so wrong, ignorant, and out of line you owe Monte Cook an apology.


----------



## Desdichado (Aug 21, 2002)

Buttercup said:
			
		

> *I suspect that parents who are inclined to see satanism hiding everywhere don't let their children play D&D anyway.  Those who are less fearful about passtimes that rely on imagination aren't going to be phased by this book.  This whole issue is most likely a tempest in a teapot.  But even if BoVD turns out to realize the worst fears expressed in this thread, each one of us has a way to send a message that we don't like it.  Just don't buy it.
> *



Besides, the Book of Fiends series from Green Ronin already has all those rules (with the exception of Demon Princes -- it only has Demon Lords 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





  You've got the thaumaterge class that sacrifices _something_ depending on your patron for dark powers, you've got nude fiends (esp. Sam Wood's illustrations in _Legions of Hell_ you've got about the most vile torture and drug abuse imagineable (granted, their use isn't statted out, though.)  Nobody's up in arms about Green Ronin, to the best of my knowledge.  What makes this so special?


----------



## Desdichado (Aug 21, 2002)

*Re: Monte Obsessed?  I don't think so!*



			
				CBS Brian said:
			
		

> *Simply put, you're so wrong, ignorant, and out of line you owe Monte Cook an apology. *



Speaking of wrong or ignorant, you're ignoring everything he wrote in the industry _before_ the release of 3e.


----------



## Dr Midnight (Aug 21, 2002)

*Re: Monte Obsessed?  I don't think so!*



			
				CBS Brian said:
			
		

> *Dr. Midnight, you say MC has an unhealthy fascination with evil.  *



Uh, I never said he has an unhealthy fascination with evil. Look again. 



> _Originally posted by CBS Brian _*Simply put, you're so wrong, ignorant, and out of line you owe Monte Cook an apology. *



I'll wait for yours, first.


----------



## Wolfspider (Aug 21, 2002)

barsoomcore said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Man, I wish I'd gone to YOUR high school! *




*chuckles*

Yes, it was a very progressive school.


----------



## Dakeyras (Aug 21, 2002)

I for one will be buying it.  For one thing I like Monte's work so I don't think I'll hate it and second unlike alot of you, I'll be starting to DM my First actual campaign soon.  So I while I can come up with villains and such why shouldn't I use the resources of someone whose been DM'ing alot longer then me.  There are going to be ideas in this book that I'd probably never have, and since my players have known me forever it'll help me surprise them.  And that's my main reason for buying this book, my players watch, read, listen to pretty much the same things I do so I need to go outside our likes etc for inspiration.  I could just read or watch things I don't like, or I could buy a book of one authors distilled villainous inspirations, especially one whose work I already respect.  

Dakeyras


----------



## Psion (Aug 21, 2002)

Wolfen Priest said:
			
		

> *I was 12; my parents had to buy me the books.  If it starts to scare away soccer moms with fears of satanism and dark rituals, guess what?  The hobby will lose gamers, period.  Or else the people who take it up will become even more distanced from 'mainstream' society. *




This is my fear as well. I was blessed with parents who pretty much trusted me and didn't over-react when I brought home a copy of "Arcanum" (which, for reference, had a pentagram cover like R&R). Other parents of would-be gamers out there might not be so tolerant.

I think gaming is a worthwhile hobby, mentally engaging and a lot healthier than a lot of other activities youngsters could be involved with these days. I would hate to see that all go to pot because someone felt like pushing the issue on what to include in a variety of popular books.

Not that I think or know that BovD is pushing it, of course.


----------



## Balsamic Dragon (Aug 21, 2002)

*Re: Monte Obsessed?  I don't think so!*



			
				CBS Brian said:
			
		

> *Dr. Midnight, you say MC has an unhealthy fascination with evil.  OK, let's look at the "evil" products he's produced.
> *




You forgot about Return to the Temple of Elemental EEEEVIILLLL!

Seriously though, it is true that Monte _has_ been focused on darker, horror genre roleplaying as of late.  There isn't anything wrong with that!  

Personally, I don't mix too much horror into my D&D game.  A little, yes, but not a lot.  As an analogy:  I don't have a problem with hand crossbows, complex seige weaponry or even a little bit of gunpowder in my game, but steampunk is not something that I would introduce to D&D.  A d20 steampunk game?  Sure!  But not a steampunk supplement for D&D.  By the same token, I think a d20 horror game is cooler than a supplement to introduce horror into D&D.  It's just a personal preference really.  

Balsamic Dragon


----------



## Hakkenshi (Aug 21, 2002)

The most enthusiastic and eager player I know has a family full of people who denounce D&D so much that they prohibited him from watching the damn cartoon. How much worse can you get?

I seriously doubt that any word leaking out about this book (especially with all the tip-toeing that WotC seems to be engaging in for it) is going to compromise gaming in any way. I don't think it's going to stop parents from buying Pokémon cards for their kids because of the association of WotC with EVIL.

Parents probably worried a WHOLE lot more about the Diablo phenomenon.


----------



## Nathanael (Aug 21, 2002)

My point, exactly, Psion.

Regardless of the vile stuff already out (the Green Ronin books for example) the BoVD will have the D&D logo squarely on its cover. This means linking that material to the game in a very definate way.

As a personal note, my mother thought D&D was the work of satan based upon what her church group said. She was surprised to hear that I played it. I explained to her the entire concept and the myths and rumours and their origination. She said, 'oh, that's not so bad' and left me to it. Would she have said that if she knew about the BoVD?

As another point, my FLGS places a little 1'x1' card on the D&D shelf explaining to parents the wheres and why-fores of D&D and how it benefits your child (the three R's) and can be a family activity. The BoVD will throw the good that comes of that practice out the window, as it blatantly proclaims its contents and cover under a D&D logo. Welcome back to the '80s and the concept that D&D is for sociopathic rejects with a disgusting fascination with the profane.

Yeah, a lot of you don't give a rats a33 what the other people of the world think. This attitude, of course, exacerbates the problem and perpetuates the 'sociopath nerd' stereotype, but the real point is that the world doesn't work like that anymore. You can't depend on people just forgetting the thing exists like you could before the advent of the internet. Fact is, with society as 'hooked in' as it is, you can bet that a media frenzy will descend on the game as soon as some depressed teen kills some classmates and they find the BoVD in his room. Then Hasbro will drop it and you can kiss D&D goodbye, because it hasn't become mainstream enough to survive such attacks, unlike computer games. And why hasn't it? Because some of you don't want it to be.

Is the above example extreme? Maybe. But so are a lot of other 'hysterical historical events' that ruined many great things (Muslims blowing up ancient budhist art, for example).  Call me 'prophet of doom' or whatever you will, but I think one should take a bigger picture view on the way our hobby is percieved in society, especially todays 'think less, accept what the news tells you' society. Greater things than D&D have gone the way of the Giant Space hamster for lesser offenses...


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Aug 21, 2002)

Nathanael said:
			
		

> *Call me 'prophet of doom' or whatever you will, but I think one should take a bigger picture view on the way our hobby is percieved in society...*




Here is the way I see it-

I am a rather conservative fellow and have in the past started some annoyingly long discussions on my feelings about why I don't play evil pc's and don't allow my players to do so when I dm.

I will be the first to stand up and protest this book if it is as bad as a lot of people are making it out to be.

BUT- I am not chicken little. I will not let my concerns dictate my actions or feelings. 

Unless you are suggesting that those concerned start a campeign to stop WOTC from releasing the book, then sit back and wait.

You will find a lot more support IF you are right.

FD


----------



## Dr Midnight (Aug 21, 2002)

VERY well written, Nathanael. Every time I try to write something like that, I fall wayyyy short.


----------



## Hakkenshi (Aug 21, 2002)

> Yeah, a lot of you don't give a rats a33 what the other people of the world think. This attitude, of course, exacerbates the problem and perpetuates the 'sociopath nerd' stereotype, but the real point is that the world doesn't work like that anymore. You can't depend on people just forgetting the thing exists like you could before the advent of the internet. Fact is, with society as 'hooked in' as it is, you can bet that a media frenzy will descend on the game as soon as some depressed teen kills some classmates and they find the BoVD in his room. Then Hasbro will drop it and you can kiss D&D goodbye, because it hasn't become mainstream enough to survive such attacks, unlike computer games. And why hasn't it? Because some of you don't want it to be.




No, not caring what the world is a healthy attitude. If we cared what the world thinks, we couldn't be role-playing in the first place. And people WILL forget the thing exists, just as people have already forgotten last September enough for something like Afghanistan d20 to come out. It would never have happened without the events of September 11th, but so far the outcry has been non-existent (and I for one would welcome it!).

As for Hasbro, I couldn't care less. Even WotC failing at this point couldn't stop the hobby. Are gamers really going to stop playing? I don't think so. Who buys these products? Not parents. When I was 12, I bought all my books myself, and everyone I know who games has done the same. The Internet is PRECISELY the thing that will allow a hobby of this kind to endure far beyond the public reaction to it.

As for the sociopath nerd stereotype, that's perpetuated mainly by stubborn lack of hygiene in some gamers who would be weirdos even if they didn't game. D&D just happens to cater to the reclusive nature of many of them. None of my friends who game are these "typical" gamers (though I know some who are). These people are unpleasant even outside of D&D and gaming in general. And protesting that something sucks before having read the first page is one of their favourite pastimes, from what I've gathered in my conversations with them.

Not caring what everyone thinks is what keeps the hobby going.


----------



## Nathanael (Aug 21, 2002)

While I would normally agree with you completely, Furn, I feel that the nature of the book, the silence from WOTC about it, and the few reports given out about the thing are bad news. The things it purports to address in a 'frank and mature' manner alone are enough to turn my stomach.

It's not about fixing the problem after the book is out. As I've pointed out, bad publicity, which spreads like wildfire in the modern day, can sink a product without time for explanation. I feel that the damage done upon this things release will be hard to repair and set the whole hobby back. 

The other thing I find wrong about the book is the reasoning behind why it needs to be made in the first place. I personally see it as a way for WOTC to stir up contraversy and stimulate the flagging sales of the core books (due to almost every gamer owning them) by getting attention in the media to showcase the book to non-gamers. You don't need rules for these things. As my first post suggested, these should be story effects, not mechanical effects and they should be seen from a more human viewpoint, not the viewpoint of how to do them. Even the fantasy writers everyone keeps bringing up don't rely on such graphic imagery to get the point across. Tolkien didn't. He used evil as a forbodeing presence without telling us what would happen in detail if sauron wins. And he's considered the greatest fantasy authour of the 20th century...


----------



## Psion (Aug 21, 2002)

> *
> No, not caring what the world is a healthy attitude.
> *




BS. Sociopathy is not a healthy attitude.



> *
> If we cared what the world thinks, we couldn't be role-playing in the first place.
> *




Blatant bifurcation. You don't have to (indeed, can't) adhere to all the expectations every group or individual lays on you. But that doesn't mean that you can't come to an peaceful relationship with the world around you and try to make it a better place for yourself, your fellow man, and would be gamers who would know the joys you have known without having unnecessary disdain cast upon them.


----------



## Nathanael (Aug 21, 2002)

By the way, Thanks Dr. Midnight! That's the greatest compliment you can give a writer!

And, again, Psion hits one out of the park.

I want more 'normal' people playing D&D. This kind of publicity only ensures that the vast majority of people you have to play with are going to fit the stereotype.


----------



## drowdude (Aug 21, 2002)

"Bad is good baby!!! Down with government!!!"


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Aug 21, 2002)

Nathanael said:
			
		

> *
> It's not about fixing the problem after the book is out. As I've pointed out, bad publicity, which spreads like wildfire in the modern day, can sink a product without time for explanation. I feel that the damage done upon this things release will be hard to repair and set the whole hobby back. *




I apologize if I have missed for what I am about to ask in a previous post, but what do you want to do about it as of right now?

FD


----------



## Desdichado (Aug 21, 2002)

Nathanael said:
			
		

> *The other thing I find wrong about the book is the reasoning behind why it needs to be made in the first place. I personally see it as a way for WOTC to stir up contraversy and stimulate the flagging sales of the core books (due to almost every gamer owning them) by getting attention in the media to showcase the book to non-gamers. You don't need rules for these things. As my first post suggested, these should be story effects, not mechanical effects and they should be seen from a more human viewpoint, not the viewpoint of how to do them. Even the fantasy writers everyone keeps bringing up don't rely on such graphic imagery to get the point across. Tolkien didn't. He used evil as a forbodeing presence without telling us what would happen in detail if sauron wins. And he's considered the greatest fantasy authour of the 20th century... *



Two (or so) quick points.  First, your assumption is that this book is being made to get a media knee-jerk reaction to get more buyers to plop down their dollars.  Wha..?!?  
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





  I don't believe a word of that.  Not only is that strategy absurd in the extreme, there's no indication other than your borderline "conspiracy theory" opinion that it is so.  This book is getting _no_ press outside of the hobby, and I'd be very surprised if it ever does.

Secondly, your worry about graphic violence is also a bit outdated.  Although I tend to agree with you on the unnecessary and gratuitous use of graphic violence, the fact of the matter is, society, to a large extent, no longer does.  Mainstream entertainment features stuff that's much worse than any likely content in this book, and for the most part, nobody much raises an eyebrow at it these days.

Not trying to say I'm in favor of such an attitude, but I do believe it's silly to not recognize what our society has become and what it now accepts.


----------



## barsoomcore (Aug 21, 2002)

Nathanael said:
			
		

> *Even the fantasy writers everyone keeps bringing up don't rely on such graphic imagery to get the point across. Tolkien didn't. He used evil as a forbodeing presence without telling us what would happen in detail if sauron wins. And he's considered the greatest fantasy authour of the 20th century... *




I'm not sure I agree with you, Nathaneal.

I think you could argue that Tolkien is in fact quite specific about what Sauron's rule will entail -- the characters, motivations and lifestyles of the orcs are described in some detail, as is the landscape of Mordor. And what Saruman does to the Shire at the end is very much a "hobbit's-eye" view of what Sauron's rule might be like.

In Tolkien's view, of course, cutting down a tree is just about the worst thing anyone can do. The Silmarillion makes that pretty clear. Heh.

And there are a number of great fantasy writers that have been even more specific about evil and its behaviour -- Michael Moorcock includes rapes, tortures and assorted sado-masochism in pretty much all his books, Glenn Cook's Black Company books make no bones about how awful human beings can truly be to each other -- I could go on.

None of this has anything to do with the BoVD, of course. I think myself you're being a little melodramatic, and certainly jumping the gun. I think, too, in an age where movies can routinely depict staggering levels of violence, misogyny (_XXX_, anyone?) and foulness, this book won't be a blip on anyone's radar. This is NOT the early 80's, where _Friday the 13th_ was considered subversive and surely a sign of civilization's end. _Friday the 13th_ seems quaint these days.

Besides, is there any evidence to suggest that the anti-D&D fad of the 80's actually impacted book sales to any degree? TSR was certainly poorly managed enough to go under without any help whatsoever.

So all this fuss and bother seems to me like people getting excited about something because it's fun to get excited about things. One book is not going to make or break our hobby.


----------



## Nathanael (Aug 21, 2002)

Furn asked what I to do? All I can do: voice my opinion and hope that others will do the same. 

If an exec of WOTC is reading any of this, I hope that it will at least make him think twice about the release of this product under the D&D label and perhaps convince his bosses of the same. At the very least, I would like them to release it under some other label, in the same fashion White Wolf did with Black Dog, so the connection isn't so defined.

In the end, though, I'm trying to nurture the hobby I love and protect it whilst introducing a more mainstream type of person into the wonderful world of heroic fantasy via the great grandaddy of RPGs.


----------



## kenjib (Aug 21, 2002)

Nathanael said:
			
		

> *While I would normally agree with you completely, Furn, I feel that the nature of the book, the silence from WOTC about it, and the few reports given out about the thing are bad news. The things it purports to address in a 'frank and mature' manner alone are enough to turn my stomach.
> *




...and because it turns *your* stomach, it shouldn't be available to *me*?  Come on now, it doesn't sound like there's anything in this book that you can't get from reading Robert Howard or H.P. Lovecraft.



			
				Nathanael said:
			
		

> *It's not about fixing the problem after the book is out. As I've pointed out, bad publicity, which spreads like wildfire in the modern day, can sink a product without time for explanation. I feel that the damage done upon this things release will be hard to repair and set the whole hobby back.
> *




D&D just isn't the big deal now that it was in the 80's when it came under fire before.  With all of the stuff parents need to watch out for today, D&D just doesn't top the list anymore.  I think that the demographic has also shifted to an older audience.  This is all rampant speculation on both sides though.



			
				Nathanael said:
			
		

> *The other thing I find wrong about the book is the reasoning behind why it needs to be made in the first place. I personally see it as a way for WOTC to stir up contraversy and stimulate the flagging sales of the core books (due to almost every gamer owning them) by getting attention in the media to showcase the book to non-gamers. You don't need rules for these things. As my first post suggested, these should be story effects, not mechanical effects and they should be seen from a more human viewpoint, not the viewpoint of how to do them. Even the fantasy writers everyone keeps bringing up don't rely on such graphic imagery to get the point across. Tolkien didn't. He used evil as a forbodeing presence without telling us what would happen in detail if sauron wins. And he's considered the greatest fantasy authour of the 20th century... *




Sauron created the one ring to enslave the owners of the other rings.  The nine humans were turned into foul, demonic, wraiths through this corruption (PRC and/or template and rules on resisting the will of evil corruption).  Gollum turned into a twisted and evil being for his covetousness over the one ring (new cursed magic item and a template).  This all sounds like great material for the Book of Vile Darkness.  Slavery, the corruption of the soul through lust for power and greed.  How do you handle a magic item that corrupts the souls of those who use it, enslaving them to a dark lord?  That tempts them to use it's power so that it can corrupt their souls and enslave them to it's will?

Why gee...it sounds like the Book of Vile Darkness might even have some rules that touch on these subjects!  It's a perfect act of villainly for our bold and valiant heroes to rail against -- to paint the villain as truly vile, unrepentant, and thoroughly evil so that he can be soundly thrashed by the forces of good.  The book of vile darkness might just be a great supplement for d20 roleplaying in Middle Earth.

These aren't purely story effects.  There are things in there that could be well served with mechanics.  You can make up the rules yourself, wing it and adjudicate it ad hoc, or use some solid, playtested, rules written by the guy considered perhaps the top name in d20 writing at the moment.


