# Fantasy Sex Roleplaying Game Releases October 2003



## BlackWych (Apr 29, 2003)

Here we go folks, here's a blip:

Valar Project, Inc. to release the "Book of Erotic Fantasy" in October 2003 - the first roleplaying game, compatible with the best selling Dungeons & Dragons fantasy roleplaying game, that deals directly with sex and sexuality.


Book of Erotic Fantasy GamingReport News


----------



## Liminal Syzygy (Apr 29, 2003)

I for one demand to see more info on the "wide variety of other unusual adventures" before I trust Valterra's qualifications!


----------



## Alzrius (Apr 29, 2003)

I'm having some trouble taking this seriously.

For one thing, the Tip Sheet stuff below makes this kind of hard to believe:



> Anthony Valterra helped found a fetish club (Oregon Guild Activists of S/M) and an occult church (Church of the Blood Red Moon) as well as engaging in a wide variety of other unusual adventures. He has used these personal experiences to guide him in the creation of this product.




Anthony Valterra founded OrGASM? I'm sorry, but April Fool's Day was a month ago!

And that part about using live models, photoshopped? So they're making a big book of D&D porn?

That said, this is hardly the first book to deal directly with sex and sexuality in 3E. Team Frog/Nightshift Games's _Crushed: the Doomed Kitty Adventures_ was full of erotic titillation. Mongoose's _Nymphology_ is all about sex, and the _Guide to Unlawful Carnal Knowledge_, the 3E adaption of the old 2E _Netbook of Unlawful Carnal Knowledge_ is being developed here in our very own House Rules forum.

All that said, if this really is true, I'll be extremely surprised, enough so that I'd probably pick it up just for the heck of it.


----------



## Olive (Apr 29, 2003)

this sounds... unlikely. to me at least... it seems unlike the sort of thing that Valterra, in his position, would so.


----------



## Edena_of_Neith (Apr 29, 2003)

I must admit, D&D has changed since the days when we fought those 6 giant spiders in B1, using lamp oil, in 1978 ...


----------



## BlackWych (Apr 29, 2003)

Edena_of_Neith said:
			
		

> *I must admit, D&D has changed since the days when we fought those 6 giant spiders in B1, using lamp oil, in 1978 ... *





I agree.

To me this kind of thing takes the fantasy right out of D&D.
I know I won't be picking this up...


----------



## Edena_of_Neith (Apr 29, 2003)

Oh, my words are not meant as a put down.
  Just a wry observation on how truly much things have changed.


----------



## KingOfChaos (Apr 29, 2003)

Nope, not buying this crap anytime soon...if it's even real.


----------



## RodneyThompson (Apr 29, 2003)

Sounds like _somebody_ has a grudge against Anthony Valterra.


----------



## Ulrick (Apr 29, 2003)

Does anybody remember the D&D Netbook to unlawful carnal knowledge? 

aka the D&D Book of Sex?


----------



## Norfleet (Apr 29, 2003)

This is wrong.

Frankly, I'm surprised it hasn't happened sooner.


----------



## Krug (Apr 29, 2003)

Nevermind..


----------



## Dark Jezter (Apr 29, 2003)

Oh boy, a book of D&D porn.  Featuring naked elf maidens with photoshopped ears.

I'll pass, thank you very much.


----------



## fnork de sporg (Apr 29, 2003)

It could never be as bad as FATAL.


----------



## Hawkeye (Apr 29, 2003)

You need a book for this?

Hawkeye


----------



## Eternalknight (Apr 29, 2003)

Hawkeye said:
			
		

> *You need a book for this?
> 
> Hawkeye *




I'm pretty sure we all have good enough imaginations


----------



## Hand of Evil (Apr 29, 2003)

Don't get me wrong, sex is good but I keep it out of my games, it is a side bar, but that does not mean I will not pick it up.  I like fantasy, I like D&D, it will make an interesting collectable.   

Before the netnook of carnal knowledge there was a book from Lion Rampant (ARS MAGICA), ._The Races after Dark_  that you could only get at GENCON that was rather interesting take on sex.


----------



## Zappo (Apr 29, 2003)

I'm going to pick this up, simply because until then I won't believe it's real.


----------



## Robbert Raets (Apr 29, 2003)

Zappo said:
			
		

> *I'm going to pick this up, simply because until then I won't believe it's real. *




I agree with mr. Zappo


----------



## Tom Cashel (Apr 29, 2003)

The reason I play D&D is because I can't be a dwarven warrior or cast fireballs in real life.

That said, I'm sure the _Big 'Ol D&D Sex Book_ will be useful to some unfortunate souls.

I'll pass.


----------



## Robbert Raets (Apr 29, 2003)

Tom Cashel said:
			
		

> *The reason I play D&D is because I can't be a dwarven warrior or cast fireballs in real life.
> 
> That said, I'm sure the Big 'Ol D&D Sex Book will be useful to some unfortunate souls. *




*Heeeey!!* I resent that, mr. Cashel!


----------



## Cthulhu's Librarian (Apr 29, 2003)

If this is real, it's pathetic.


----------



## Sniktch (Apr 29, 2003)

Yeah, this is a joke or my Google-fu is weak this morning.  If it were true I'd expect to find mention of it on more than one website.


----------



## Tom Cashel (Apr 29, 2003)

Robbert Raets said:
			
		

> *
> Heeeey!! I resent that, mr. Cashel! *




Struck a nerve, did I? 

Hey, call me Tom--Mr. Cashel is my dad's name.


----------



## BlackWych (Apr 29, 2003)

Cthulhu's Librarian said:
			
		

> *If this is real, it's pathetic. *





YUP! This has got to be the saddest excuse for a D&D book ever.

If it is true A. Valterra has just lost any respect I had for him. 

Not that he would even care how anyone feels at this point.


----------



## Henry (Apr 29, 2003)

Hel-LO, Anthony! 

This bear further investigation...


Then again, he was asking all those public opinion questions on the Book of Vile Darkness thread a few weeks ago...


----------



## WanderingMonster (Apr 29, 2003)

Tom Cashel said:
			
		

> *The reason I play D&D is because I can't be a dwarven warrior or cast fireballs in real life.
> 
> *




See, now this alleged book will help you play a dwarven warrior _with_ fireballs.


----------



## Fenes 2 (Apr 29, 2003)

Myself, I'd rather buy a book dealing with sex in a fantasy world than yet another elf-book, or yet another monster book, or yet another prestige classes book, or yet another alternate magic spells/system book.


----------



## maddman75 (Apr 29, 2003)

fnork de sporg said:
			
		

> *It could never be as bad as FATAL. *




Of course not.  FATAL is so bad it is the worst possible game.  No matter what crap gets put out, we will always, always be able to say 'at least it isn't as bad as FATAL'.

Would I buy this?  Depends.  If its trying to be serious, then no.  Lame.  But if it knows its lame and makes a joke out of it then maybe.


----------



## shouit (Apr 29, 2003)

I don't know about if any of the information about Anthony is true, but, the book is.  That is all I know...


----------



## EricNoah (Apr 29, 2003)

Blech.

(Side note:  As with any topic such as this, please be sure to keep all comments tasteful.)


----------



## Red Baron (Apr 29, 2003)

Tom Cashel said:
			
		

> *The reason I play D&D is because I can't be a dwarven warrior or cast fireballs in real life.
> 
> That said, I'm sure the Big 'Ol D&D Sex Book will be useful to some unfortunate souls.
> 
> I'll pass. *



I really wish I had said what you said... Nicely put. 100%.

/me wipes the coffee droplets from his monitor.



> _Originally posted by WanderingMonster_
> *See, now this alleged book will help you play a dwarven warrior with fireballs.*



Okay, I'm getting tired of cleaning up coffee spray now. Will you guys knock it off already? ;-)


----------



## Arnwyn (Apr 29, 2003)

> Anthony Valterra helped found a fetish club (Oregon Guild Activists of S/M) and an occult church (Church of the Blood Red Moon) as well as engaging in a wide variety of other unusual adventures. He has used these personal experiences to guide him in the creation of this product.