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Aug 21, 2002)

Nathanael said:
			
		

> *All I can do: voice my opinion and hope that others will do the same. *




Well, if the limit of your voice is on this message board, then I don't mean to sound offensive- but I doubt how sincere you are on the matter.

If it bothers you then snail *and* e-mail wotc and MC. Write a letter to dragon (which reachs people this board does not). Push other people who believe the same way as you do to do all of the above.

If you are not willing to make an effort, then I don't see the point in getting upset over the issue.

Respectfully submitted
FD


----------



## Hakkenshi (Aug 21, 2002)

> BS. Sociopathy is not a healthy attitude.




You misunderstood, Psion. Sociopathy is not healthy, but deciding what you do in relation to what people might think of what you do is no more healthy. You end up doing nothing for fear of displeasing someone. I personally don't care what people think of the fact that I roleplaying, and if they make an issue of the fact that they don't like it, they can take a hike.

The people who matter to me (and there are many) would NEVER make me feel out of place because I game.



> Blatant bifurcation. You don't have to (indeed, can't) adhere to all the expectations every group or individual lays on you. But that doesn't mean that you can't come to an peaceful relationship with the world around you and try to make it a better place for yourself, your fellow man, and would be gamers who would know the joys you have known without having unnecessary disdain cast upon them.




Don't get me wrong, I'm advocating neither anarchy nor blatant disregard for your fellow man. I'll try and get along with everyone if I can. But don't say that not publishing the BoVD makes the world a better place for "myself, my fellow man, and would-be gamers etc. etc." Because it won't.

I certainly do NOT disdain would-be gamers, or indeed anyone else except those who would judge something before knowing anything about it. But if gamers quit gaming just because they're afraid that some people might disapprove, maybe the hobby deserves to die out. There's something to be said for "doing your own thing", after all.

People are talking about the release of this book as though it were the coming Apocalypse. I'd bet dollars to dimes it won't make more than a few tiny ripples caused by indignant puritans who haven't even read it.

CoC is scary, and deals with madness; Monte Cook wrote that book, and no one's any more insane than they already were. Why would he suddenly write a book that's going sink everything he's worked for?! Think about it, people. The man ought to know what he's doing.


----------



## Corinth (Aug 21, 2002)

Wolfen Priest said:
			
		

> *If it starts to scare away soccer moms with fears of satanism and dark rituals, guess what?  The hobby will lose gamers, period.  Or else the people who take it up will become even more distanced from 'mainstream' society. *



The D&D target audience is college undergraduates, not pre-teens.  There is no danger of parental disapproval here.


----------



## Wolfspider (Aug 21, 2002)

I'm sorry to bring up this potential bit of flamebait, but this entire discussion against the publication of Book of Vile Darkness smacks too much of censorship for me to be comfortable with it.  

There have been many books published in the past that have been controversial in nature and opposed by many groups due to "evil" content, from _Catcher in the Rye_ to _Harry Potter_.  Now, I'm not saying that the BoVD is great literature (as much as I respect Mr. Cook), but I think that it should be offered the same respect that ANY book has.

In addition, some of you seem to be implying that we should ban this gaming book so that gaming books will not be banned.  No, the word "ban" hasn't actually been used, but the sentiment seems to be there.  You would much prefer that this book not be published.  That's not banning, but it's pretty close to it.  I guess it's a "pre-ban."  In any case, the circular nature of this argument should be obvious.

You might respond that we should sacrifice this one book so that the hobby will live on...cutting off the gangrenous limb so that the body itself will remain healthy.  But I see no indication that the publication of the BoVD is in any way unhealthy for the hobby.  At one point, White Wolf was in the spotlight over its Vampire game.  In fact, I daresay that Vampire eclipsed D&D as the RPG bad seed when you consider the natural attention the "Vampire murders" gathered.  But White Wolf kept on plugging along, publishing its controversial material unhindered by this scrutiny.  In fact, they even have a line of books, the Black Dog imprint, devoted to material that I warrant will far eclipse that in the BoVD in terms of "evil" content.  But White Wolf lived on.  The hobby lived on.  

There are similar examples concerning computer games.  Quake was blamed for school shootings.  Quake is still a popular computer game these days.  Marilyn Manson was blamed for school shootings.  He still sells albums and plays sold-out shows.

One book will not kill D&D or the gaming hobby.  However, the attitude that we should just roll-over to cater to the ideas of a minority of people who might be offended by gaming just might strip the hobby of its soul.

I know I'm not the only one who remembers the "soccor mom" premise behind 2nd edition.  Anyone up to fighting some tannari and baatezu?

Not me.  I prefer to call things by what they are.  Let me battle against vile demons and devils.  The darker the evil, the brighter and more satisfying the vanquishing of it.


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Aug 21, 2002)

kenjib said:
			
		

> *
> Sauron created the one ring to enslave the owners of the other rings.  The nine humans were turned into foul, demonic, wraiths through this corruption (PRC and/or template and rules on resisting the will of evil corruption).  Gollum turned into a twisted and evil being for his covetousness over the one ring (new cursed magic item and a template).  This all sounds like great material for the Book of Vile Darkness.  Slavery, the corruption of the soul through lust for power and greed.  How do you handle a magic item that corrupts the souls of those who use it, enslaving them to a dark lord?  That tempts them to use it's power so that it can corrupt their souls and enslave them to it's will?
> 
> Why gee...it sounds like the Book of Vile Darkness might even have some rules that touch on these subjects!  It's a perfect act of villainly for our bold and valiant heroes to rail against -- to paint the villain as truly vile, unrepentant, and thoroughly evil so that he can be soundly thrashed by the forces of good.  The book of vile darkness might just be a great supplement for d20 roleplaying in Middle Earth.
> ...




I think you may be dead-on accurate with your assessment of what the Book of Vile Darkness will contain. This illustration using the Lord of the Rings is fantastic.

EDIT: I'm justvguessing, of course, but kenjib's assessment seems *much* more in keeping with what Monte has written in the past than some of the other speculations I've seen.


----------



## Hakkenshi (Aug 21, 2002)

Yes, kenjib got it dead-on. And as for Monte Cook saying the book was hard to work on because of the subject matter, well, I'd think that writing about what kenjib described would begin to wear on anyone in the long run.

As for these so-called "soccermoms", are they a new type of demon in the Monster Manual 2? Or is that covered in the BoVD?


----------



## Desdichado (Aug 21, 2002)

Wolfspider said:
			
		

> *I'm sorry to bring up this potential bit of flamebait, but this entire discussion against the publication of Book of Vile Darkness smacks too much of censorship for me to be comfortable with it.
> *



I don't see how.  Are you suggesting that anyone on this board has the power and authority to tell publishers what to publish and what not to publish and actually make it happen?

Let's not go crazy here.  Someone saying they don't like the premise of a book and wishing it wasn't published, and expressing their opinion that it would be better off not published: that's not censorship.  Some outside agency going in to WotC, shutting down their print shops, blotting out certain words or images -- all without the consent WotC -- now that's censorship.


----------



## Ristamar (Aug 21, 2002)

Hakkenshi said:
			
		

> *...are they a new type of demon in the Monster Manual 2? Or is that covered in the BoVD?  *




You might want to look into the other _BoVD_.  I refer to, of course, the B00|< of V4p1d D0rkn355!!!*

I heard the Epic Assassin and the Epic Accountant make appearances, as well.  


*_Translation for the l33tspeak impaired: Book of Vapid Dorkness._


----------



## CBS Brian (Aug 21, 2002)

*Wow, quick responses*

I only made that post an hour or so ago, and I've been reprimanded three times already.  Wow!

Firstly, to Mr. Dyal: I don't know much about Monte's work prior to 3E, I know he worked for Iron Crown; I have never read an IC product (my loss? I have no idea).  Secondly Dr. Midnight was talking about Monte's "fascination" (my bad wordage midnight, see below) LATELY, so I only referenced the most recent materials he's produced.

I forget who mentioned this, but I did forget RttToEE.  Don't own it, not a Greyhawk fan, just slipped my mind.  Oops.

Dr. Midnight: I do owe you an apology for misquoting you. I read the entire thread, up to my post, straight and probably got your original statement mixed up with something I've read somewhere else on this board...or Monte's board...or maybe Jack Chick's board...who knows.  However, I still think my point stands: claiming MC's is fascinated (which is really just obsession to more minute degree) with evil is just plain unfair.  I write alot of short stories, and in almost everyone people have a meal, but I'm not obsessed with food.  Silly analogy, I know, but I'm at work, and am tired.  Anyways, I came off a little too harsh and I apologize.


----------



## Hakkenshi (Aug 21, 2002)

> Let's not go crazy here. Someone saying they don't like the premise of a book and wishing it wasn't published, and expressing their opinion that it would be better off not published: that's not censorship. Some outside agency going in to WotC, shutting down their print shops, blotting out certain words or images -- all without the consent WotC -- now that's censorship.




I don't know... The intent behind the message definitely is that the book should be barred from publication, which is technically censorship: a censor is someone who examines publications before printed release to suppress any parts on the grounds of obscenity, a threat to security, etc.

(That's almost word-for-word the definition in my Concise Oxford Dictionary)

So you're right to say that it's not ACTUALLY censorship, but the intent is there. This isn't even saying "I don't like the point of the book" (although some people have expressed that opinion, which is fine), it's saying "This sort of thing is offensive and doesn't belong on the market."


----------



## Wolfspider (Aug 21, 2002)

> Let's not go crazy here. Someone saying they don't like the premise of a book and wishing it wasn't published, and expressing their opinion that it would be better off not published: that's not censorship. Some outside agency going in to WotC, shutting down their print shops, blotting out certain words or images -- all without the consent WotC -- now that's censorship.




You're right, my bad.  One is censorship, and the other is just the support of or desire for censorship.  Or perhaps the desire that WotC would self-censor in order to avoid potential public outcry over the publication of the book.


----------



## Wolfspider (Aug 21, 2002)

That was weird.

Sorry, double post.


----------



## Khan the Warlord (Aug 21, 2002)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Let's not go crazy here.  Someone saying they don't like the premise of a book and wishing it wasn't published, and expressing their opinion that it would be better off not published: that's not censorship.
> *




You're 100% correct -- it is truly far from censorship.

When one takes into account that we know SQUAT about the content of the book (the specifics, anyway), it is downright...

IDIOTIC. 

Hmm... I'm getting too passionate about this already and I'm barely into my reply. 

I believe in the integrity and common sense of Monte Cook. I believe in Mr. Cook's game design. I believe in the standards set forth by Monte Cook and his former employers.

What I don't believe, is unfounded whining from a group of people that dare to cast stones at a man that writes a tome with questionable themes that best of all -- NO ONE HAS EVEN READ YET!

Damnit, my temper is flaring, my common sense is quickly depleting, so before I open my mouth in a fashion that various people I work for may not approve of, I guess I'll just finish.


----------



## NeghVar (Aug 21, 2002)

Wolfspider,

You are 100% on target! We the consumers should be the final censor.

Let me as an adult make the decision to buy or not buy BoVD. I think everyone here should wait until it shows up at their FLGS and flip through it, before making sweeping judgements.

How many of you whined this much about novels by Robert Howard, Stephen King, Dennis McKiernan, or any other authors that had "mature" themes in them?

Why not condemn S&SS for having a pentagram on a rulebook (read as Relics & Rituals)? Let's dredge up the Avalanche Press covers issue again! Let's beatup on the "immature" content in Liber Beastarius again (which I playtested).

I personally want to buy BoVD for two reasons, because I like the idea of "Mature Themed" books and I have enjoyed everything Monte has contributed to D&D and the gaming industry.

Later!


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Aug 21, 2002)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Let's not go crazy here.
> *




So.. I got my pitchfork and torch for.. nothing? *sigh*

Fine.

FD


----------



## Ristamar (Aug 21, 2002)

NeghVar said:
			
		

> *Why not condemn S&SS for having a pentagram on a rulebook (read as Relics & Rituals)? *




Not surprisingly, some people did throw a bit of a fit over that cover.  Back in the day, there was a thread or two discussing said pentagram.


----------



## Nathanael (Aug 21, 2002)

Kenjib and others have missed the point.

Tolkien doesn't describe the corruption in graphic terms. He doesn't say 'to get orcs you sodomize elves and then scoop out their brains and replace them with the blood of a slain innocent.'

PrCs. Fine. A ringwraith would have 'wraith powers.' but that's not the point. The mechanics I'm refering to a re about other things that are not necessary to the story. Even Michael Moorcock never went into excruciating detail of Dr. Jests techniques, for instance, merely enough to imply that being his victim was a horror beyond belief. Do you need to know the exact powers you get from vile acts and the dice mechanic to make sure you did the vile act correctly? Ring wraiths are said by Tolkien to be corrupted by their greed and the effect of the one ring. Not 'they sacrificed 100 virgins after sodomizing them and biting off their nipples, because that's how it's done.'

And, Furn, I thought you were being civil, but I guess I was mistaken. How do you know that I haven't written of this subject to Dragon and WOTC? You asked what I planned to accomplish here, and I told you. And, no, I don't believe in censorship (that's how we lost the New Adventures of Mighty Mouse), just a clearly defined line between the generic fantasy RPG of D&D and the 'mature' games like Vampire and certain d20 products. Notice that I haven't started a thread about Green Ronin? Because it's not a visible and persistent symbol of the RPG hobby.

For those who have refused to read back a few pages, I'll recap my points in a condensed format:

D&D is a high profile example of RPGs. It's market is larger than university kids and old D&D vets. Putting the D&D Logo on BoVD will damage the family oriented aspects of roleplaying and discourage parents from allowing their children, a vital source of new players, to participate. D&D is not mainstream enough to survive an attack by the media similar to the one aimed at computer games after Columbine. My belief that the release of this book is a marketing ploy is not a conspiracy theory, but the professional opinion of a Marketing person. History is full of examples of good things gone to pot over bad publicity (Mighty Mouse). Kenzer & Company's book is a good example of the book your looking for without all of the needless graphic exposition. A good storyteller doesn't need such exposition in the first place to create a mood.


----------



## Son_of_Thunder (Aug 21, 2002)

*Holy Smokes! What Fun!*

Greetings all,

It was me you quoted. I said Monte had an unhealthy fascination with evil, but that's just my opinion of course.

On a related note. Issue #300 of Dragon is supposed to have a sealed section in it to go along with the Book of Vile Darkness. Why would it need to be sealed? Is it just a marketing ploy? I wonder. In an upcoming edition of Dungeon there is supposed to be a sealed portion of the magazine with an adventure within. Why?

Son of Thunder


----------



## Khan the Warlord (Aug 21, 2002)

NeghVar said:
			
		

> *Wolfspider,
> 
> You are 100% on target! We the consumers should be the final censor.
> 
> Let me as an adult make the decision to buy or not buy BoVD. I think everyone here should wait until it shows up at their FLGS and flip through it, before making sweeping judgements.*




NeghVar, does it hurt to be so right? 



Face it everyone: no amount of whine nor worry will stop this book from seeing print. Nothing you people say or do at these forums or countless others will be able to force WotC to change their minds about a book that is slated for release THIS SOON.

Nothing.

Nada.

So basically, knowing that you're powerless in this regard, why not cease the worried discussions until AFTER one of you has the book and actually turn out to be so shocked and  dismayed by the content inside.

OK?

Pretty please?

Sugar on top?


----------



## Tiefling (Aug 21, 2002)

Nathanael said:
			
		

> *You don't need rules for these things. As my first post suggested, these should be story effects, not mechanical effects and they should be seen from a more human viewpoint, not the viewpoint of how to do them.*




You go do that in your game. Meanwhile, I'll have rules for how these things work in my game, and they'll be drawn from the BoVD, and if you don't like that, don't play in my game. Meanwhile, shut the hell up about how I shouldn't use a book in my game because you don't use it, and therefore it shouldn't be published.


----------



## Wolfspider (Aug 21, 2002)

Nathanael said:
			
		

> *Kenjib and others have missed the point.
> 
> Tolkien doesn't describe the corruption in graphic terms. He doesn't say 'to get orcs you sodomize elves and then scoop out their brains and replace them with the blood of a slain innocent.'
> 
> *




And you think that this is the kind of thing that Monte Cook is going to do in the BoVD?

Well, since I haven't actually read the book yet, I don't really know (but, knowing Mr. Cook's previous work, I find it highly unlikely).  

I take it, however, that you haven't read the book either, so you're just blowing smoke here.  There's no evidence that this is the kind of content we're going to find when we flip through the BoVD.  

Considering how the other D&D books have been written, I doubt we'll find anything remotely similar to what you've described here.  The subject matter will certainly be different, but the presentation should be similar.  After all, the Psionics Handbook didn't teach its readers how to channel psychic energy with detailed instructions.  The Monster Manual didn't graphically describe how the chimera tears its prey limb from limb.  The section of Player's Handbook describing spells doesn't actually describe the hand gestures and incantations of spellcasting.

All of these books focus on effects.  I warrant that the BoVD will do the same.

Or have I been missing out on the pages and pages of flavor text and fiction in the D&D3e books?  

Nope, that's White Wolf.  Sorry.


----------



## NeghVar (Aug 21, 2002)

Nathanael said:
			
		

> *D&D is a high profile example of RPGs. It's market is larger than university kids and old D&D vets. Putting the D&D Logo on BoVD will damage the family oriented aspects of roleplaying and discourage parents from allowing their children, a vital source of new players, to participate. D&D is not mainstream enough to survive an attack by the media similar to the one aimed at computer games after Columbine. My belief that the release of this book is a marketing ploy is not a conspiracy theory, but the professional opinion of a Marketing person. History is full of examples of good things gone to pot over bad publicity. Kenzer & Company's book is a good example of the book your looking for without all of the needless graphic exposition. A good storyteller doesn't need such exposition in the first place to create a mood. *




Here is my point...

Send the message to WotC by not buying it!

Later!


----------



## Tiefling (Aug 21, 2002)

Nathanael said:
			
		

> *Ring wraiths are said by Tolkien to be corrupted by their greed and the effect of the one ring. Not 'they sacrificed 100 virgins after sodomizing them and biting off their nipples, because that's how it's done.'*




How do you sodomize someone of the opposite sex?