Okay... now *that's* a little weird...


----------



## Drakron (Apr 29, 2003)

I downloaded the old lawful guide to carnal knowledge .... its a nice read but never use it.

I doubt that I can find this book but even if I do, I am not going to buy it ... its not my play style or my group play style.


----------



## Ysgarran (Apr 29, 2003)

I'll second this...until I see some sort of confirmation I don't believe it.  

Ysgarran.



			
				Sniktch said:
			
		

> *Yeah, this is a joke or my Google-fu is weak this morning.  If it were true I'd expect to find mention of it on more than one website. *


----------



## Voadam (Apr 29, 2003)

Hawkeye said:
			
		

> *You need a book for this?
> 
> Hawkeye *




You are right, a glossy magazine format might do just fine.


----------



## Nellisir (Apr 29, 2003)

I think the book would be funny as hell, but after digging around, I don't think it's legit, and I don't think aspects of the press release are very funny.

If it is legit...hell, I'll buy a copy.  Like I said, funny as hell.


----------



## Sixchan (Apr 29, 2003)

I've always joked about the lack of good elf-porn these days, but who would have though someone might think that seriously.  If this is real, I won't buy it since this is taking it too far, but I can't honestly say I'll be able to resist looking through it in a game shop...


----------



## Morrus (Apr 29, 2003)

AV has confirmed to me that this is for real.  He's offered to do an interview, so I'll try to set something up.

To repeat Eric's warning earlier - please be careful and ensure that these messageboards remain a family-friendly place.  Thanks!


----------



## bolen (Apr 29, 2003)

Surely this is a joke. (not very funny but a joke)


----------



## Morrus (Apr 29, 2003)

bolen said:
			
		

> *Surely this is a joke. (not very funny but a joke) *




No, AV has confirmed to me that this is for real. He's offered to do an interview, so I'll try to set something up.

I just got a feeling of deja-vu...


----------



## takyris (Apr 29, 2003)

Aw, man, that was MY idea!

Dangit!

Of course, my idea never got much past the idea of creating concrete rules for determining whether something required a Fort, Reflex, or Will save...

-Tacky


----------



## KitanaVorr (Apr 29, 2003)

I don't know whether to laugh or ... what  am I thinking...LOL!  At the same time I want to say that I can't believe that its truly real, but then I also have to agree that I'm not exactly surprised that it is.

Hopefully it will be tastefully done (I don't know how but hey its worth a try I suppose) and that the images will be evenly distributed among genders (how many of them there are) and species...and....

hmm....


----------



## Darrell (Apr 29, 2003)

Hmmmm....

Since it now appears that Morrus has had confirmation from AV, it also appears that the press release is legit.

Sounds good to me, to be quite honest.

As someone else pointed out, I'm much more likely to purchase something like this than I am to pick up yet another "complete"/"ultimate" elf/dwarf/orc/undead book or yet another collection of prestige classes.

The sample art in the press release looks cool, too.  I've often wondered why some company or other didn't use altered photography instead of drawings or paintings for interior art for a fantasy RPG or setting.  (Though indeed, someone may have, and I just missed it.) 

Regards,
Darrell King


----------



## Geoffrey (Apr 29, 2003)

Why so much disapproval of this product? Surely one can't get jaded looking at tasteful nudes. I've been doing so for the last 14 years and certainly don't turn my nose up at such.

I don't even play 3E, but I might buy this book.


----------



## Assenpfeffer (Apr 29, 2003)

The marketplace will determine whether or not this is a good idea, or whether interest warrants its publication.  I wish Valterra the best of luck.

That said, I think it's damn tacky.


----------



## MEG Hal (Apr 29, 2003)

Ysgarran said:
			
		

> *I'll second this...until I see some sort of confirmation I don't believe it.
> 
> Ysgarran.
> 
> *




It is real, AV is doing it, the PR is true.