----------



## Hakkenshi (Aug 21, 2002)

> Kenjib and others have missed the point.
> 
> Tolkien doesn't describe the corruption in graphic terms. He doesn't say 'to get orcs you sodomize elves and then scoop out their brains and replace them with the blood of a slain innocent.'
> 
> PrCs. Fine. A ringwraith would have 'wraith powers.' but that's not the point. The mechanics I'm refering to a re about other things that are not necessary to the story. Even Michael Moorcock never went into excruciating detail of Dr. Jests techniques, for instance, merely enough to imply that being his victim was a horror beyond belief. Do you need to know the exact powers you get from vile acts and the dice mechanic to make sure you did the vile act correctly? Ring wraiths are said by Tolkien to be corrupted by their greed and the effect of the one ring. Not 'they sacrificed 100 virgins after sodomizing them and biting off their nipples, because that's how it's done.'




I would LOVE to know where you got all this inside info. Did Monte Cook personally tell about the sodomy and nipple-biting, or did you come up with that all by yourself? 


This is some priceless stuff you wrote. Have you even read anything by Monte Cook? Has he done the sort of thing you describe in the past? Are we even talking about the same Monte Cook?



> A good storyteller doesn't need such exposition in the first place to create a mood.




No, I certainly wouldn't want to read a story describing what you wrote. But then even George R.R. Martin, whose fantasy is gritty to say the LEAST, doesn't rely on such things. D&D should NOT be those weird S&M rituals you describe (and nothing indicates the BoVD will change that), but then again it shouldn't be all prancing through flowery meadows either. And some people WOULD like a book to cover certain angles they haven't considered, and mechanics to help these angles come out into play.


----------



## NeghVar (Aug 21, 2002)

Khan the Warlord said:
			
		

> *NeghVar, does it hurt to be so right?
> *




Only when I laugh!  

Later!


----------



## Maraxle (Aug 21, 2002)

Nathanael said:
			
		

> *You don't need rules for these things. As my first post suggested, these should be story effects, not mechanical effects and they should be seen from a more human viewpoint, not the viewpoint of how to do them. *



That's the truth... and exactly what I was trying to say on my previous post.  Of course, as usual, some twit decided to twist my words and nitpick the way I phrased something.  Which is why this is my final post.


----------



## barsoomcore (Aug 21, 2002)

Nathanael said:
			
		

> *Do you need to know the exact powers you get from vile acts and the dice mechanic to make sure you did the vile act correctly?*




Quite possibly, yes. I need to know, for example, the exact powers I get from sneaky acts (Bluff, Hide, Move Silently). Why not vile acts?



> *Ring wraiths are said by Tolkien to be corrupted by their greed and the effect of the one ring. Not 'they sacrificed 100 virgins after sodomizing them and biting off their nipples, because that's how it's done.'*




And you think BoVD will include this sort of information because...



> *D&D is a high profile example of RPGs. It's market is larger than university kids and old D&D vets. Putting the D&D Logo on BoVD will damage the family oriented aspects of roleplaying and discourage parents from allowing their children, a vital source of new players, to participate.*




Does Universal Pictures releasing _XXX_ discourage parents from allowing their children to see other Universal Pictures releases? Um, no.



> *D&D is not mainstream enough to survive an attack by the media similar to the one aimed at computer games after Columbine.*




D&D has already survived such attacks and is now stronger than ever. Your evidence?



> *My belief that the release of this book is a marketing ploy is not a conspiracy theory, but the professional opinion of a Marketing person.*




Fine. Your evidence?



> *A good storyteller doesn't need such exposition in the first place to create a mood. *




Yes, they often do. Stephen King certainly does. As does Michael Moorcock, your comments on Dr. Jest notwithstanding. The Jerry Cornelius books are full of detailed descriptions of sodomy, murder and other fun stuff. Maybe "full off" is overstating the case, but anyways. A good storyteller includes just the details required to acheive the effect desired.


----------



## Hakkenshi (Aug 21, 2002)

> How do you sodomize someone of the opposite sex?




I hope you're kidding Tiefling, 'cause I don't think anyone can post the answer on the board without getting mauled by a Fiendish Dire Panda.


----------



## Dr Midnight (Aug 21, 2002)

Khan the Warlord said:
			
		

> *Face it everyone: no amount of whine nor worry will stop this book from seeing print. Nothing you people say or do at these forums or countless others will be able to force WotC to change their minds about a book that is slated for release THIS SOON.
> 
> Nothing.
> 
> ...




This is discussion about the book on a messageboard, in a thread about the book. Why can't we discuss it... and why are you assuming people are attempting to halt its release? I think you should reread some of the viewpoints here.


----------



## NeghVar (Aug 21, 2002)

As for the artwork in the book being to "mature" in content...

Perhaps you should go to every book store in the area and make sure they are not placing D&D books next to artbooks by Royo (which I own all of), Frank Frazetta, Boris Valejo, Brom, and so on.

I for one was impressed with the art preview for BoVD at GenCon.

Later!


----------



## JeffB (Aug 21, 2002)

I hope no one construed MY posting as a moral issue with the material; it was solely a gaming focused discussion.

But I do wish to comment a bit on something further…

While the content of the book remains to be seen, I find the hype that either Dragon or Dungeon  using a bit  well…distasteful…

What I mean is the “Sealed Section” of the magazine with the cover hyping the absolute evil things one will find in said section…Shock marketing for sure… Juvenile if you ask me, especially when the product description talks about handling things  “in a mature way”.

Of course this is just par for the course with the way Dragon has handled some issue covers/art and advertising since 3E’s inception.

Anyways..food for thought….regardless of the book’s contents, Dragon and/or Dungeon is handling it poorly in my view.


Ahh and I see someone beat me to it....


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Aug 21, 2002)

Nathanael said:
			
		

> *
> You asked what I planned to accomplish here, and I told you.  *




That is not what I asked- that would be a silly question.

I said, and I quote (haha, I kill me)-



> _Originally posted by Furn_Darkside- the one and only _ I apologize if I have missed for what I am about to ask in a previous post, but what do you want to do about it as of right now?




A bit too wordy, but that could hardly be confused for "What do you want to do about it on Enworld forums?"



> And, Furn, I thought you were being civil, but I guess I was mistaken.




I am not being civil.. because I doubted your sincerity?
You have an interesting view of civil behavior- considering all the ways I could have said that statement.



> How do you know that I haven't written of this subject to Dragon and WOTC?




Err.. that was the point of my misconstrued question. 

If my ability to mangle sentence structure caused the misunderstanding, then I apologize for that.

FD


----------



## Wolfspider (Aug 21, 2002)

Tiefling said:
			
		

> *
> 
> How do you sodomize someone of the opposite sex? *




Ummm...you might want to check the definition of sodomy.

You might also find that it's illegal in your state.  I think it is in mine ....


----------



## Renshai (Aug 21, 2002)

Originally posted by Nathanael .


> Regardless of the vile stuff already out (the Green Ronin books for example) the BoVD will have the D&D logo squarely on its cover. This means linking that material to the game in a very definate way.




What books from Green Ronin are vile? The Secret College of Necromancy? If you think that book is vile you apparently only want to game in a world where the villains whistle zippty do da and not perform the vile acts that a real villain would. 

I personally like my villains to be *evil* to the core, and I like it to show in the game... My players have great imaginations and can figure out for themselves what sort of evil things a villainddoes, but when they actually experience it in the game they are moved to greater acts of heroism. 


I think you have an unhealthy habit of over dramatazing (the comment about Green Ronin and your less than informed verbal crusade against the Book of Vile Darkness). No one, (that includes you) knows what kind of material the Book of Vile of Darkness will have in it, or the affects it will have on the gaming industry. 

 I think you go a little far in thinking that it is going to cause some sort of damage to the industry, especially when you are speaking about a product you have no concrete information on. 

Ren


----------



## barsoomcore (Aug 21, 2002)

Tiefling said:
			
		

> *How do you sodomize someone of the opposite sex? *




Not to get all Monte Cook here and indulge in needless exposition, but if you have a rear end, you can be sodomized. The term in no way implies homosexuality, just, um, "point of contact."

Nipple-biting, on the other hand, is hugely queer.


----------



## Henry (Aug 21, 2002)

I think there is a message here.

20 years ago, we were burned by the red-hot stove when it was on.

Now, the stove is cold, and has been for a while. But we still flinch when we put our hand near. I'm guilty of it myself.

The kinds of pressure that were once taking D&D books away from players left and right are no longer there - or more specifically, they no longer have teeth. I don't see any specific backlash to the Book of Vile Darkness any more than the latest R&B video. Nudity, Innuendo, violence, and worship of the mundane are rife in the images of standard culture currently - and the Book of Vile Darkness, despite the title, will be quite tame compared to ALL other influences out there. Teletubbies it ain't, but frankly I don't see the backlash. If Deities and Demigods got little or no exposure, detailing entire pagan pantheons, then I HIGHLY doubt this will even register. _It's coming out at Halloween, for goodness sakes!_


----------



## Hakkenshi (Aug 21, 2002)

Yeah, seriously, didn't anyone see it GenCon?

Maybe someone's seen enough of it to calm the fears of those who think that Death awaits us all with nasty big pointy teeth...


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Aug 21, 2002)

JeffB said:
			
		

> *While the content of the book remains to be seen, I find the hype that either Dragon or Dungeon  using a bit  well…distasteful… *




Dragon has been showing questionable behavior for sometime now- the issue on fighters with profane language on the cover.

Very odd ads of some bloody clowns, iirc. I don't recall what it was for, but I remember wonder what that had to do with d&d.

A very bloody gnome or halfling picture that had nothing to do with the article attached.

There may have been others- but I am not surprised by the sealed section marketing gimmick.

FD


----------



## Nathanael (Aug 21, 2002)

A little OT, but Hakkenshi, I love the illustrations on your page. nicely done!

And something else I thought was funny, considering where we're at, your website has a pop up titled 'Do you know if there is Porn on your computer! LOL!

And Tiefling, as you are likely very young or old and immature, considering the replies you have given, the act of sodomy has nothing to do with gender. And all virgins are not female, as I'm sure you are a prime example of.


----------



## Tiefling (Aug 21, 2002)

Hmm. You learn something new every day.


----------



## Codragon (Aug 21, 2002)

I am looking forward to the BoVD like no other D&D book except perhaps the 3E PHB.

We're all speculating here, so.....

I think the BoVD will "put D&D on the map" so to speak.  It will be a groundbreaking book and will spawn a host of similiar EVIL adventures and accessories.  MWAHAHAHA!!

It may stir up lots of negative attention in the National Media.  This will be a good thing as bad press is better than no press.  This will make the BoVD one of the best selling D&D products ever and draw more and more new folks into the hobby.  Realize this nation is less conservative than it was in the early 80s when the anti-D&D craze was strong.

Another point:  If you don't like it, don't buy it.

I could be wrong.  Maybe this will spell the downfall of the D&D brand.  No matter.  I still will have my books and will game on.


----------



## Dr Midnight (Aug 21, 2002)

Nathanael said:
			
		

> *...And all virgins are not female, as I'm sure you are a prime example of. *



That was unnecessary.


----------



## Psion (Aug 21, 2002)

Tiefling said:
			
		

> *Meanwhile, shut the hell up about how I shouldn't use a book in my game because you don't use it, and therefore it shouldn't be published. *




Y'know what, that's just rude. Sure, you may not care that someone disagrees with you, but when you get that rude, you are crossing the line.


----------



## MeepoTheMighty (Aug 21, 2002)

I'll buy it because I'm Monte's be-yotch.

*fails will save to resist buying another Monte product*


----------



## Ristamar (Aug 21, 2002)

Wolfspider said:
			
		

> *
> 
> And you think that this is the kind of thing that Monte Cook is going to do in the BoVD?
> 
> ...




I agree with the 'Spider.

I'll even go a step further and say that using Tolkien as a moral guideline is horrendously out of of touch with today's standards.  I'm not berating Tolkien, or trying to promote the violent/graphic/sexual culture we live in today...  I just call 'em as I see 'em.

The last call-to-arms against RPG's came at a period of time when media and entertainent was far more conservative than it is today.  Sure it was only about 20 years ago, but think of how much has changed in those 20 years.  South Park used the word 'sh*t' about 160 times in one half hour episode.  It's not entirely uncommon to hear the words 'co****cker' or 'mo******cker' on primetime television (NYPD Blue, The Shield, etc).  I haven't even touched radio or the music industry yet.  I could go on and on and on....

The BoVD would have to be something truly disconcerting to even faintly register on the radar these days.  Anything less, and you're merely jumping at shadows.


----------



## Hakkenshi (Aug 21, 2002)

> A little OT, but Hakkenshi, I love the illustrations on your page. nicely done!




Thanks, just don't expect me to concede because of that 

Without going to Meepo's extreme (since we all know that Kobolds have low Will saves ), I'd say that having Monte Cook as an author definitely increases my chances of purchasing a book. So far, the only d20 publication on which he's worked that I don't have is CoC. And I've flipped through that too.

But if Bruce Cordell had written it, I'd still buy it.

I think that really, WotC is not trying pull a marketing ploy on us all, they're just trying to REALLY cover their tracks by throwing out warning after warning, just so that a parent can't drag them into an idiotic lawsuit about warping their children's minds toward Satan.


----------



## Wolfspider (Aug 21, 2002)

Nathanael said:
			
		

> *And all virgins are not female, as I'm sure you are a prime example of. *




Tiefling is a prime example of a female?  Whoah!  Someone post a pic!


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Aug 21, 2002)

Ristamar said:
			
		

> *
> The last call-to-arms against RPG's came at a period of time when media and entertainent was far more conservative than it is today.  *




I don't think it is a matter of the social slant of the media but how bored they are- last summer when nothing was going on: Shark Attacks and Chandra Levy ruled the air. 

This summer it is child kidnapping- you would think it was an epidemic instead of a very sad standard state of affair.

If the media was bored when this book came out and it got their attention, they might make a big deal of it.

But- this is an election year, and the book comes out near poll times. The media has its toy. The politicians have other things to worry about this fall.

But, you never know!

FD


----------



## Ristamar (Aug 21, 2002)

Wolfspider said:
			
		

> *You might also find that it's illegal in your state.  I think it is in mine ....  *




Very true.  But the real question is, have you heard or known of anyone getting arrested for it (and _only_ it)?


----------



## Nathanael (Aug 21, 2002)

My dear Haashenti, I would never blow smoke up your backside to get you to concede! That would be political and I actually care about this topic! 

Furn! You agree with me on something! The Media will take any subject matter like a pit bull with a bone if it finds it interesting, hence, my bother. It could cause serious backlash for gaming in general. Just ask a certain Californian senator.

And, to further illustrate my point, why release something that you have to put out warning after warning about in order to avoid bad press? Like I said, it would be enough, I think, to release the BoVD under another, non- D&D game line. If it is, infact, not aimed at the mainstream and will sell anyway, why advertise it in Dragon and Dungeon? Children have subscriptions to those magazines as well, and one can only imagine the horror on a parents face when they get issue #300 in the mail...


----------



## Desdichado (Aug 21, 2002)

Nathanael said:
			
		

> *Kenjib and others have missed the point.*



Actually, I think it quite likely that _you've_ missed the point.  See below.

*



			Tolkien doesn't describe the corruption in graphic terms. He doesn't say 'to get orcs you sodomize elves and then scoop out their brains and replace them with the blood of a slain innocent.'
		
Click to expand...


*And the point you missed here is that you have _no reason whatsoever_ to assume that the BoVD has this kind of information either.  What you are posting is scandalous yellow journalism.  Come back when you have some _facts_ to discuss and not mindless pandering.  We understand your point, but you're reacting to non-existent threats.

*



			And, Furn, I thought you were being civil, but I guess I was mistaken. How do you know that I haven't written of this subject to Dragon and WOTC? You asked what I planned to accomplish here, and I told you. And, no, I don't believe in censorship (that's how we lost the New Adventures of Mighty Mouse), just a clearly defined line between the generic fantasy RPG of D&D and the 'mature' games like Vampire and certain d20 products. Notice that I haven't started a thread about Green Ronin? Because it's not a visible and persistent symbol of the RPG hobby.
		
Click to expand...


*
Whatever.    Or have you not noticed that both books will be _right next to each other_ in most stores?  Or that _Dragon Magazine_ was giving away free copies of _Legions of Hell_ with every subscription recently?  These accusations you're making here are uninformed, inconsistent and vapid.  
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





*



			D&D is a high profile example of RPGs. It's market is larger than university kids and old D&D vets. Putting the D&D Logo on BoVD will damage the family oriented aspects of roleplaying and discourage parents from allowing their children, a vital source of new players, to participate. D&D is not mainstream enough to survive an attack by the media similar to the one aimed at computer games after Columbine. My belief that the release of this book is a marketing ploy is not a conspiracy theory, but the professional opinion of a Marketing person. History is full of examples of good things gone to pot over bad publicity (Mighty Mouse). Kenzer & Company's book is a good example of the book your looking for without all of the needless graphic exposition. A good storyteller doesn't need such exposition in the first place to create a mood.
		
Click to expand...


*I'll say it one more time although you've conveniently ignored it every time it's been said before: you have no idea how graphic the book is going to be.  Monte himself on these very boards said that it's not going to be graphic and the purported topics like prostitution etc. are not going to be touched upon.  Your professional marketing must be a bit shoddy if you think that the Book of Vile Darkness is a marketing ploy of the kind of describe, because it will _not_ be getting press outside of the D&D community.  The very idea of a massive public outcry to this book is absolutely absurd.  It will never happen.  Society doesn't care enough.  The exposure of the game isn't big enough.  And most of all, your projections of the actual content of the book are completely off base.  Therefore, your professional marketing opinion doesn't have a leg to stand on.  When you make up chicken-little scenarios about the apocalypse of our hobby and try to ascribe nefarious marketing suits with beady little eyes focused on short-term profits at the expense of the hobby as the culprits, that's what I call conspiracy theory.


----------



## Ristamar (Aug 21, 2002)

Furn_Darkside said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I don't think it is a matter of the social slant of the media but how bored they are- last summer when nothing was going on: Shark Attacks and Chandra Levy ruled the air.
> 
> ...




I won't say a media blitz on D&D after BoVD is impossible (and as I mentioned earlier, it'd have to be REALLY, REALLY bad), though I'd still be confident in saying the chances are slim to none.  There's much bigger, juicier fish to fry:  FPS's (Columbine and copycat incidents), flight sims (planes hitting the WTC), controversial movies and music, piracy, terrorism, and so on, just to name a few.

Also, D&D no longer equals satanism in the eyes of even the most conservative people.  It just doesn't make a good story anymore, unless there is tragic results.  

Even my local paper, which is fairly conservative, did a positive expose on 3e  when it was released, and they printed the shot of Jozan holding forth his holy symbol against a succubus from the PHB.  It was pretty cool.

At the very least, there would need to be some nutballs hacking at each other with replica swords or commiting a ritualistic murder or suicide with the BoVD in hand or nearby to resurrect the old fears and intolerance.  Hopefully none of that will ever come to pass, both for the well being of others and the prosperity of the hobby itself.


----------



## barsoomcore (Aug 21, 2002)

Nathanael said:
			
		

> *If it is, in fact, not aimed at the mainstream and will sell anyway, why advertise it in Dragon and Dungeon?*




Um... because Dragon and Dungeon aren't "mainstream" magazines? They're only read by gamers -- and in fact only a small subset of those?

I don't get what you're trying to get at.


----------



## Sammael99 (Aug 21, 2002)

Nathanael said:
			
		

> *Furn asked what I to do? All I can do: voice my opinion and hope that others will do the same.
> 
> If an exec of WOTC is reading any of this, I hope that it will at least make him think twice about the release of this product under the D&D label and perhaps convince his bosses of the same. At the very least, I would like them to release it under some other label, in the same fashion White Wolf did with Black Dog, so the connection isn't so defined.*




All the above is, of course, a point of view based on your opinion (even though I still think arguing about something you have not seen based on rumours is silly), but on this last comment, I must object : 



> *
> In the end, though, I'm trying to nurture the hobby I love and protect it whilst introducing a more mainstream type of person into the wonderful world of heroic fantasy via the great grandaddy of RPGs. *




It is my opinion that "mainstreeam" is never going to nurture the hobby. If anything, it is more liklely to kill it, like it has many niche hobbies. 

Not that I believe RPGs will ever make it to mainstream. In an age when every media is struggling for their customers' attention spans, RPGs ask a commitment way too massive for most people out there. 

So there are a few odd people in the hobby. Name me a hobby that doesn't have them ? Ours don't wash and are called geeks ? That's kind of a lesser evil, don't you think ?

I for one am happy for RPGing to stay at the level of popularity it has today. That way it can survive and not thrive, which means it will remain creative. 

Concerning the issue of bad publicity, the only one I'm seeing so far on this virtually subversive RPG book is the one you're making. And I do believe that it's the only one we will ever see.

Anyone who wants to be offended by RPGs today and more specifically by D&D will find plenty to be offended about in the 3 Core Rulebooks. Scantily clad women abound in most game lines, including WOTC supported ones. Sacrifices and pacts with the devil are present in most horror flicks, books, etc. so it would hardly be a novelty for it to be featured in an RPG.


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Aug 21, 2002)

Nathanael said:
			
		

> *Just ask a certain Californian senator.*




If you are referring to Condidit, then he is/was a house member. He is not a senator.

FD


----------



## Siobharek (Aug 21, 2002)

*Underhanded Son_of_Thunder*

Son_of_Thunder, or "Sir Klysandral" on Monte's boards: One thing that hasn't been addressed yet. The info about how Monte felt while writing the book is taken WAY out of context. When on his boards, you didn't explain your motives or refer to this discussion. Instead you just asked him,


> I don't know if this question has been asked of you as I'm too lazy to read all the posts, but here goes. What were your feelings while writing this book? Did you get ideas from movies? How was your relationship with people during this time?
> 
> I guess I'm just wondering what this time in your life was like. I remember one of my favorite Star Trek: The Next Generation episode was one where Riker was in a play as a crazy man, or something. Dr. Crusher encouraged him to explore his dark side. The whole episode was one of illusion and Riker doubting himself.




When he answered fair and square, you take that reply and use it further your sorry little opinions about what someone else feels: 







> Monte seems to have an unhealthy fascination with evil. On Monte's boards I asked him what his feelings were like while writing the book. His reply was that he had a tough time as it was dark subject matter.




It's pathetic, it's sad, and if it doesn't remove any credibility you might have had - for reasons that are beyond me - then I don't know what's wrong with the world. Everything we do in life reflects on us, someone said (in a film, but hey, it's true). You're just... <insert own epithet here>


----------



## MeepoTheMighty (Aug 21, 2002)

*Re: Re: Monte Obsessed?  I don't think so!*



			
				Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> *
> Speaking of wrong or ignorant, you're ignoring everything he wrote in the industry before the release of 3e.
> *





Yeah, like Heroclix!  Er..wait. I'll shut up now.


----------



## Nathanael (Aug 21, 2002)

Sorry, Furn, meant to say congressman. A bit busy and distracted over here...

Con-did-it?

That's funny!


----------



## Hakkenshi (Aug 21, 2002)

Out of curiosity, what WAS Monte's reply to the question? I don't hang around his boards.


----------



## Desdichado (Aug 21, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Monte Obsessed?  I don't think so!*



			
				MeepoTheMighty said:
			
		

> *Yeah, like Heroclix!  Er..wait. I'll shut up now. *



  I'm not trying to make Son of Thunder's point here, because I disagree with him, but Monte has written a lot of 2e stuff on hell and evil and the like, including _Dead Gods, A Paladin in Hell, Hellbound: The Bloodwar_ and stuff.  But he also wrote tons of stuff that has nothing whatsoever to do with evil really, so I think the whole thing is a silly accusation to make.

In fact, looking at my D&D book collection, you could probably make the same accusation.  I still think it's silly, though.


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Aug 21, 2002)

Nathanael said:
			
		

> *Sorry, Furn, meant to say congressman. A bit busy and distracted over here...
> *




Not a problem- I just don't think the senate wants to be insulted by a suggestion that Condidit is a member.

And I doubt Condidit wants to be insulted by suggesting he is a member of the senate. haha.



> Con-did-it?




A mistype-- honestly..  

FD


----------



## Gizzard (Aug 21, 2002)

I'm going to give BoVD a look; and I'd be just as interested in the Book of Exalted Deeds that people have mentioned earlier in the thread.  So its not about me "liking evil" or being "obsessed with goodness".  I just want source material for great villians and great heros.  

As for the larger arguement, it seems those opposed to this book are really opposed to the whole idea of a "Mature Audiences" rating for any WotC product rather than being specifically opposed to BoVD.  (I suppose that makes sense, since we dont know much about BoVD other than that it will be for "Mature Audiences"!)

Would spinning off an "adult brand" (like Disney spun off Touchstone to handle non G-rated films) of WotC help?  It seems that this is the idea WotC is working on, trying to figure out how to publish more adult material while giving fair warning to consumers.

What do the anti-BoVD people think of Touchstone-izing WotC?


----------



## Nathanael (Aug 21, 2002)

Well, that is what I suggested.

I want the book distanced from the D&D brand name. Not censorship, telling you how to run your game or anything else I've been accused of. I just don't want it called D&D for many reasons for which I have already given much argument.

I feel that this would be an excellent middle ground on the subject...


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Aug 21, 2002)

Gizzard said:
			
		

> *
> What do the anti-BoVD people think of Touchstone-izing WotC? *




I am not anti-BoVD (yet- tee hee), but I think this is a cheap trick. If they are going to print it, then print it under their own name.

As for the Mature-Audiance line question, I would prefer WOTC leave that to a third party. It would allow them to keep themselves clean and the audiance can still get what they want.

FD


----------



## Hakkenshi (Aug 21, 2002)

I guess the thing to remember is that WotC itself does NOT want the book distanced from its D&D brand name. Maybe that's an indicator of the fact that it's not as bad as many seem to expect.


----------



## Ristamar (Aug 21, 2002)

I think before this line of discussion can truly evolve, the term 'mature' needs to be defined and agreed upon.


----------



## Nightfall (Aug 21, 2002)

Okay two thoughts for the day. 

1. I STILL can't figure out how someone can compare R&R I and R&R II to a book about vile darkness. Sure it's a gritty world that the Scarred Lands are set in. BUT there's also some nice happy parts too. The Paladin spell list should prove that point pretty well. I just can't wrap my brain around that one.

2. While I understand Nath's concern, I guess the reason I don't care is because I believe, both a person and a Christian, God judges us by our ACTIONS, not our reading material. Am I to believe that He will accept Hilter merely because he read the Bible, and that made him acceptable? Or that Stalin's policies of mass starvation and killings of his enemies didn't mean he was exempted from justice or judgement merely because he also tried to occasionally follow the Russian Ordothodox Church? Fanaticism is equal to fantasy, in terms that people believe what they believe, not matter what the actual facts may be before them. It doesn't matter if Monte wrote a book about Angels and Insects, some one would STILL condemn this book as being "heretical" and "Anti-whatever" Why? Because people fear what they don't believe or understand. Thus they rather see it burn.


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Aug 21, 2002)

Ristamar said:
			
		

> *I think before this line of discussion can truly evolve, the term 'mature' needs to be defined and agreed upon. *




Well, the MA rating I had in mind was from video games-

http://www.esrb.org/esrb_about.asp

It seems clear enough for me. 

FD


----------



## Hakkenshi (Aug 21, 2002)

I don't expect there to BE a "Mature Line" of products. Because honestly, if it were to go much beyond the type of horror that you have in CoC or that we can reasonably expect out of BoVD, WotC would be shooting itself in the foot.

Such things are pointless. You already have material saying that zombies devour flesh; if you want Resident Evil, just describe the slam attacks as tearing into the flesh with putrid nails, a character has his brain consumed after his death, etc. etc.

What I expect from the BoVD, however, is more along the lines of how certain historical evils translate into a fantasy world. What demonic plots and summoning rituals do the Inquisitors discover? How does a character's soul (whether PC or NPC) interact with these evils? My current campaign is very much concerned with these things, and to be honest I don't always have a good answer ready, nor the time to come up with one.


----------



## Buttercup (Aug 21, 2002)

Nathanael said:
			
		

> *I want more 'normal' people playing D&D. This kind of publicity only ensures that the vast majority of people you have to play with are going to fit the stereotype. *




Gee, all the people I play with are normal.  We all have graduate degrees, professional positions, and families.  We mow the grass, go to the grocery store, walk the dog.  

Like Furn, I don't play evil characters, nor will I allow my players to.  That doesn't mean that there is no evil in my games.  It's what the PCs fight against.  I'll be buying the BoVD to help me throw more stuff at my players.   Believe it or not, it's possible to want to purchase the BoVD and still be a decent human being.


----------



## the Jester (Aug 21, 2002)

Nathanael said:
			
		

> *Well, that is what I suggested.
> 
> I want the book distanced from the D&D brand name. Not censorship, telling you how to run your game or anything else I've been accused of. I just don't want it called D&D for many reasons for which I have already given much argument.
> 
> I feel that this would be an excellent middle ground on the subject... *




But it IS dnd.  Demogorgon, Asmodeus, et al and how you deal with them IS a topic in dnd, and those things have come up in many campaigns for YEARS, since 1e and longer in some cases!

My first devil-dealing issues in-game came about in 1986.  In the 16 years since them I've NEVER ONCE seen any rules from tsr/wotc about the topic.  My first torture in-game came about in prolly 1988... and again, there's NEVER been any coverage of torture rules in the official stuff ANYWHERE (except very brief treatment in a 1e DL module).

Calling it something other than dnd isn't middle ground, it's avoiding the subject... imho, of course.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Aug 21, 2002)

I guess my lack of concern over the BOVD is that I don't really know if it's a great thing to be "mainstream".   To me that says, "dumbed down for the average idiot".   Look at what happens anytime a musical style goes mainstream.  The innovators are copied by in a way that any idiot can enjoy it without having to think.    If it remains a "niche" HOBBY that's fine with me.


----------



## barsoomcore (Aug 21, 2002)

Flexor the Mighty! said:
			
		

> *If it remains a "niche" hoppy that's fine with me. *




Sorry, a niche _hoppy_? Now is that a decorative bunny that sits in an alcove or is that a brand of beer for some VERY specific demographic ("Technical Writer Ale!")?


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Aug 21, 2002)

Buttercup said:
			
		

> *
> Believe it or not, it's possible to want to purchase the BoVD and still be a decent human being. *




Like anyone named Buttercup could be anything but a dangero..err.. whats that noise.. ack..nooo!

*klump*


----------



## Renshai (Aug 21, 2002)

> Notice that I haven't started a thread about Green Ronin?




I still can't figure out what Green Ronin has published that would be called vile, or even close to being offensive in any way. 

Nathanael, perhaps you are a little too conservative in your views on what should and shouldn't be published with the Dungeons and Dragons name on it.  That of course is your right, but most people are not going to share your overly conservative view of what should and should not be published for D&D. 

Publishing the Book of Vile Darkness really isn't different than publishing the Monster Manual, which contains Demons and Devils. If a conservative Soccer Mom is going to be offended by the Book of Vile Darkness, chances are she is going to be offended by the presence of Demons and Devils in the Monster Manual... 

Personally, I think you are making a mountain out of mole-hill. (Before the mole-hill has even been built)

Ren

Off Topic,  does anyone know when does the Tome of Horrors come out?


----------



## Nightfall (Aug 21, 2002)

Flexor the Mighty! said:
			
		

> *I guess my lack of concern over the BOVD is that I don't really know if it's a great thing to be "mainstream".   To me that says, "dumbed down for the average idiot".   Look at what happens anytime a musical style goes mainstream.  The innovators are copied by in a way that any idiot can enjoy it without having to think.    If it remains a "niche" hoppy that's fine with me. *




Now that I can agree with. I mean let's face the music industry hasn't REALLY changed since the late 60s in terms of getting these "poppy" and "Fresh looking" faces that all they do is sing about love, broken hearts and cheating significant others. Mainstream doesn't necessarily make a product better. I still think it shows with things like Buffy and Lord of the Rings.


----------



## Buttercup (Aug 21, 2002)

Wolfspider said:
			
		

> *I'm sorry to bring up this potential bit of flamebait, but this entire discussion against the publication of Book of Vile Darkness smacks too much of censorship for me to be comfortable with it.
> *




Amen, brother.  Censorship is vile, in a way this book could never be.


----------



## Ristamar (Aug 21, 2002)

Furn_Darkside said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Well, the MA rating I had in mind was from video games-
> 
> ...




Hehe.  Those ESRB ratings are generally regarded as pretty vague and virtually worthless by the (video)gaming community.

Take a look at 3 video games with MA ratings (go to IGN or GameSpot for more info if you need it): Eternal Darkness, Grand Theft Auto 3, and BMX XXX (formerly Dave Mirra XXX).  Now they are three wholly different games.

GTA 3:  Guns, violence, cursing, theft, murder, prostitution, sexual content, etc.

BMX XXX: Nudity (topless strippers, topless female bike riders), sexual content, cursing, vulgar themes.

Eternal Darkness:  No nudity or cursing (save for the rare use of 'damn' or 'hell'), yet it received an MA rating due to it's dark storyline, sacrifices, ritualistic magic, some gore, and violence (it's very Lovecraftian in nature).

Now, while they all have MA ratings, they're certainly 3 different types of 'maturity'.

Personally, if WotC wants to release mature products akin to Eternal Darkness (which seems to be the case with BoVD, or even CoC), I see no problem with that, nor would I think they'd need to market it under a different brand or identity.

However, if it's pure smut like BMX XXX, then I can see a problem.  GTA 3 falls somewhere in the middle, though it's clearly closer to the smut side of things.

My point is, there are different types of 'mature' content, and some forms are arguably more 'mature' than others.  The ESRB just lumps them all together and is not a very good indicator of what a game really contains.

(NOTE: I'm not railing against GTA 3 or most MA-rated games...  they're obviously quite popular, and I've admittedly enjoyed a bit of GTA 3 myself)


----------



## Nathanael (Aug 21, 2002)

*For Jester and others who just joined in...*

Look, you lot, if you can't be bothered to read the 6 pages of posts, then at least read mine so you know what my arguments are and can stop misquoting me.

They don't concern Devil/Daemon stats. They don't concern PrCs. They concern rules for selling your soul, human sacrifice, drug use, extremely graphic artwork (which WOTC artists say they have to keep redoing because it's not 'bloody' or 'naked' enough)etc.

I also don't care what YOU do in YOUR game. I'm concerned with the brand image and, if what the blurb on the advert says is true, and if two magazines and the BoVD itself need to be shrinkwrapped, then we're not talking your typical D&D stuff here. This will be linked to the D&D brand, not as some offshoot book for certain people and... you know, I tire of saying all of this over and over. Go read my other posts.


----------



## Buttercup (Aug 21, 2002)

Furn_Darkside said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Like anyone named Buttercup could be anything but a dangero..err.. whats that noise.. ack..nooo!
> 
> *klump* *




   :smooch:


----------



## Psion (Aug 21, 2002)

ObReminder: Until I see it, I am not passing judgement on BovD going "over the line."

First off, I think this "media hype" paronoia probably won't pan out. Could, probably won't. As several have pointed out, it's day has passed.

What I am worried about has nothing to do with the media. It has to do with the grass roots. The perception of potential gamers and those who provide the spending dollars for those would be gamers. That, to me, is more important than the latest media distraction.

That said:


> *
> It is my opinion that "mainstreeam" is never going to nurture the hobby. If anything, it is more liklely to kill it, like it has many niche hobbies.
> *



I doubt it will never really be "mainstream" per se. But on the other side of the coin, D&D has survived, nay thrived, without going the way of the Black Dog game factory. The D&D audience is not in the same fringe as those who the recent Demon: The Fallen contraversy appeals to. You know the type -- the "fringer than thou" gamers. D&D is closer to the mainstream than the likes of WW, and it would not thrive the way it does if it wasn't. We don't need a push in the fringe direction any more than we need a push in the mainstream direction.


----------



## Nathanael (Aug 21, 2002)

Media hype isn't my main concern either. It's the grassroots, as you put it, but that, too, is influenced by the media. Other than that, what you said is very true, Psion.


----------



## Tiefling (Aug 21, 2002)

*Re: For Jester and others who just joined in...*



			
				Nathanael said:
			
		

> *... I also don't care what YOU do in YOUR game. ...*






> *You don't need rules for these things. As my first post suggested, these should be story effects, not mechanical effects and they should be seen from a more human viewpoint, not the viewpoint of how to do them.*




I dunno. When you repeatedly say how something SHOULD be in the game, it gives one the idea that you care very much.