I have talked with a few people about this but I was not allowed to say anything.


----------



## Harlock (Apr 29, 2003)

Morrus said:
			
		

> *
> 
> No, AV has confirmed to me that this is for real. He's offered to do an interview, so I'll try to set something up.
> 
> I just got a feeling of deja-vu... *




Say it ain't so, Mo!  This is hilarious.  I doubt my FLGS even picks it up.  I certainly know I won't.  How is bondage tastefully done?  And no, don't bother trying to tell or show me because in matters of taste for me, there is not a way for it to be tasefully done. So, I wonder if the same folks that laughed at this saying it had to be a joke and they were not buying it no matter what will re-think since it appears to be legitimate and by someone a lot of D&D players know about?  I for one will abstain from this product and any others Valar puts out.  Will this be some sort of sublicense from D&D or does AV plan to leave WotC and do this quaint little project full time?


----------



## Simplicity (Apr 29, 2003)

Well, I'm stunned...  I definitely got to hand it to AV...  This 
takes some serious guts.  Reviewers seem to love to tear 
books like this apart.  But maybe for once, someone can 
actually cover the subject of sex in D&D tastefully and equally.

Either that or Morrus is messing with us...


----------



## 2WS-Steve (Apr 29, 2003)

I finally understand why 3e's motto was "Back to the Dungeon."





I had to say it before Hong got here.


----------



## Geoffrey (Apr 29, 2003)

I for one definitely hope that the photography in the book is mostly of female models. Why? Two reasons:

1. Most gamers are heterosexual males.
2. A majority of females would rather look at unclothed women than unclothed men.


----------



## NiTessine (Apr 29, 2003)

Whoa... Whoa... WHOA!  

Umm... I'm not sure if I should be worried, weirded, or amused. I compromise by being all three.

I think I'll just pass on this one...


----------



## Belen (Apr 29, 2003)

Well, now we know why AV asked us about a "mature" line of products, although this hardy counts as mature.  I'm betting that they use a token male and have an all female extravaganza!  Like it is not already hard enough to recruit women to the game.

I had asked AV about his definition of mature content.  It appears as if he'd rather go for immature gross-out (BoVD, although I am glad that Monte set us straight on his true intentions for the book) and sex rather than tackle really mature content.

What's next "d20 jokes that you shouldn't tell your mother?"

Sex and gore, mature?  I think not.  It's only labeled mature because kids shouldn't see it. <sigh>

Dave


----------



## Voadam (Apr 29, 2003)

Darrell said:
			
		

> *
> 
> The sample art in the press release looks cool, too.  I've often wondered why some company or other didn't use altered photography instead of drawings or paintings for interior art for a fantasy RPG or setting.  (Though indeed, someone may have, and I just missed it.)
> 
> ...




The pdf book of Eldritch might had photo altered art originally as well (It no longer does). Bastion Press' Lore of the Gods Book Two: Norse Gods does too (and probably the other two in that series).

So as a real confirmed product, anybody know if this will be just in print or pdf as well?


----------



## Voneth (Apr 29, 2003)

Darrell said:
			
		

> *Hmmmm....
> The sample art in the press release looks cool, too.  I've often wondered why some company or other didn't use altered photography instead of drawings or paintings for interior art for a fantasy RPG or setting.  (Though indeed, someone may have, and I just missed it.)  *




sigh, yet another bit of proof that no one ever gave the Changeling RPG a real look.

They used photos, illustrations and photo shop to set up some surreal pictures in a lot of their supplements. The LARP version leaned more to enhanced photos, as did another game Nobils.

And before both of those games, White Wolf used enhanced photos for a lot of their Mage covers.

On the other hand, products like Digital Burn make for a good case that photos shouldn't be used!

(Poor, poor Changleing. It was a game that could be taken in many directions, from Disney to savage folklore. But it seemed that a  lot of people  assumed it was the one thing they weren't interested in. It didn't help that power gamers couldn't lay a finger on regular humans who didn't belive in magic.)