----------



## Nathanael (Aug 21, 2002)

Those with reading comprehension skills will also note the use of the word SUGGESTED.


----------



## Wolfspider (Aug 21, 2002)

*Re: For Jester and others who just joined in...*



			
				Nathanael said:
			
		

> *They concern rules for selling your soul, human sacrifice, drug use, extremely graphic artwork (which WOTC artists say they have to keep redoing because it's not 'bloody' or 'naked' enough)etc.*




Could you please provide a link to this please?  I require proof.


----------



## barsoomcore (Aug 21, 2002)

Psion said:
			
		

> *We don't need a push in the fringe direction any more than we need a push in the mainstream direction. *




I kind of disagree, Psion. I think we need pushes in both directions. Constantly. WotC ought to be pushing the envelope at times, just to see where the edge is, and at the same time encouraging conservatism in order to avoid fragmenting the market.

Not sure what you mean by "we", of course. You can get pretty "fringe" and remain d20, certainly. But whether we're talking about what's best for WotC or for the gaming community, there needs to be expansion and contraction going on if it's going to be a healthy and vibrant community or market. Somebody has to push the envelope and sometimes it ought to be WotC. Just like sometimes Microsoft has to try new things and gamble on out-on-the-edge stuff -- if you're not doing that then you're ceding the market to the up-and-comers.

Maybe the BoVD will be a complete embarrassment, resulting in negative publicity and lost sales and yada yada yada. I doubt it, myself. But even if it is, it's still emblematic of the sort of thing WotC and the gaming community need to keep doing.


----------



## Ristamar (Aug 21, 2002)

*Re: For Jester and others who just joined in...*



			
				Nathanael said:
			
		

> *They don't concern Devil/Daemon stats. They don't concern PrCs. They concern rules for selling your soul, human sacrifice, drug use, extremely graphic artwork (which WOTC artists say they have to keep redoing because it's not 'bloody' or 'naked' enough)etc.
> *






			
				Wolfspider said:
			
		

> *Could you please provide a link to this please?  I require proof. *




...and while you're at it, what exactly is wrong with rules for sacrifices and selling your soul?

Lords of Darkness already touches on drug use.  There have been PlaneScape products that have dealt with using souls as currency on the Lower Planes.  These are not new concepts in the industry and have already been tapped (though not with much depth, admittedly).  There was no public outcry against them.  What's inherently bad about these types of rules?  Making up your own rules somehow makes it ok because it's out of the public eye?


----------



## barsoomcore (Aug 21, 2002)

*Re: For Jester and others who just joined in...*



			
				Nathanael said:
			
		

> *They concern rules for selling your soul, human sacrifice, drug use, extremely graphic artwork (which WOTC artists say they have to keep redoing because it's not 'bloody' or 'naked' enough)etc.*




None of which we actually KNOW is in this item. The fact that submitted art wasn't graphic enough does not imply any particular level of graphicality.

And besides, "rules for human sacrifice" to take an example could be something like: _To summoun Demon Lord Hoohah requires twenty human sacrifices._ What's graphic or appalling about that?

Rules on the effects of narcotics would be welcome. I hardly see how that would negatively impact the brand.



> *If what the blurb on the advert says is true, and if two magazines and the BoVD itself need to be shrinkwrapped, then we're not talking your typical D&D stuff here*




Here's the advert:

_Targeted toward mature audiences, Book of Vile Darkness deals with material that has never been explored in the D&D roleplaying game. Elements such as moral dilemma, slavery, human sacrifice, and other sensitive issues will be treated in a mature fashion to allow players to add a level of complexity to their campaigns. Also included are evil monsters; dark prestige classes; unique spells, magic items, and artifacts; and adventure material, as well as rules and advice to help Dungeon Masters create and play truly corrupt villains or run more intense campaigns. _

And? Do we see anything to indicate there will be loving descriptions of vile acts? Graphic images of violence or sex? Rules for addicting people to drugs (though, as I've said, I would welcome that and don't see how it would be some PR disaster)?

Instead I see things like moral dilemmas treated in a mature fashion. Spells. Advice to DMs.

You're starting to sound hysterical, Nathanael. Demonstrate some evidence for your position and I'll certainly swing round. But just insisting something is true doesn't convince.


----------



## kenjib (Aug 21, 2002)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> *A bunch of good stuff that I also wrote.
> *




Lol - I just wrote approximately the same time you did  and deleting it after I saw your response.  Thanks for making me waste my time!  

Nathanael,

One of the very few things we actually do know about this book from Monte is that it does not contain the kinds of material you have described in your posts.  The book you are talking about is called F.A.T.A.L., not the book of Vile Darkness.  Luckily F.A.T.A.L. was quite stillborn so we can both relax, be happy, and enjoy cracking open for the first time our copies of the BoVD.  I love the smell of fresh book!


----------



## Wolfen Priest (Aug 21, 2002)

Khan the Warlord said:
			
		

> *When one takes into account that we know SQUAT about the content of the book (the specifics, anyway), it is downright...
> 
> IDIOTIC.
> *




Not to fan the flames of your self-described anger, but I don't think you could be any more wrong.

We know squat about the contents of this book?  ...Doesn't compute.  

We are allowed to discuss this stuff, right?  Or are you suggesting this thread be <ahem> censored?


----------



## Khan the Warlord (Aug 21, 2002)

Wolfen Priest said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Not to fan the flames of your self-described anger, but I don't think you could be any more wrong.
> 
> ...




Heh. 

You took one sentence that led into me elaborating my reasoning -- reread the whole thing and you'll see my meaning, thanks. You should also read what was in parenthesis of that quote as well, while you're at it.

And at no point was I suggesting censorship. I never asked for an EN World moderator to storm in here and close the thread or remove it altogether. Now, I *was* hinting at the fact that the people whining about the book, while they don't have a copy to know how Monte and WotC handled the "extreme" subjects, may please reconsider their position and drop the arguement, until they have the product and the right to pass sentencing on the design team.

It is silly.

Quite silly.


----------



## Wanderer At Dusk (Aug 21, 2002)

I'd have to say the book is very tempting to get for me, yet also at the same time it pushes me away. 

I have had a very bad experience with sacrafice in my games, back when i was in junior high. One of my players, the sorcerer encountered a little girl who was seperated from her mother by the chaos of a large battle that just happened in the city. He wanted to sacrafice her, he was of good alignment, he wanted to sacrafice her. My mother heard this, it almost cost me from playing the game and had there parents found out they wouldn't be playing the game either. I managed to convince her it was just a stupid outburst. One of the first things starting Dnd up in my town was me promiseing everyones parents i'd keep the game out of such things as well as clean. I'm in High School now and the danger of getting a player banned still exists from such things. Having rules makes it even more likely for one to give in to the temptation, rather then creating your own rules would. 

With that i also think the book is going to be excellent quality. However in my game how much of it could i use? The stats for the archdevils and other monsters would be excellent. What would happen if one of my players parents found out I had such a book? I may go for the other book mentioned here (i don't remember the name but it was by the folks that made Kalamar right?)

I also have to contend with the fact that almost all of my current players are extremely immature. I am considering dropping most of them from my regular game. They do not handle mature things such as torture, sacrafice of sentients or selling ones soul well at all. Hell i've had trouble with them encountering female npcs. There is only one player that is up to a mature level besides myself. He is also a DM (i taught him).  Were probably going to start up another group.


----------



## Wolfen Priest (Aug 21, 2002)

Khan, I guess we may not know anything specific about the BoVD yet, but it really depends on the definition of "specifics."  We do know about some specific topics that the book will cover.

Now, having said that, I also mentioned that I will be buying the book.  OF COURSE I WILL BUY IT!  Personally, I'm just speculating about how it will _possibly_ impact the game.  Everything we've discussed on this thread has been _basically_ speculation anyway, so I really don't see the harm in it.

If we have a good idea of what's in the book (heck, that's why we're talking about it in the first place, and that's why we're going to buy the dang thing), then we can discuss it's potential impact.

I shouldn't have to even point this out, but the only person who brought up censorship was expressing a fear of it.  I don't think anyone ever mentioned that they want this product to be censored; and even if someone did (want it), that equates to more press for it, and probably more sales as a consequence.

And as to the idea that WotC is targeting college undergraduates, that may well be, but I'd bet about 90% of us here all started at a younger age.  It's a valid case that many gamers start at around age 12 or so.  And with books costing upwards of $30 a pop, you can wager that "mom" is going to buy it for "Billy" as much as "Billy" buys it himself.

I don't think the BoVD could ever topple the Empire that is D&D (even if it did cause a huge uproar), but it's not absurd to think that it could well take this hobby of ours in a new direction.  And I am pretty happy with it as it stands.


----------



## Khan the Warlord (Aug 21, 2002)

Wolfen Priest said:
			
		

> * Everything we've discussed on this thread has been basically speculation anyway, so I really don't see the harm in it.
> 
> If we have a good idea of what's in the book (heck, that's why we're talking about it in the first place, and that's why we're going to buy the dang thing), then we can discuss it's potential impact. *




To a point, you're quite right. However, those few people that are against tBoVD aren't using key terms like "if", "may", and the like -- they're actually speaking as if they magically know exactly how Monte and the rest of the team at WotC handled every topic and how HORRIBLY they did that job.

No one knows if this is the case or not! Why can't these worried few just take the stance that Monte MAY or MAY NOT have handled all of the topics in a mature and tasteful fashion, instead of "THIS BOOK SHOULD NOT BE FOR REASON X, OF WHICH I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT I'M BABBLING ABOUT"???

*sigh*


----------



## Ciarrai (Aug 21, 2002)

*Personally, I'm torn*

On one hand, I really don't want to read about evil. There is enough evil in the world without having entire books about it and I am sure there will be some content that will bothers me in some way. It wouldn't be evil if it didn't cross some line and everyone has their own threshold for what they can deal with.

On the other hand, having evil more defined.... having the things that we fight actually be TRUELY evil, actually makes the game a little more moral in some ways. 

With watered down villians, sometimes it seems like the PCs are just beating people up or killing them because they want something the villian has, because they have differing opinions or want opposing things, because they have green skin and/or pointy teeth or are a monster in some way, or because they want the experience.  Is that really a reason to fight someone or kill?

If the BoVD actually makes it more likely that there is a reason that my characters HAVE to fight and kill... that the stakes are big enough and the issues at hand are clear enough to justify the violence, then it might be worth it to me. 

Having said that, I do not think this book will be suitable for everyone. There are plenty of gamers who do not have the mental stability or the maturity to deal with the topics covered here. But the good thing is that it is a suppliment. You can play the game and never see one thing from between the covers of the BoVD and if it bothers you so much you can personally abstain from using it, reading it or buying it.


----------



## Desdichado (Aug 21, 2002)

*Re: For Jester and others who just joined in...*



			
				Nathanael said:
			
		

> *Look, you lot, if you can't be bothered to read the 6 pages of posts, then at least read mine so you know what my arguments are and can stop misquoting me.*



That's pretty rich coming from you: complaints about ignoring points you've already made?  When are you going to stop ignoring all the posts that tear up your "argument" by pointing to your scandalous use of "un-facts" and presenting them as truths?  Oh, I know.  It makes everything you've said pretty invalid.  But if you really want to engage in some discussion you want someone else to take seriously, you oughtta at least acknowledge the fact that, for instance, you have no idea what the contents of the book are.


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Aug 21, 2002)

*Re: Re: For Jester and others who just joined in...*



			
				Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> *
> That's pretty rich coming from you... *




A wiser person then I suggested he might be a troll, but I think that is giving him too much credit. 

FD


----------



## Wolfspider (Aug 21, 2002)

> extremely graphic artwork (which WOTC artists say they have to keep redoing because it's not 'bloody' or 'naked' enough)etc.




Nathanael, I'll repeat my question:  Where did you hear this?  What is your proof?


----------



## Lady Dragon (Aug 22, 2002)

The way I see it there are 3 basic attitudes toward D&D. The first Type are of course us gamers, we understand it and we understand the use and need for a book on the subject of evil villians done right. The second group of people are the "D&D is evil" group. These people are already biased to the point of ridiculous they haven't even bothered to read the PH I doubt they will even make a distiction between ordinary D&D books and the BoVD as far as they are concerned all of them are evil and they don't read them.

Finally the 3rd group is the rest of the public which view it as a quirky hobby by weirdo geeks and quite frankly I don't see them really caring about some D&D book. Fast Forward put out a book called the encyclopedia of Demons and Devils and that didn't get any press a book called the Book of Vile Darkness is also not going to get any attention cause quite frankly the general public just doesn't care about anything D&D.Only those of us familiar with the game even know that a Book of Vile Darkness is a magic item from the game.

Look at it this way if some of the stuff being putout by white wolf didn't hit their radar this won't either.There are far more interesting and mainstream things for the media to go after, their favorite being vidiogames for them to go after a niche hobby book that is played mostly by adults as opposed to young teens.


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Aug 22, 2002)

Nathanael said:
			
		

> *Kenjib and others have missed the point.
> 
> Tolkien doesn't describe the corruption in graphic terms. He doesn't say 'to get orcs you sodomize elves and then scoop out their brains and replace them with the blood of a slain innocent.'
> 
> *




What kenjib described wouldn't entail anything graphic. It would simply entail a corruption factor of some kind, along the lines of: "The PC must make a Will save, DC 25, every week that he bears the item. A failed save means the character has become corrupted. Here are the game effects of that corruption..." and then a chart of corruption effects. How is that so different from what has been done in any number of other instances?

As for the question about Dragon and Dungeon's "sealed" section - it's for publicity, folks. Come on, like Dragon or Dungeon could prevent some kid from reading it. If it was really that bad, customers would have to produce i.d. to buy it.


----------



## Xarlen (Aug 22, 2002)

I will say that after slogging through 3 pages that were added between my classes... Yeesh.

Okay, look Folks, this book will not change your aligment to chaotic evil when you pick it up. C'mon. It's not the end-all-be-all instruction manual to being evil. Infact, considering the 'evil' that Monte does, I don't think it will be any more horrid then RttoToEE. 

I remember when I was a kid, there was a Nintendo game called Taboo. On the box, it said 'No one under 16'. My mom refused to let me play it. If a parent sees 'Mature rating', then they're not going to buy it for their kid. Or if they do, then they Don't Care, so what's the point?

Really, I mean, c'mon. First of all, why are 12 year olds buying this book? Is it to DM evil better? I'd prefer they get a book that tells them how to DM Better, period. Like a splatbook, this isn't Core. Thus, there's no need for everyone to buy it. 

I'll point out that EVIL, a product allready on the market, has Demon and Devil worship rules. The book is called EVIL, for gods' sake, and it hasn't earned any flack. Yes, Mazes and Monsters hurt the RPG community, but that is no longer a problem. 

As to evil being in this world... We don't have rules for said evil. And, I know *I* don't want to put Osama in my game. Now, a witch who swims in the blood of innocents, and uses that same lifeblood to fuel her magics, Give Me That. Or better, give me the Mechanics for that. 

Mongoose put out Demonology. It hasn't seen any flames. 

Next, I gotta ask... If BoVD destroys the familiy values of D&D (A game basicly founded on killing stuff, more or less) Then those parents aren't really making good family values. 

I remember one guy complaining about the nudity in the MM, and how he can't show his family. Does that mean that we should tailor the MM, because it's got 'naughty bits' and the monsters have curves?


----------



## barsoomcore (Aug 22, 2002)

Xarlen said:
			
		

> *I remember one guy complaining about the nudity in the MM, and how he can't show his family. Does that mean that we should tailor the MM, because it's got 'naughty bits' and the monsters have curves? *




More curvy monsters! Bring 'em on!

I've got it! WotC's next release will be The Book of Naughty Bits. Uh-huh. Now that'll need GRAPHIC artwork.


----------



## Xarlen (Aug 22, 2002)

With Mialee, Vadania, and Alexandra?


----------



## Wolfspider (Aug 22, 2002)

barsoomcore said:
			
		

> *
> 
> More curvy monsters! Bring 'em on!
> 
> I've got it! WotC's next release will be The Book of Naughty Bits. Uh-huh. Now that'll need GRAPHIC artwork. *




Hmmm...but will they be CRUNCHY Naughty Bits?


----------



## barsoomcore (Aug 22, 2002)

Wolfspider said:
			
		

> *Hmmm...but will they be CRUNCHY Naughty Bits? *




...


...


*runs away.*


----------



## Renshai (Aug 22, 2002)

I did read the entire thread, thank you. Its basically post after post of you predicting that the Book of Vile Darkness is going to cast some horrible shadow over Dungeons and Dragons.  

The people that think Dungeons and Dragons is evil will always think it is evil, new people will form their own opinions by actually studying the subject matter or not. If they take one book and decide that the entire game is evil, it is their problem, not mine, yours, or the hobby's problem. The problem is simply the conclusion of a narrow minded person.

Point in fact, you have made comments about how a good DM should not need such a book, when it is obvious that there are plenty of solid DMs around here who look forward to it. I can't wait to see a book that focuses on the evil aspects of villains in the Dungeons and Dragons world, and I doubt seriously that it will the negative impact on the game that you are going on about...  

Ren


----------



## ThomasBJJ (Aug 22, 2002)

BoVD, I'll buy it.


----------



## Xarlen (Aug 22, 2002)

Y'know, in 2e, a 'Complete Villains Handbook' was created. No flack there, and I remember mention inside of a man eating dogs. Infact, his soldiers, if cornered, would attack with their *TEETH*.

No screaming from that, nope.


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Aug 22, 2002)

There was the Necromancer book from TSR also. It's a good book, but it is a bit more...let's say "graphic," for lack of a better word, than other TSR books of the time. Not much of a brouhaha over it either.


----------



## MeepoTheMighty (Aug 22, 2002)

Ristamar said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Hehe.  Those ESRB ratings are generally regarded as pretty vague and virtually worthless by the (video)gaming community.
> 
> ...




Dead or Alive Beach Volleyball might contain see-thru swimsuits and even full frontal nudity, with pubic hair, and still retain an M rating.  In the article I read, they weren't yet sure how far they were going to go, but apparently you can show anything short of actual depictions of sex and still be rated M as opposed to Adults-Only (AO).