----------



## bramadan (Apr 29, 2003)

OK, I'm more likely to get this then the book of prestige classes #73 

BUT

I am not sure we realy need the photoshoped photographs. Fnatasy art through the ages seems to have been quite sufficient. We are counting on the demographic that is supposed to have some imagination after all.
Also, if the emphasis is placed on the girlie pictures at the expanse of the written content the great opportunity will be lost. 
Now if the book contains the feats dealing with seduction, magical uses of sex (and not, please not, sexual uses of magic), Courtesan and Enchantress prestige classes (done well for a change) Adventure seeds rooted in sex-related situations. Sex related abilites of assorted mythologicl crittes (of which there are quite a few), then it just may be an interesting title.


----------



## The Sigil (Apr 29, 2003)

MEG Hal said:
			
		

> *It is real, AV is doing it, the PR is true.
> 
> I have talked with a few people about this but I was not allowed to say anything. *



What Hal isn't telling you is that HE will be the token male appearing in the book... now we know why Hal is known as "the man without pants."  

And he's the only one that won't need to be Photoshopped. 

...

Seriously, I must admit that I am SHOCKED by the tone of this thread.  I thought I would see a lot more "Huzzahs!"  Instead, it's been, for the most part, one big indifferent shrug, with almost a resigned sigh... and it appears to be something that not a lot of people feel they want and/or need.

After being hammered on numerous "Vile" threads, my faith in the gaming community is a little stronger today... I guess gamers may want some "mature/peurile" (depending on the view point of the observor) material , but not "blatantly pandering" material.  This reminded me of the line,

"It's not child porn - they're elves, see?  Pointy ears!"

Once again, thanks for restoring my faith in the gaming community. 

--The Sigil


----------



## ForceUser (Apr 29, 2003)

I won't pretend to understand occultism or fetish fantasies. I went to the website of the photographer listed in the blurb and his work is more revolting than interesting. That said, it takes big stones to stand behind that kind of product and open oneself to the ridicule an alternative lifestyle d20 book could create. 

Would I buy such a product? Probably not. Will I want a peek? Probably.


----------



## Tyler Do'Urden (Apr 29, 2003)

Let me get this straight: A D&D Sex Manual written by an occultist and bondage enthusiast that will feature elf and nymph porn?  Good golly, someone call Jack Chick before this one hits the market!

This is sick and wrong!

Which is exactly why I MUST PRE-ORDER MY COPY!!!


----------



## Bulletproof (Apr 29, 2003)

Morrus said:
			
		

> *AV has confirmed to me that this is for real.  He's offered to do an interview, so I'll try to set something up.
> 
> To repeat Eric's warning earlier - please be careful and ensure that these messageboards remain a family-friendly place.  Thanks! *




I find it difficult to comment on a product that is not family friendly in a family friendly manner, especially since I would personally prefer our hobby to be thought of as family friendly.  Difficult, but not impossible, and I hope others can keep it clean too.

During the interview, can you ask a few of these questions: 

Why is Valar Project, Inc. allowed to advertise compatibility with a trademark (Dungeons and Dragons) when that is normally forbidden by the OGL?

From the OGL FAQ at http://www.wizards.com/D20/article.asp?x=dt20010417g :

"Q: Why can't I indicate compatibility with a Trademark or a Registered Trademark?

A: The Open Game License expands the control a Trademark owner has over your ability to use that Trademark beyond the restrictions normally allowed by trademark law. The explicit reason this clause is included in the Open Game License is to stop people from saying that their Open Game Content is compatible with Dungeons & Dragons, or any other Wizards of the Coast game, without getting permission from Wizards of the Coast first. Of course, the clause is generic, so you can't indicate compatibility with any other company's trademarks either unless you get their permission first."

I assume that someone other than Anthony himself at WOTC has given them permission as outlined above, since A.V. is the one guy at WOTC who should know the rules, so here are a couple of follow up questions, if that is the case:  

Isn't there a conflict of interest in his ability to get the permission to do this?

If WOTC gave permission, doesn't that mean that WOTC, and therefore Hasbro, is endorsing the product to some extent?  

At the very least it gives the appearance that WOTC endorses this product more than the products of other publishers.  If such permission isn't considered the same as endorsement, then shouldn't there be a disclaimer to that effect?

Other questions:

Has he considered that this product will attract bad press for the hobby as a whole, when it comes from an employee of the premeire publisher of RPGs?

[Edit:  Actually I meant to ask "Is he *concerned* that this product will attract bad press for the hobby as a whole, when it comes from an employee of the premeire publisher of RPGs?"  It's obvious that he would have considered it. ] 

What makes him think that his experiences in setting up a church (of any religion) give him qualifications for such a product?

Edit:  Just so people know:  I'm not really against the product, and I certainly don't care what AV does in his personal time.   But I am concerned that he may be abusing his employment with WOTC at the expense of the RPG industry, and he did bring up the personal stuff, not me.


----------



## Assenpfeffer (Apr 29, 2003)

One of the funny things about this is the talkback attached to the gamingreport article.  WotC is apparently to blame.


----------



## Tyler Do'Urden (Apr 29, 2003)

Bulletproof said:
			
		

> *Has he considered that this product will attract bad press for the hobby as a whole, when it comes from an employee of the premeire publisher of RPGs?*




NOTHING increases sales like bad press.  All one needs to do is look at Marilyn Manson, Eminem, or any thug rap star to notice this effect.  Not to mention Michael Moore's films as of late.

Valterra is a business guy, and he thinks controversy would be good for sales- and I agree.  Completely.



> *What makes him think that his experiences in setting up a church (of any religion) give him qualifications for such a product? *




Anyone who has been involved with Thelemic or Neo-Tantric occult religions doesn't even need to ask that question.


----------



## kenjib (Apr 29, 2003)

fnork de sporg said:
			
		

> *It could never be as bad as FATAL. *




Even if it's FATAL with pictures?

Why doesn't he cut to the chase and just release it as a photo gallery book?  How many people will actually buy it for anything other than the pictures?  I do think that it's a clever ploy to increase distribution channels though.

Also, how does founding an occult church give someone great experience for making a book on sex?  Perhaps it had sex rites.  If that's the case, is the focus of this book on sex or is the focus of this book on fetishism and occult sex magic?  Both?  Did anyone else look at the photographer's gallery?  It's full of blood, self-mutilation, and skin-flayed cow heads.  Is that an indication of what to expect in the book?

Has anyone else ever had to deal with people getting the completely wrong idea when you say "roleplaying games?"  Well before long it might not be the wrong idea after all!

Actually - a thought.  Perhaps this book is specifically meant to bridge the gap between rpgs and "that other kind of roleplay."  Hmm....  A completely untapped market segment?  So maybe it will include variant rules for player participation/LARP activities.

*shiver*

I'm afraid.



Very afraid.

EDIT:  Portion of this post moved by myself to the meta-forum.  If you want to discuss the appropriateness of some of the links in the press release vis-a-vis Eric's Grandmother, then go there.


----------



## Darrell (Apr 29, 2003)

Voneth said:
			
		

> *
> 
> sigh, yet another bit of proof that no one ever gave the Changeling RPG a real look.
> 
> ...




Changeling & Mage, huh?  That'd be why I missed them.  With the WW/WOD stuff, I looked at Vampire, then Werewolf, and then gave everything else a pass.  The White Wolf stuff just ain't to my liking (well, the Sword & Sorcery Studios/Necromancer Games d20 stuff is technically White Wolf stuff, but I digress).

Regards,
Darrell King


----------



## Dareoon Dalandrove (Apr 29, 2003)

Ok since this is in fact real...

I don't think that this contributes to the gaming world in any real way.  No matter how many people complain about the splat books or how this company or that doesn't measure up.  They all still furture the goals of a vibrant, interseting, and fun world to adventure in.  A book about sexuality, particularly this one, doesn't fit any of that criteria.  Some people may want rules to deal with pregnancy or STD's.  Ok that is fine.  But this just goes a bit too far.