The point of the article is that game companies are noticing that their major demographic is the 18+ crowd, the guys who played nintendo 10 years ago and kept on playing.  Therefore more companies are starting to push the envelope of good taste in order to attract these older games who can buy whatever the hell they want.

Er, where was I going with this? I dunno.


----------



## Sepulchrave II (Aug 22, 2002)

I like demons. I'll buy it.


----------



## the Jester (Aug 22, 2002)

*Re: For Jester and others who just joined in...*



			
				Nathanael said:
			
		

> *Look, you lot, if you can't be bothered to read the 6 pages of posts, then at least read mine so you know what my arguments are and can stop misquoting me.
> 
> They don't concern Devil/Daemon stats. They don't concern PrCs. They concern rules for selling your soul, human sacrifice, drug use, extremely graphic artwork (which WOTC artists say they have to keep redoing because it's not 'bloody' or 'naked' enough)etc.
> 
> I also don't care what YOU do in YOUR game. I'm concerned with the brand image and, if what the blurb on the advert says is true, and if two magazines and the BoVD itself need to be shrinkwrapped, then we're not talking your typical D&D stuff here. This will be linked to the D&D brand, not as some offshoot book for certain people and... you know, I tire of saying all of this over and over. Go read my other posts. *




Well, for the record I've been following this thread with interest since the beginning, and actually paying a lot of attention to what you're posting.

I guess I didn't put my feelings forward very clearly.  I should have left out the examples.  All right, let me try again.  

I realize that what you object to isn't Demogorgon's stats.  It seems like what you're more concerned about is the roleplaying aspect of interacting with Demogorgon.  There was an infamous pc cleric of Juiblex in my game years ago.  He slew many another pc, as well as lots of important npcs, before he was finally laid low by another pc.  During this time he made many sacrifices to his demon prince.  It would be nice to have a consistent system to handle his rewards.  Now, obviously, I dealt with it just fine; and certainly having that sort of pc in the campaign isn't for every group.  But he made for great role-playing possibilities; by the end, almost every other pc active in the game was out to get him.  He tortured, used drugs and poisons, dealt with demons and was nasty and evil in ways the rules just don't cover.  

Now, as I understand your concerns, basically you're afraid that this book is going to cause an uproar against dnd and force it back into the shadows.  Well, I remember all the anti-rpg propoganda in the 80's and I'd hate to see a return to it; I was once handed a flyer by one of my jr. high teachers about how dnd promoted voodoo, witchcraft, assassination, poison use, demon worship, etc.  But you know what?  If a "mature audiences" book was going to do that, don't you think it would have already happened with the Black Dog stuff?  Heck, don't you think games like Vampire would have done it?  Or LARPing!  Look at those kids, living in a fantasy world, why they might assault you and drink your blood!, blah blah blah.  I just don't see it happening.

I certainly don't intend any insult to you, and I respect your opinion; I just disagree with you.  I think the BoVD is a chance for dnd to address some genuinely fresh material that's long since overdue and, actually, somtimes necessary.  For example, how do you determine whether a pc can resist being tortured for information?  Or how long he can resist?  Or what's left of him afterward?  After all, most tortures can be ruinous to the body and mind.  Could you cast a spell with after your thumbs were crushed by a vise?  How much damage do you take if you're slammed inside an iron maiden?  

Sure, I can make up answers; so can you.  But they'll be different answers.  And sometimes, when the pcs walk into a dungeon's torture chamber, the giant guardian might want to throw them in the iron maiden and slam it shut.


----------



## Xarlen (Aug 22, 2002)

Here here, Jester! 

And, let's not forget that in D&D, torture can be extended via magic. Imagine bringing the sucker back from death's door via healing magics, after throwing him in the iron maiden.

Considering the rigorous amounts of stuff that could be done, Rules to inform you on How to handle how long it takes someone to crack would be good.


----------



## the Jester (Aug 22, 2002)

Xarlen said:
			
		

> *With Mialee, Vadania, and Alexandra?  *




Are you kidding??  You'll never get Alexandra in that one!!

Now, find us a good female ELF paladin...


----------



## Olive (Aug 22, 2002)

just so we're allclear:

the green ronin 'vileness' that people are referring to is the sacrifices that the thurmatagist class in Armies of the Abyss have to make in order to gain their spells. It's pretty vile.

The comment from Nathanel about graphic, naked and blody art refers to a early post where someone claimed to have been told by their local game shop owner that the artists for BoVD shop their and were told by WotC that they needed to make their art more vile.

Now, I couldn't care less. I want mechanics for selling ones soul and human sacrifice and joining cults. What I've seen so far (lords of darkness, one of the PrCs in Masters of the Wild and the monster cults from Dragon) I like. I like Monte's work. And I lik evil. I've never seen any actual suggestion hat the book will have soddomy rules ('and I roll at 20 for penatration depth! take that small faerie creature!!!') or any of the other stuff some people seem to think this book will have... i bet monte's laughing at us RIGHT NOW!

Also, you're all wrong when you say that there is no rules for torture in DnD. the Stronghold Builders Guidebook has some very small ones...

enough from me.


----------



## Nightfall (Aug 22, 2002)

Sepulchrave II said:
			
		

> *I like demons. I'll buy it. *




Works for me too.


----------



## Henry (Aug 22, 2002)

Simply put - all here who have seen Monte's past track record and enjoy his work, will probably pick up this book. All here who don't like Monte's work anyway, WON'T pick up the Book of Vile Darkness.

Any naysayers about this out there?


----------



## Son_of_Thunder (Aug 22, 2002)

*Howdy All!!!*

Howdy fellow ENWorldites!!!

There have been some well thought out replies and posts here. It proves that my opinion can be swayed. I will hold off on my decision until I can actually peruse the book.

As many have pointed out we don't really know what's in the book. I have also changed my opinion about Monte. He doesn't have an unhealthy fascination with evil, he's just a very good writer that fills this niche in the game.

I just want to thank those who kept it civil and given well thought out replies.

Son of Thunder


----------



## Desdichado (Aug 22, 2002)

Henry said:
			
		

> *Simply put - all here who have seen Monte's past track record and enjoy his work, will probably pick up this book. All here who don't like Monte's work anyway, WON'T pick up the Book of Vile Darkness.
> 
> Any naysayers about this out there? *



Yeah, I've been devil's advocate (no pun intended, really 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





) in this thread, so why not one more time.  I don't care that it's Monte writing it.  I think it'll be useful source material, and no matter who's writing it, it's from WotC.  They have certain standards as far as decency, so I'm not worried about the content.  But, like some other recent WotC productions (ELH, D&Dg) I'll have to either see it first to see if I want it or not, or find it really cheap through buy.com or something like that.  I won't be buying this one sight unseen.  MM2, on the other hand, I will be.


----------



## William Ronald (Aug 22, 2002)

I have read through several pages of this thread, to find that people are being a bit uncivil and perhaps worrying a bit too much.  (With some of the insults, I am surprised the moderators have not given out a few warnings.)

It is likely that the BoVD will have some rules on the effects of associating with evil entities and evil practices, such as human sacrifice.  However, almost any topic can be written about in a mature, non-provocative manner.

Perhaps it is best to wait until the book is released to judge it.

However, there is something to be said for heroes fighting truly evil villains as opposed to just engaging in another treasure raid.  I think we should try to avoid prejudging a book.


----------



## Ristamar (Aug 22, 2002)

MeepoTheMighty said:
			
		

> *
> Dead or Alive Beach Volleyball might contain see-thru swimsuits and even full frontal nudity, with pubic hair, and still retain an M rating.  In the article I read, they weren't yet sure how far they were going to go, but apparently you can show anything short of actual depictions of sex and still be rated M as opposed to Adults-Only (AO).
> *




I've seen screenshots and movies of DOA Extreme Volleyball (they were all clean, though definitely, well....  you know). Heck, all DOA titles are basically average T&A fighting games (give me Street Fighter or Soul Calibur any day of the week).  However, they've never pushed it too far.  I was a bit stunned to hear about real stripper footage being placed into Dave Mirra XXX, so  I'll be absolutely _shocked_ if they do full-frontal nudity in DOA Volleyball.  I'd honestly have to see it to believe it.  That would _really_ be pushing the envelope in the North American videogame market, and I know there'd be some mad flak forthcoming...  especially if the gameplay sucks.


----------



## Dakeyras (Aug 22, 2002)

I rarely post since I'm usually incoherent but I'll try to say this clearly  .  

First to those who say we don't need BoVD because of all the real world evil we can draw inspiration from the evil in the real world.  Isn't that kinda against the point?  At least in my case when I play a fantasy came I'm trying to forget the real world.  Between child murders, suicide bombers, and the stuff of my nightmares concentration camps I would might rather face a DeathKnight at the head of an army of undead then reminding myself of the evils I've seen on the news.  Even if I disguise the plot so my players don't know where I got it, I still get to remind myself of the child parents on the news or my trip to Dachau when I was in school, not exactly my idea of fun.  I'd much rather have a book I can open and take said DeathKnight make him a worshiper of Asmodeaus and see what benefits he gets from that and if they fit my campaign.  Also I can't turn off real life, if this book actually goes too far I can close it and take a break.

Secondly I've only ever met three kinds of people when it comes to our little hobby.  Those of us who play it or used to play and understand it a wonderful pastime.  Those who don't care one whit about the game. And those people who told me I was going to Hell for playing (and at this point in my life I was actually thinking of entering the Roman Catholic priesthood and living my life accordingly).  The first group is us and we already know what our reaction is going to be apparently.  I don't really see the second group suddenly rallying against us when BoVD comes out and the third group has already condemned us.  So in my case I don't really see how BoVD can be anything but a book written for a game.


----------



## Wolfspider (Aug 22, 2002)

> The comment from Nathanel about graphic, naked and blody art refers to a early post where someone claimed to have been told by their local game shop owner that the artists for BoVD shop their and were told by WotC that they needed to make their art more vile.


----------



## Hakkenshi (Aug 22, 2002)

I think research will show that the Book of Naughty Bits will be much more controversial than the Book of Vile Darkness. Death, destruction, torture, brutal murder, all these things are fine when there's no sexual content involved. It becomes especially controversial when said sexual content involves the Catlord 

(/sarcasm)



> _Originally posted by Nathanael_
> *They concern rules for selling your soul, human sacrifice, drug use, extremely graphic artwork*




You mean the BoVD is gonna have rules for extremely graphic artwork??? Sweet! I never COULD get the hang of it...


----------



## barsoomcore (Aug 22, 2002)

Hakkenshi said:
			
		

> *It becomes especially controversial when said sexual content involves the Catlord *




It's not so much the sexual content involving the Catlord. It's the sexual content involving her cats. Mrow.


----------



## Hakkenshi (Aug 22, 2002)

See, this is type of thing I'd like to see covered in the BoVD: did Tony DiTerlizzi know what he was unleashing upon the world when he painted the Catlord???

A question for the ages.

Another question for the ages would be why it isn't called the CatLADY. Still, some secrets Man Was Not Meant to Know.


----------



## barsoomcore (Aug 22, 2002)

Hakkenshi said:
			
		

> *Another question for the ages would be why it isn't called the CatLADY. Still, some secrets Man Was Not Meant to Know. *




Or, possibly, there are some secrets That Are Really Going to Surprise Man When He Puts His Hand Down Her(?) Pants.


----------



## psionotic (Aug 22, 2002)

This book will not sink our hobby.  If it was released in 1982, perhaps there would be an uproar, but 'the evil of D&D!' is no longer newsworthy.  Joe sixpack and Sonya Soccer Mom have already seen the 700 Club special on demonworshipping and D&D six times now.  Its yesterday's news.  People care more about the war on terrorism, corporate crime, and Tonya Harding vs Monica Lewinksy celebrity boxing then some geekboy hobby, anyway.

Mismanagement by certain corporate overlords might be able to ruin D&D,  but the Book of Vile Darkness will not.  



I'm going to buy it, and frankly I can't wait.


----------



## Al (Aug 22, 2002)

My comment on the matter is: no big deal.

The fact of the matter is that the so-called 'soccer mums' aren't going to tear down the walls of WotC with their bare hands, lynch Monte and insert a constitutional amendment making playing DnD a hanging offence.

Why not?

1.  Most will never have heard of it.  Indeed, the overwhelmingly majority won't have heard of it.  Most people don't really know what Dungeons & Dragons is.  If you were to take a poll of one hundred randomly selected people, I guarantee that nearly none will have even heard of the Book of Vile Darkness.  To those that proclaim that a media furore will alert their attention, I disagree again.  Ask them about Jack Chick, Dark Dungeons or any of the cases involved so-called 'DnD related' suicides/homicides: most will not have a clue.

2. The media is more liberal these days than the 1980s.  Without being able to make more than general allusions, we bear in mind that most of the 'soccer mums' were brought up in the 1960s/1970s, after the liberalising effects that they had; hence, they are far more open-minded and liberal than the 'soccer mums' of the 1980s who were brought up pre-1960 or so.  

3. Bigger fish to fry.  Nowadays, (unlike the 1980s), there are graphically violent computer games, rising violence and sex on television and in the cinema.  The Graduate even has full nudity on stage.  If the media is to go berserk, it is unlikely that it would do so over a minor fringe product like BoVD.  As to Nathanael's 'graphic nudity', why would this cause an outcry when you can buy porn from your local newsagent?  And why has Vampire not caused the hypothesised outrage: surely this would be as 'evil' as anything in BoVD.

4. Hasbro's business sense.  Hasbro is a strong brand with a good deal of goodwill.  They are NOT going to compromise their younger audiences (Pokemon et al.) by releasing a product which will contaminate their name and undermine the goodwill factor: especially considering that their youth market (e.g. Pokemon) easily outsells DnD.  It just wouldn't make sense.

5. Public Perception of Gamers.  Of those that vaguely know what DnD is, the perception has shifted.  In the 1980s, gamers were a smaller group than today, and were generally associated with being slightly sinister and affiliated with the Goth movement.  Today, we are in there with any other type of geeks (Trekkies etc.)

Sorry Nathanael, but BoVD just isn't going to cause the DnD world to collapse around us.


----------



## ForceUser (Aug 22, 2002)

Actually, I think it would be kind of cool if BoVD was so graphic that we couldn't talk about it here for fear of upsetting Eric's Grandmother. I think D&D is due, I think the gaming community can handle it, and I think that an entire line of "mature" D&D products would be fantastic. I enjoy broaching mature subjects in my games. They're not for everyone, but they are for me.


----------



## Desdichado (Aug 22, 2002)

ForceUser said:
			
		

> *Actually, I think it would be kind of cool if BoVD was so graphic that we couldn't talk about it here for fear of upsetting Eric's Grandmother. I think D&D is due, I think the gaming community can handle it, and I think that an entire line of "mature" D&D products would be fantastic. I enjoy broaching mature subjects in my games. They're not for everyone, but they are for me. *



Still, we know that it won't be.  Monte himself has stated on these boards that it's pretty tame, and the copy editor, or whomever it was that made that first advert, was pretty grossly misrepresenting the actual contents of the book.

Y'know, it's abit surprising that nobody _has_ pulled up a link to that post yet, in the 7 pages of this thread...


----------



## Hakkenshi (Aug 22, 2002)

> Y'know, it's abit surprising that nobody has pulled up a link to that post yet, in the 7 pages of this thread...




I believe in being led by example. Show us how it's done!


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Aug 22, 2002)

Hakkenshi said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I believe in being led by example. Show us how it's done!  *




Ok, http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/show...84&perpage=40&highlight=darkness&pagenumber=2


FD


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Aug 22, 2002)

Monte At Home said:
			
		

> *"Prostitution?" Does it actually say that in the catalog copy? Who writes that $#%$?
> 
> If I wrote a book called The Book of Vile Darkness, I'd fill it with the most hideously evil spells, feats, prestige classes, magic items, artifacts, monsters and NPCs that you'd ever want to put in a D&D game. I'd include rules for the benefits evil cultists get from sacrifices, new poisons, diseases, and so on.
> 
> ...


----------



## Friadoc (Aug 22, 2002)

Ok,

...I guess I was lucky when it came to my start playing D&D, as it was my mother's idea after a few people from my elementary school told her I needed a hobby to challange my intellect and creative desires. I've been playing D&D, in one form or another, since Jan. of 1980, which was roughly four months before my 7th birthday.

This was, obviously, during a significant portion of anti-D&D hype, much of which was erroneous urban legend that has as much basis in fact as the world of Conan is an archaeological representation of a previously unknown, real world, culture. 

Anyhow, I think having a book aimed at adults is a good thing for the hobby - we are getting older - and just because that book is aimed at older people does not mean it should harm the overall industry, or this particular genre, just because younger players should not see the book.

Why?

Simply put, it has not harmed the movie industry or fictional novels.

Kids read Harry Porter, even after some fundamentalists complained about it being a tutorial for devil worship, or other such nonsense - normally those people wouldn't buy the book anyway, so there is no loss to the market.

In general most anti-D&D hype is based on rumor, myth, and false information - or just plainly ignored facts about the cases people talk about.

I'm sure many of us can remember a certain movie with Tom Hanks, which he doesn't talk about much as it was a rather badly acted part for him, which was based on a real life missing persons case that, in the end, turned out to have nothing to do with the game of D&D and was, instead, just a messed up portion of the life of a person who played D&D. People didn't look at all the facts, but instead looked at what they wanted to see and used that.

Children can't buy R-rated movies, if the store is run properly, without an adults permission - nor can kids under 13 see a PG-13 movie, if the store is run properly.

Those movies are still made, they do not impact the movie industry negatively and, thusly, it should not hurt the hobby anymore then it already does.

People who refer to D&D as satanic, or what not, will already refer to it as such and do not need a book to fuel their fires - they already use incorrect information, false statements, and general stupidity to make those inferences already.

For the record, I'm not calling anyone on this board stupid, I just do not agree with the actions of a certain, large number of fundamentalists who spout of like broken records.

Funny thing is, when you look at both my current D&D groups, we've a health does of various religions; we've a handful of mormans (some jack and some regular), a few catholics, a couple southern baptists, a hedonists, a wiccan, and myself (a Neitzschean Taoist Deist, kinda.  ).

Anyhow, more to the point, it is a game and the people who would complain about it, call it evil, or what not would do so without the Book of Vile Darkness being published, so not publishing it for this reason is bad in my opinion.

Children shouldn't see things of an mature nature, so it's good that it has the 'Mature Content' label - Sword and Sorcery Studios has items with nudity and no such labels, we've heard no outcry about that (one item in question is the topless 'wood' elf female in their Scarred Lands DM Screen booklet).

Just my opinion though, no more right or wrong then anyone elses.


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Aug 22, 2002)

Friadoc said:
			
		

> *Sword and Sorcery Studios has items with nudity and no such labels, we've heard no outcry about that (one item in question is the topless 'wood' elf female in their Scarred Lands DM Screen booklet).
> *




You have missed some fun topics then 

There is one d20 company that can't be discussed with the standard argument over its artwork coming up and being debated.

FD


----------



## Hakkenshi (Aug 22, 2002)

Ok, having read Monte's post, I can't POSSIBLY credit the doomsayers with having any credibility whatsoever. It's pretty clear what he included and, more importantly, what he INTENDED to include. There was never anything about sodomy or the biting off of nipples, as nathanael had declared there would be.


----------



## Balsamic Dragon (Aug 22, 2002)

Concerning the media:  newspapers and television news will not do a story on a book that has been published that people might find offensive.  They will do a story on a book that people have found offensive and are now complaining about loudly.  And even then, there has to be something else newsworthy about it, because heck, some folks will complain about anything.  So I think until we see a violent crime tied to the book or until someone sues someone over it, we are unlikely to see press backlash.

That said, I will step up and say that my number one, purely selfish, concern is that the BoVD will either a) deal with too many sexual issues (which apparently Monte has said it will not) or have too much blatent female nudity (which I am guessing it will), and as a result of that b) create an even more hostile environment for female players.  I simply don't want to see rules for prostitution or any sort of ritual sex for D&D.  It's gratuitous and drives would-be gamers away from the hobby.  We had the wandering hooker subtable in the first edition DMG and that was quite enough thanks!

Does this make me a prude?  I doubt it, considering the size of my XXXenophile CCG collection   I just have my own interest in keeping D&D female-friendly.

Balsamic Dragon


----------



## Hakkenshi (Aug 22, 2002)

I sincerely doubt that the female nudity will be more exploitative than the scantily-clad fantasy ladies already are--in proportion, of course.

And I REALLY don't expect to see ritual sex described in this book.


----------



## Psion (Aug 22, 2002)

Hakkenshi said:
			
		

> *Ok, having read Monte's post, I can't POSSIBLY credit the doomsayers with having any credibility whatsoever. It's pretty clear what he included and, more importantly, what he INTENDED to include. There was never anything about sodomy or the biting off of nipples, as nathanael had declared there would be. *




So what you are saying is that you doubt _nathanael's_ credibility. I don't know if you are calling me a doomsayer, but I am concerned. I was perfectly aware of the content of Monte's post and cited it several times. Further, I said I am reserving judgement on whether it lives up to my worries when I have a copy in hand.

Now tell me I don't have any credibility. If you are not ready to, put the big paintbrush away, okay.


----------



## Hakkenshi (Aug 22, 2002)

Well I didn't count those who were CONCERNED among the doomsayers, Psion. I'm concerned too, the way I'm always a bit concerned when a product that interests me is about to be published.

What I can't understand is the uninformed blanket statements that declare this book anathema (or crap) without having seen it.

You reserve your judgement, as well you should. I'm not ready to declare the book a perfect success either. I mean, I haven't even seen the front nor the back cover!


----------



## Wolfen Priest (Aug 22, 2002)

I have.

Go to amazon.com, they have the front cover available for viewership.  And yes, it looks like it's bound (mock-style, of course) in human flesh.

Here it is:


----------



## Psion (Aug 22, 2002)

Hakkenshi said:
			
		

> *I mean, I haven't even seen the front nor the back cover!  *




If you dig around, there's a facsimile of the front cover floating around somewhere. It's nothin' special. R&R is worse...


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Aug 22, 2002)

I think it looks silly/cartoony...and those are bat wings, not human flesh


----------



## Hakkenshi (Aug 22, 2002)

OK, so now I've seen the cover. I still can't emit an informed opinion about the damn book


----------



## Wolfspider (Aug 22, 2002)

> And yes, it looks like it's bound (mock-style, of course) in human flesh.




It does? 

*scratches head*

*turns head sideways*

Bat wings.

And some grey stuff in the background etched with runes.

That grey stuff's human flesh?

Hmmm....


----------



## Desdichado (Aug 22, 2002)

Hakkenshi said:
			
		

> *I believe in being led by example. Show us how it's done!  *



Thanks, Furn!  I don't have access to the search function, I'm sorry to say.  I've referred to this post several times myself, but actually having it quoted makes a big difference.


----------



## Wolfen Priest (Aug 22, 2002)

Heheh, ok, so it doesn't look like human flesh.  I was basing that observation on having only seen the thumbnail!

In any case, looking at the cover up close, I can say my opinions on it haven't changed much; that is, I know I'll buy it, but I don't know how _comfortable_ I am with it.


----------



## Corinth (Aug 22, 2002)

That cover is supposed to scare or disturb people?


----------



## Hakkenshi (Aug 22, 2002)

That creepy eye on the cover of MM1 is MUCH more disturbing.

And don't get me started on the cover of CoC


----------



## Xarlen (Aug 22, 2002)

Maybe if they have fear of bats or little cartoon skulls?


----------



## Vrylakos (Aug 22, 2002)

Wolfen Priest said:
			
		

> *I have.
> 
> Go to amazon.com, they have the front cover available for viewership.  And yes, it looks like it's bound (mock-style, of course) in human flesh.
> 
> ...




Uhm, I see bat wings. Is this the human-flesh picture?

VRYLAKOS


----------



## Buttercup (Aug 22, 2002)

ForceUser said:
			
		

> *Actually, I think it would be kind of cool if BoVD was so graphic that we couldn't talk about it here for fear of upsetting Eric's Grandmother.  *




After some of the comments made in this thread, by a certain person who is supposedly up in arms about 'mature themes', Eric is in big trouble with his grandmother.  I really expected the moderators to insist that certain comments be cleaned up.


----------



## Darkness (Aug 22, 2002)

*I've read this thread just now, and...*

*Attention, please:* 

No matter the topic being discussed: This is EN World - _not_ the Board of Dark Vileness or some such thing. For that, go to Nutkinland instead - 'cause _here_, such behavior won't be tolerated.

So please tone the venom down and start playing nice again, folks - this goes especially for the person whose post I had to edit, but not _only_ for him; others were rude, too (e.g., "morons," etc.).

- Darkness


----------



## Olive (Aug 23, 2002)

Hakkenshi said:
			
		

> *And I REALLY don't expect to see ritual sex described in this book. *




but see, that would be useful in a game context. so i'd be keen for that...


----------



## Ristamar (Aug 23, 2002)

Olive said:
			
		

> *
> 
> but see, that would be useful in a game context. so i'd be keen for that... *




I think that topic, at least in the context of RPG's, is viewed by most as more of a (crude) joke than anything else, myself included.  Sometimes I peruse the [Adult] GtUCK thread for an occasional chuckle.


----------



## Nightfall (Aug 23, 2002)

Psion said:
			
		

> *
> 
> If you dig around, there's a facsimile of the front cover floating around somewhere. It's nothin' special. R&R is worse... *




Yep I still see my players shudder when I mention "The Big Black Book!" Course now I'll have the Big RED book too when R&R2 gets released.


----------



## Olive (Aug 23, 2002)

Ristamar said:
			
		

> *I think that topic, at least in the context of RPG's, is viewed by most as more of a (crude) joke than anything else, myself included.  Sometimes I peruse the [Adult] GtUCK thread for an occasional chuckle. *




well, given that, like human sacrifice, its a major part of ocult lore, i think its appropriate. in fact maybe the only appropriate use of sex in my games...


----------



## William Ronald (Aug 23, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Balsamic Dragon:_
> I simply don't want to see rules for prostitution or any sort of ritual sex for D&D. It's gratuitous and drives would-be gamers away from the hobby. We had the wandering hooker subtable in the first edition DMG and that was quite enough thanks!




Balsamic Dragon, Monte Cook has stated that prostitution is *NOT* a topic in the Book of Vile Darkness.   I suggest rules for ritual sex would probably be a source of endless arguments.

Darkness does have a point.  This thread is getting a bit overheated.  Let's stay on topic and avoid personal attacks.


----------



## Ristamar (Aug 23, 2002)

Olive said:
			
		

> *
> 
> well, given that, like human sacrifice, its a major part of ocult lore, i think its appropriate. in fact maybe the only appropriate use of sex in my games... *




Oh, I didn't mean to imply it wasn't part of occult lore.  Though I'm still of the opinion that most view it as...   well, I already stated my opinion.  I'd simply be repeating myself.  

As for whether or not it would be _appropriate_ for WotC to be publishing rules on ritualistic sex...    I'm not even going to touch that topic.  I'll only say that while I'm hardly a prude, I would be rather disappointed and inclined to pass on that particular purchase.


----------



## Sammael99 (Aug 23, 2002)

Balsamic Dragon said:
			
		

> * We had the wandering hooker subtable in the first edition DMG and that was quite enough thanks!
> *




We had ? Drat ! I missed that one !


----------



## National Acrobat (Aug 23, 2002)

I'll buy it because it has evil in it, and it has the Demon and Devil princes in it. Enough for me!


----------



## derverdammte (Aug 23, 2002)

Sammael99 said:
			
		

> *
> 
> We had ? Drat ! I missed that one ! *




Man, that table sucked.  Not only was it not solely a "wandering hooker" table (it was actually a city encounter table), it didn't have stats for the hookers!!  I want to know what the difference between a "brazen strumpet" and a "slovenly trull" are, gamewise!


----------



## Hakkenshi (Aug 23, 2002)

> As for whether or not it would be appropriate for WotC to be publishing rules on ritualistic sex... I'm not even going to touch that topic. I'll only say that while I'm hardly a prude, I would be rather disappointed and inclined to pass on that particular purchase.




Ditto.

A generic sort of "benefits for rituals" table would suffice for those who MUST include that in their games. Of course, it would also most likely suffice for those who want standard rituals too. A simple reference to ritualistic sex won't make me dislike the book, but an extended coverage would.

That said, I REALLY don't expect such things from Monte Cook, so I'm reasonably certain it'll be alright.


----------



## Leopold (Aug 23, 2002)

I want it for evil things: Magic Disease, Pestilence, Plague, Demons, Devils, etc. I want it because I want to fully describe and have stats for a sacrifical ritual and what it will take to bring in demons from another world or summon dead gods. I want to describe that in all it's gory and macrabe detail and freak my players (who are all 20ish and older) out with scenes that they would remember for the rest of their lives.


Ever see the movie Event Horizon? Now THAT is a perfect candidate for rules from the BoVD. I want to have my players and henchmen go mad from powers beyond their control. Have them be influenced by demonic forces that warp and twist their minds. Hell i want to make this almost into Warhammer 40k with the powers of The Empire vs. Chaos and stat it all out for them. 


This is not your mother's gaming book. This is for DM's who like twists and turns in their games. I can see that this will NOT be for everyone but for those of us with a MATURE (read the warning on the label people) gaming group and players that can handle and respond to such influences.


----------



## Hakkenshi (Aug 23, 2002)

I think a lot of people who are preparing their sacrificial daggers and pentagrams are gonna be disappointed with the book...


----------



## Khan the Warlord (Aug 23, 2002)

Hakkenshi said:
			
		

> *I think a lot of people who are preparing their sacrificial daggers and pentagrams are gonna be disappointed with the book... *




WHAT?!

Damn.

/me goes to release his chained, nude wifey from the altar.


----------



## Hakkenshi (Aug 23, 2002)

> /me goes to release his chained, nude wifey from the altar.




(Police Chief Wiggum voice) "Continue swimming naked... Aw, c'mon, continue! *sigh* Open fire."


----------



## Pazu (Aug 23, 2002)

derverdammte said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Man, that table sucked.  Not only was it not solely a "wandering hooker" table (it was actually a city encounter table), it didn't have stats for the hookers!!  I want to know what the difference between a "brazen strumpet" and a "slovenly trull" are, gamewise! *




Skill ranks.   

--Pazu


----------



## Desdichado (Aug 23, 2002)

Pazu said:
			
		

> *Skill ranks.
> --Pazu *



class ability: flurry of blows?  Sorry.


----------



## SHARK (Aug 23, 2002)

Greetings!

Hmmm...well, relaxing here smoking my pipe, I can't say I quite understand what the fuss is all about. There are books in any bookstore, and stuff that is easily found on the internet that is far more graphic and immoral than anything that is likely to be discussed in detail or shown in the Book of Vile Darkness. This is a GAME. The GAME appeals to a wide audience--not just kids under 18. Parents should always inspect stuff their KIDS buy. If they don't approve of it--take it back. If an adult doesn't approve of it--don't buy it. For the rest, though, the book may offer a wide range of interesting ideas, discussion, and mechanics, not to mention creatures, demons, magic items, spells, and stats, that many will find useful.

In my own games, there are drugs and sanity-balsting substances; there is rape; there is human sacrifice; there is demcn-summoning; there is slavery; there is cruel torture; there are dark blasphemies that threaten to befoul and subjugate the entire world; there is madness, lust, murder, racism, and hatred;there is prostitution, sex, orgies, and wicked debauchery of all kinds; there is genocide, corruption, mayhem and insanity unleashed!

These things are all present, in different degrees, and with different levels of detail, depending on the players present. Obviously, when kids under 18 are playing, the level of detail and description is different. With adults, more detail and context, as desired, can be provided.

All of which is set into the plot, characters, and context of what is going on at the time and place in the campaign. I've never had any problems with any of it, or with any players. What is the problem? The Book of Vile Darkness will likely only enhance the mechanics and context of such topics within the campaign. I just don't see what so many people are upset over a book they haven't even seen, and a book that is written by a very skilled writer and game designer, Mr. Monte Cook.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK


----------



## Tiefling (Aug 23, 2002)

SHARK, I think if you re-read the thread carefully you'll find that the fuss is about whether or not irrational parents will see this book and not let their kids play D&D, and/or if the media will pick up on it and start another witch hunt.


----------



## jester47 (Aug 23, 2002)

Wolfen Priest said:
			
		

> *
> 
> And for those who simply don't give a rat's you-know-what about the next generation of gamers, do you ever think about what will happen to our little hobby if people stop playing it?  I for one don't want to see it taken over by CRPG's.  Flexor, how old were you when you started playing D&D?  I was 12; my parents had to buy me the books.  If it starts to scare away soccer moms with fears of satanism and dark rituals, guess what?  The hobby will lose gamers, period.  Or else the people who take it up will become even more distanced from 'mainstream' society.
> 
> *




Jumping in on a mile long thread... will this ever be read?

I disagree with you on this Wolfen Priest.  I think it will make our hobby stronger.  Obviously you care a lot about the hobby and want it to grow and enter the mainstreem.  However, I do not think getting kids involved early is the way to do it.

Ryan Dancy made the point that one of the greatest mistakes that TSR ever made was targeting the ages 8 and up category.  Doing that caused much of the damage of the 1980 D&D satanism scare.  If the game had not been packaged and targeted at kids, it probably would not have gotten attacked like it did and the hobby would be better off for it.   This game should have never been targeted for kids.  It is not, and has never been,  a game for kids.  The target age for 3E is 18+.  

Yes there are some prodigies out there.  There is the occasional 8- 12 year old, that grew up around it or got involved early.  I can say from my experience, while I have been playing D&D since I was 8, I started truely playing by the rules when I was in my mid to late teens.

If I was working in a book store and a "soccer mom" came to the checkout stand with her kid and a PHB, I would challenge her.  I would ask if she was aware that the game was designed for an older (18+) audience and if she was sure that she wanted to buy it for her child.  The game is rated R, and I think it is responsible to make that clear when we talk about it.

If we did this two things would happen.  It would become a game only adults play.  Teenagers would be trying to play it like they try to get cigarettes and alcohol.  (ok well maybe not that much)  Also the game would not have such a negative connotation because the players were showing a higher level of responsibility.  

I think that the Book of Vile Darkness is a rated R book.  And I think the warning label is saying "hey most of the other stuff is PG13 but this book is rated R.  If you don't like the R stuff please do not buy this book."  If you are offended by the extreme R movies then dont get the book.  But I do not think that this book is going to be even that bad.  It will definately not be rated X. 

Aaron.


----------



## Tiefling (Aug 23, 2002)

Wait... first you say the game is rated R... then you say that most of it is PG-13 and the BoVD is R. Personally I'm not even sure about that. I suppose the illustrations MIGHT push it there (if there's _excessive_ gore and nudity), but talking about human-sacrifice and demon-worship doesn't do it.


----------



## Latency (Aug 23, 2002)

I will pick it just because I buy all the books wizards prints


----------



## Desdichado (Aug 23, 2002)

What makes you think the target audience for 3e is 18+ year olds?  I'd say it's more early teens and up -- and a lot of that's just in the complexity of the rules, not the content per se.

Although there is a breast or two in the monster manual.  Not so much as in 1e MM, of course.


----------



## barsoomcore (Aug 23, 2002)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> *Although there is a breast or two in the monster manual.  Not so much as in 1e MM, of course.*




Mmmm, remember the succubus? That was a formative experience for me...


----------



## Henry (Aug 23, 2002)

Should I post again? Why the heck not?

I see - not even minimal damage - I see ZERO damage done by the Book of Vile Darkness to the image of D&D among parents of young children. It comes down to parental responsibility, and to exposure of parents to the material. Believe me, if a parent were to be truly worried about the BOVD, they would be also controlling their children's exposure to the following:


All popular culture music
All entertainment programming on all television networks
All popular fiction novels
Works containing no negative consequences for drug abuse, promiscuous sexuality, or violent flagrant opposition of authority

And that's just the short list.

D&D will become no more known for its "promotion of evil" than it already is. Not having the BOVD published will not make it any LESS so, either. Unless you personally are trying to convince someone that D&D is wholesome, and you have a front-cover-up copy in front of you while talking, it's doubtful that any non-gamer would even know or care about the BOVD.


----------



## jester47 (Aug 23, 2002)

Nathanael said:
			
		

> *Kenjib and others have missed the point.
> 
> Tolkien doesn't describe the corruption in graphic terms. He doesn't say 'to get orcs you sodomize elves and then scoop out their brains and replace them with the blood of a slain innocent.'
> 
> *




Can you assure me that the Book of Vile Darkness does have such graphic terms as you have invented here?