The photographer for this project site www.hypnox.com has some very disturbing photo's.  I'm made of stern stuff, but again how far is too far?  

I don't think that this will be anything more than a curiosity.  People may buy it but overall it won't set the charts on fire.

I would suggest a book on weather if AV is looking for something to do.  Rules for  getting sick from prolonged  adventures in the rain or the harsh desert evironments would be much more useful.


----------



## Mark (Apr 29, 2003)

MEG Hal said:
			
		

> *It is real, AV is doing it, the PR is true.
> 
> I have talked with a few people about this but I was not allowed to say anything. *




Now that you can discuss it in detail...

_Did they shoot your best side...?_


----------



## mkarol (Apr 29, 2003)

Bulletproof said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Why is Valar Project, Inc. allowed to advertise compatibility with a trademark (Dungeons and Dragons) when that is normally forbidden by the OGL?
> *



*

Here's a thought... I do see that the project is publishing under the OGL, but could the Valar Project be a sub of Hasbro/WOTC?  I mean, i would have assumed that AV has a non-compete with WOTC while working there (unless he left and I missed that fact in my non-obsesive D&D news gathering time).*


----------



## Bendris Noulg (Apr 29, 2003)

Bulletproof said:
			
		

> Why is Valar Project, Inc. allowed to advertise compatibility with a trademark (Dungeons and Dragons) when that is normally forbidden by the OGL?



In an earlier thread, AV mentioned the _possibility_ of a sub-publisher within WotC, meaning that a label would publish WotC products in the same manner that Vertigo publishes DC comics, that would focus on sales towards mature gamers (meaning aimed at those of college age or older, as the article indicates).  If Valar _is_ that sub-publisher, than they'd have full rights to advertise themselves as a 3E-compatible product.

This is speculative, of course, based on previous information, but it does seem the logical conclusion with the info on-hand.


----------



## Bulletproof (Apr 29, 2003)

Tyler Do'Urden said:
			
		

> *
> 
> NOTHING increases sales like bad press.  All one needs to do is look at Marilyn Manson, Eminem, or any thug rap star to notice this effect.  Not to mention Michael Moore's films as of late.
> 
> ...




You could be right.  I suspect though that it's not as much of a business decision as it is that he just really wants to create this type of product.  We'll probably never really know for sure what his motivations are.  



> *
> Anyone who has been involved with Thelemic or Neo-Tantric occult religions doesn't even need to ask that question.  *




I haven't, so I do need to ask.  I'm ignorant about these religions, as I suspect most people are,  thus the question needs to be asked.


----------



## Eridanis (Apr 29, 2003)

> Why is Valar Project, Inc. allowed to advertise compatibility with a trademark (Dungeons and Dragons) when that is normally forbidden by the OGL?



That was what made me think this was a joke. But if Morrus has confirmed this...

I think I'll just go into the corner and pretend this book won't exist. (plugs ears & closes eyes) La la la la not listening la la la...


----------



## mythusmage (Apr 29, 2003)

Just to be contrary I'm saying good for Anthony. After all, what could be more family friendly than an activity that helps you establish a family?

Remember, you'll meet no one as raunchy as a pre-teen. (That includes fratboys.)


----------



## Mark (Apr 29, 2003)

Bendris Noulg said:
			
		

> *If Valar is that sub-publisher...*




...does that make WotC the _DOM_-publisher...?


----------



## kenjib (Apr 29, 2003)

mkarol said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Here's a thought... I do see that the project is publishing under the OGL, but could the Valar Project be a sub of Hasbro/WOTC?  I mean, i would have assumed that AV has a non-compete with WOTC while working there (unless he left and I missed that fact in my non-obsesive D&D news gathering time). *




The potential for a non-competition clause in his contract is an excellent point you bring up.  What he is doing is very unusual in other industries.  It seems clear to me that there is some kind of agreement about this with Anthony and the other people running WotC.  My guess is that it went something like this:

---------------------------
AV:  BoVD raked in the phat lewt.  We need more vile.  We also need to ratchet up the explicitness.  Monte Cook watered down the book I thought we should have made.  There's a big market for this stuff and it hasn't been tapped to full potential.