> *
> 
> Do you need to know the exact powers you get from vile acts and the dice mechanic to make sure you did the vile act correctly? Ring wraiths are said by Tolkien to be corrupted by their greed and the effect of the one ring. Not 'they sacrificed 100 virgins after sodomizing them and biting off their nipples, because that's how it's done.'
> 
> *




Do you think that there will be a dice mechanic to make sure a character did the act correctly?  DC20 on a knowledge (sacrifice) roll perhaps?  

Nathanael, you do not know if this is what the book is about.  Unless you were a playtester, you have not seen it anddo not know what it contains.  Your fears, while full of the best intentions are based completely on speculation.  My argument on this point (what we can guess will be contained in the book) continues at the end of this post.  



> *
> 
> For those who have refused to read back a few pages, I'll recap my points in a condensed format:
> 
> ...




I don't want normal children playing this game.  Kids have more fun outside playing pretend without rules.  Put the book away kids, and go get hurt in the field, it will make you stronger. 



> *
> D&D is not mainstream enough to survive an attack by the media similar to the one aimed at computer games after Columbine. My belief that the release of this book is a marketing ploy is not a conspiracy theory, but the professional opinion of a Marketing person. History is full of examples of good things gone to pot over bad publicity (Mighty Mouse). Kenzer & Company's book is a good example of the book your looking for without all of the needless graphic exposition. A good storyteller doesn't need such exposition in the first place to create a mood. *




No you are wrong. D&D DID survive an attack from the media similar and far more extensive than the one aimed at First Person Shooter Video Games after Columbine.  The attack lasted almost a decade and guess what?  We won.  We are still here and stronger than ever.  Because of that attack we have the resources and the know how to squash a second attempt.  If anything the reason FPS games survived the attack is because they studied what the RPG industry did.  Bad publicity knocked the gaming industry on its a$$.  But it got up and kept on puching.  In the end we won.

Now here is what we know about the contents of the Book of Vile Darkness:

Catalog:

Elements such as moral dilemma, slavery, human sacrifice, and other sensitive issues will be treated in a mature fashion to allow players to add a level of complexity to their campaigns. 

Monte Says: 

Well, the book handles horrible things ranging from torture to drug addiction. Sadism, self-mutilation, and selling one's soul. Sacrifice and disease. Spells so awful that they corrupt you when you cast them--in body and/or soul. 

Some of these topics (and more that I haven't even mentioned) are "mature audiences" material. You'll find frank discussions of the evil that men (and women) do. This isn't there to encourage such things, even as player characters, but so that it can be used for villains. There is a section on playing evil characters, but that's not the main focus of the book.

So here is the list of topics:

Moral Delima - These are classic trap the paladin cases.  

slavery - I bet it runs the gambit of buying and selling, laborer to servant, and all points in between.

Human Sacrifice - not how to sacrifice but rather why bad guys would want to do it and what they get out of it.  

Selling ones soul - Faust did it in Budapest, why can't Rary do it in Greyhawk?  Besides, devils are always open for a deal as Charlie Danials likes to remind us. 

drug addiction - Drug running is in Lords of Darkness, might as well cover theother side of it eh?

Sadism and Self Mutilation - I think we will get a lecture on these things, not examples but rather somthing similar to the mental disorders section in CoC, cause well thats what they are...  I think this would also include information of the impact on people caused by "the evil that men do."  

No where has anything been said about explicit material.  Mature material, yes, explicit description of depraved acts described in detail, no.  The book will be nothing worse than CoC in my opinion.  

Aaron.


----------



## Desdichado (Aug 23, 2002)

jester47 said:
			
		

> *Nathanael, you do not know if this is what the book is about.  Unless you were a playtester, you have not seen it anddo not know what it contains.  Your fears, while full of the best intentions are based completely on heresy.  *



I think you mean *hearsay*






EDIT:  Whoops, by the time I posted that, you had already changed it.  My bad!


----------



## jester47 (Aug 23, 2002)

Tiefling said:
			
		

> *Wait... first you say the game is rated R... then you say that most of it is PG-13 and the BoVD is R. Personally I'm not even sure about that. I suppose the illustrations MIGHT push it there (if there's excessive gore and nudity), but talking about human-sacrifice and demon-worship doesn't do it. *




Sorry not being clear.  In the entertainment industry it seems that there is always an element of bleedover.  That is if you target somthing for ages 13 and up, kids younger than that are going to think its cool.  So if you dont want people younger than 12 playing the game you target it at 18+.  So the lowest common denominator of D&D is R, that is as low as it will get.  However, since the relaese of 3E it has been cruising at PG13.  BoVD is going to be a little more riskier than the other D&D stuff.  its just fair warning if you are the sort to play it with your family.

Aaron.


----------



## Wolfspider (Aug 23, 2002)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> *
> I think you mean hearsay
> 
> 
> ...




Still a darn funny typo.  Thanks for pointing it out...it made my afternoon!


----------



## jester47 (Aug 23, 2002)

too many reports on the inquisition in the late middle ages...

hearsay, heresy, is there really that much difference, also, wasn't sure how the hear-say was spelled...

Aaron.


----------



## jester47 (Aug 23, 2002)

Al said:
			
		

> *My comment on the matter is: no big deal.
> 
> The fact of the matter is that the so-called 'soccer mums'
> 
> *




Wouldn't those be football mums over there Al?

Aaron.


----------



## Xarlen (Aug 23, 2002)

Y'know, considering the artwork, and the way the PHB was constructed, it seemed designed to target the 15+ male adolecent. 

I'm going to have to say, that I got into D&D, or atleast, fantasy novels as a Freshman in highschool. I wanted to play RPGs THEN, but didn't find anyone.

I will note that the first time I started playing 3e, and heck, I started DMing (And still have that game, I add), was when I was 17. I don't think the PHB should require you to be 18, c'mon. Sure, it will not cripple the hobby, it will not kill it, but D&D is not something that should be kept away from teenagers. I can get my hands on some rather violent video games, and I think D&D is even more harmless, content wise, then those. 

It all depends on the DM. There are some DMs go game for their family, children and all. I imagine that they don't have these elements in their games. That's just fine. I imagine high schoolers experiment with the elements, but likely not very good. Morale delimmas are perhaps not seen with so much conviction and consideration as 'Let's blow it up'. I know some High Schoolers that would want DBZ D20. College students (When time is had), can incorperate Anthropology, Psychology, Geology, and so forth into their games, offering serious morale delimmas.

D&D is a System. A rules mechanic. So, WHY say 'you have to be 18 to use these rules'. Besides, if you really want to look at an RPG that targeted itself to kids, or atleast 'cutsefied' itself, then look at Changeling. Changeling had a Lot of potential, but they made it too cute. I quote a friend who won't touch it: "The first time we played, we went up against the Crayon Dragon." Usually, fairy tales are not very nice. Most were based on true, or rather grim things; look at the Brothers Grim. Now, how well did Changeling do? 

But... I'm straying off topic.


----------



## jester47 (Aug 23, 2002)

I agree that the PHB and the core rulebooks is about ages 15+.  But it is essentially targeted at adults because if they said on the books 13+ you would get more 8 - 12 year olds which is exactly what they dont want.  Also targeting an age group and designing for an age group are two different things.  I think the core rules are designed for people 15+ but targeted at 18+.  And I think this is wise because if you write somthing for 15+ and market it to 18+ most 18+ will easily understand it.  (trust me, I have met some real morons in this hobby, but all in all most people are pretty intelligent.)  

Aaron.


----------



## hellbender (Aug 23, 2002)

Suffice it to say....

   Monte Cook is an intelligent writer who has put out many tasteful products. He is far wiser than to put out anything that would cripple or hurt the hobby. Any speculation to the contrary will be easily dispelled when the book is released.

    And WotC artists do not all shop at the same hobby shop, the art is more than likely not going to make anyone have seizures. Having contact with many of them, anything blatant would have been announced by now.

    And regarding nudity in any D&D product: Classical art as well as modern art and sculpture is rife with depictions of the nude human form. Anyone offended by a pair of breasts on a harpy and considers that as vulgar has no appreciation for artistic expression, in my opinion. 

hellbender


----------



## Corinth (Aug 23, 2002)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> *What makes you think the target audience for 3e is 18+ year olds?  I'd say it's more early teens and up -- and a lot of that's just in the complexity of the rules, not the content per se. *



Dancey's say-so at the time, when he had the final say on that very issue.  He said that D&D's target is the college undergrad, and that's the way it's been ever since.


----------



## shadow (Aug 24, 2002)

I really think that BoVD is more of a marketing gimmick more than anything.  WotC is looking to increase D&D sales by attracting players of certain games (*cough* White Wolf *cough*) who prefer dark and more "mature" gamers.  One of the things that has always turned a lot of the aforementioned players off to D&D was the reputation that D&D was a "kiddie" game, or a "hack n' slash" game.  BoVD is Wizard's way of attracting those players to D&D.
With that said, I would really like to know if such a book is really necessary?  Although cultists sacrifing people, demonic pacts, and selling one's soul have been in many a D&D campaign, are specific rules really needed for them?  I've always viewed such things as a plot device, rather than someting that specific rules were needed for.  I wouldn't mind seeing villanous presige classes, but I've already seen quite a few of them in the various splatbooks. (For example Acolyte of the Skin and the various necromancer classes from Tome and Blood, or the Blighter and the Bane of Infidels from Masters of the Wild.)  Moreover, the prestige classes, spells, and magic items in the splatbooks were edgy enough for my tastes; I can't imagine how much more edgy they must be to warrant a Mature Content Warning.


----------



## gregweller (Aug 24, 2002)

If anyone's mentioned this already, my apologies. I'd make the point that we already have a 'Book of Vile Darkness' available for free. It's the MALLEUS MALEFICARUM, and you can get it at:

http://www.malleusmaleficarum.org

I especially like the version that's done as a Microsoft Help file. If you think about that for a bit, you can't get much viler than that!


----------



## jester47 (Aug 24, 2002)

shadow said:
			
		

> *I really think that BoVD is more of a marketing gimmick more than anything.  WotC is looking to increase D&D sales by attracting players of certain games (*cough* White Wolf *cough*) who prefer dark and more "mature" gamers.  One of the things that has always turned a lot of the aforementioned players off to D&D was the reputation that D&D was a "kiddie" game, or a "hack n' slash" game.  BoVD is Wizard's way of attracting those players to D&D.
> With that said, I would really like to know if such a book is really necessary?  Although cultists sacrifing people, demonic pacts, and selling one's soul have been in many a D&D campaign, are specific rules really needed for them?
> 
> <snippage>
> ...




I think you are right about it being a marketing gimmick, but just a little bit.  WotC knows who playes their game and in reality I think it is a pretty mature bunch.  I would even go as far to say that the White Wolf crowd is actually more inmature simply because they want to be more mature in thier game.  That is, it takes maturity to be ok with somthing not being really cool all the time.  But I think the BoVD is a resource that we have been doing without for a long time.  The rules are not needed just as rules for breaking items in the game are not really needed.  But they are nice to have around.  

I once ran an encounte where some tharizdun cultists had armor that if you wore it it had the ability to corrupt.  The mechanic I came up with was half baked and really did not work too well.  And it was the party's paladin that was using it!  I would have loved to have rules for magic items that corrupt at that time.  It would have been great and saved me some time and bad design experience.  I hope such rules are in the BoVD.

Aaron.


----------



## sword-dancer (Aug 24, 2002)

jester47 said:
			
		

> *El Ravager Says:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Could I say Rifts?


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Aug 24, 2002)

nevermind..


----------



## sword-dancer (Aug 24, 2002)

Flexor the Mighty! said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Were you one of those who said that?  That's like people telling me I was sick because I read a lot of Steven King and other horror authors.   Idiots.   To say that writing of the macabre is "unhealthy" reveals one as a moron. *




You are sick if you cold stand to read stephen king books.
This is an horrible and boring writer.




















Or had I experienced even worser translation than d&d novels?


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Aug 24, 2002)

sword-dancer said:
			
		

> *
> You are sick if you cold stand to read stephen king books.
> This is an horrible and boring writer.
> *




So horrible and boring that he has sold many many books.

Err.. right.

FD


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Aug 24, 2002)

sword-dancer said:
			
		

> *
> 
> You are sick if you cold stand to read stephen king books.
> This is an horrible and boring writer.
> ...




Probably. I don't like King much, but he's not that bad a writer. You probably read a horrible and boring translator.


----------



## Al (Aug 24, 2002)

jester47 said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Wouldn't those be football mums over there Al?
> 
> Aaron. *




Quite so: hence 'so-called' 'soccer mums'


----------



## Zappo (Aug 24, 2002)

sword-dancer said:
			
		

> *You are sick if you cold stand to read stephen king books.
> This is an horrible and boring writer.*



I don't like him too, but considering the sheer number of copies he sells, I think you can't say he's bad.


----------



## Darkness (Aug 25, 2002)

Zappo said:
			
		

> *I don't like him too, but considering the sheer number of copies he sells, I think you can't say he's bad. *



My opinion of him is pretty neutral; I haven't read his any books so far, but I might read one that interests me some day.

Still, sales numbers are _not_ a good measurement of objective quality.


----------



## Gargoyle (Aug 25, 2002)

Darkness said:
			
		

> *My opinion of him is pretty neutral; I haven't read his any books so far, but I might read one that interests me some day.
> 
> Still, sales numbers are not a good measurement of objective quality. *




What would be?  A critic's review?  Quality of a work of fiction is subjective, not objective.

I guess I agree with your sentiment, but sales numbers are a good measurement of perceived quality for the market that is buying.

Edit:  Clarified what I meant a little...


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Aug 25, 2002)

Gargoyle said:
			
		

> *
> What would be?  A critic's review?  Quality is subjective, not objective. *




It is when it comes to art.

I think sales is a fine way to judge the fundemental quality of an author. 

King has written some good books and some bad books, but he is definitly not horrible or boring- or else he would never sold a second book.

FD


----------



## Zappo (Aug 25, 2002)

Darkness said:
			
		

> *Still, sales numbers are not a good measurement of objective quality. *



There are _no_ good measuremebts of objective quality, because quality isn't objective.

Anyway, since he sells so much, and since most buyers are likely enjoying the books, it can be said that enjoying SK's books is normal and certainly not sick.


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Aug 25, 2002)

Zappo said:
			
		

> *There are no good measuremebts of objective quality, because quality isn't objective.
> *




I can measure the objective quality of a sandwich, bookshelf, or car.  

FD

edit: Added smiley to make tone clear.


----------



## Tiefling (Aug 25, 2002)

Furn_Darkside said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I can measure the objective quality of a sandwich, bookshelf, or car.
> 
> FD *




I have a strange feeling that he's refering to creative works.


----------



## derverdammte (Aug 25, 2002)

Zappo said:
			
		

> *I don't like him too, but considering the sheer number of copies he sells, I think you can't say he's bad. *



I don't think he's a bad writer.  I'd say that even if I didn't like what he writes.  Anyone who writes well enough to be published isn't a bad writer--they may be hacks, or they may have no talent, but they can at least turn out professional-quality prose.  At least, that applies in most cases.

I really like Stephen King's definition of "talent," which, IIRC, went something like this:

If you write a story, then you send it to a professional editor and he buys your story, and you get a check, cash the check (and it doesn't bounce), and pay the light bill with the money, then you have talent.

Still, there are plenty of "talented" writers who write nothing but worthless crap.  Troy Denning, for instance.  I ran out of toilet paper, so I started keeping "Crucible" in the bathroom.  I got a lot more out of the book that way.


----------



## Wolfspider (Aug 25, 2002)

derverdammte said:
			
		

> *Still, there are plenty of "talented" writers who write nothing but worthless crap.  Troy Denning, for instance.  I ran out of toilet paper, so I started keeping "Crucible" in the bathroom.  I got a lot more out of the book that way. *






I have no respect for someone who would even joke about treating ANY book in this manner.


----------



## kenjib (Aug 25, 2002)

Furn_Darkside said:
			
		

> *
> I think sales is a fine way to judge the fundemental quality of an author.
> *




Is Danielle Steele a better writer than Thomas Pynchon because she sells more books?

Is Steven King a better horror writer than H.P. Lovecraft?

...and since you brought sandwiches into the mix, does McDonalds objectively make the best hamburgers in the world?


----------



## derverdammte (Aug 25, 2002)

Wolfspider said:
			
		

> *
> 
> 
> 
> I have no respect for someone who would even joke about treating ANY book in this manner. *



Oh, come on.  Just because it's printed on paper doesn't make it sacred.  Did you have trouble with the people who used pages from the bible as rolling papers for party joints?

I think the absolute best response to a review came from a composer (I don't remember which one):

"Dear Sir,

I am writing you from the smallest room in my house.  Your review is in front of me.

In a moment, it will be behind me.

Sincerely,

Etc."


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Aug 25, 2002)

Tiefling said:
			
		

> *
> I have a strange feeling that he's refering to creative works. *




I know- I was trying to be facetious. (I forgot the smiley.) I had said thing in the post above his.

FD


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Aug 25, 2002)

kenjib said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Is Danielle Steele a better writer than Thomas Pynchon because she sells more books?
> 
> ...




Did I say sales was the only way to judge the quality of a writer?
Did I say sales was a way to compare writers?
Did I say sales was the only way to judge a sandwich?
Did I say sales was a way to compare sandwichs?

No, I said:



> I think sales is a fine way to judge the fundemental quality of an author.




Let me break that down for you-

I think = My opinion
Sales  = the amount of an item sold
fine  =  acceptable
fundemental = basic or elementary

So, class, what I have said is that: In my opinion it is acceptable to judge the basic quality of a writer by the amount of their books that have been sold.

Does that help clear up the matter? 

FD


----------



## kenjib (Aug 26, 2002)

Furn_Darkside said:
			
		

> *
> Did I say sales was a way to compare writers?
> 
> No, I said:
> ...




If you would be so kind as to drop the completely unprovoked sarcastic and hostile tone (smiley or no smiley) I would perhaps point out that judging the fundamental quality of something has an inherently comparative element to it.  I won't respond any further though, as I'm not looking forward to more abuse.


----------



## Piratecat (Aug 26, 2002)

I think we've gotten to the point where this is no longer discussing the BoVD. I'll shut it down; if anyone cares to start another thread actually discussing the gaming supplement, feel free.


----------