Other WotC:  Probably not good for the D&D brand label to be associated with this.

AV:  Yeah, and market data from Dragon Magazein indicates that having it under official imprint is polarizing to the customer base.

Other WotC:  Yeah, but D&D would gain popularity from such a product.  It would gain lots of free publicity and drive sales of the core books, especially with the new revision coming out.

AV:  Okay, so why don't you give me permission to start a new company to handle these topics.  To keep the fires down we'll have no association with WotC.

Other WotC:  Sounds good.  We'll re-write the anti-competition clause in your contract so you can do this.  I'm sure it will be beneficial for all of us.
---------------------------

Okay, just rampant and unfounded speculation.

On another note, there is a difference between the kind of controversy this might generate and the kind of controversy that 1e generated.  1e was deemed offensive by a vocal minority with tenuous claims.  I think a book like this has the potential of being offensive to the majority for very conrete reasons (only, of course, if the book is heavy on the fetish aspects akin to the photographer's gallery).  If this is the case, RPG-land is sailing into uncharted water.  Roll the dice.  Hope we don't get craps or some of the more casual players might start being too embarassed to play anymore.

On the other hand, it's most likely that nothing will come of it.  Who really cares one bit about RPG's these days aside from the people who play them?


----------



## Ysgarran (Apr 29, 2003)

Wow, even after I saw the confirmation on the front page I was thinking it isn't that hard to spoof e-mail addresses...but we are getting confirmations from multiple people.  As to whether this is going to be awful or decent regarding the subject matter I'm just going to have to wait until more information comes out.  

I was really expecting to find a website regarding 
"Valar Project Inc." but I didn't find anything.

Ysgarran.



			
				MEG Hal said:
			
		

> *
> 
> It is real, AV is doing it, the PR is true.
> 
> I have talked with a few people about this but I was not allowed to say anything. *


----------



## Assenpfeffer (Apr 29, 2003)

Mark said:
			
		

> *...does that make WotC the DOM-publisher...?  *




Man... that hurts.


----------



## BiggusGeekus@Work (Apr 29, 2003)

Me before reading this post: 



Me after reading this post:


----------



## Nellisir (Apr 29, 2003)

Wow.  I was wrong.  It's for real.

Someone find out the price.  I gotta get this, just so my players can kill themselves laughing at it.

I also have to agree, hypnox.com is ...disturbing.  I looked through a bit of the gallery, but felt more ill than interested.

Cheers
Nell.


----------



## Eridanis (Apr 29, 2003)

I don't know anything about their contracts, but if Chris Pramas is a WotC employee, and is still allowed to run Green Ronin, wouldn't that indicate that AV can do what he likes?


----------



## Bendris Noulg (Apr 29, 2003)

Mark said:
			
		

> ...does that make WotC the _DOM_-publisher...?



LOL...

Seriously, though, I kinda like the idea of this product.  In the end, I see it less as promoting porn-in-D&D and more of a benchmark for promoting games akin to those found in _Heavy Metal_, _Epic_, _Druuna_ and other such sources.  I'll do a preview of it like I do for everything before I buy it, but I am looking forward to its release.  Coming from AV, I firmly belief it will do more good than harm.  And after _Nymphology_, I would very much like to see a _mature_ book regarding sexual interaction in the role-playing environment.


----------



## Artimoff (Apr 29, 2003)

If you asked any of my friends about me, they'ed say I'd be first in line to pick this up. But they would be wrong. This book holds no intrest for me. I can't think of any D&D/sex concept that would make a good D&D book. _good_ D&D book.


----------



## EricNoah (Apr 29, 2003)

Eridanis said:
			
		

> *
> I think I'll just go into the corner and pretend this book won't exist. (plugs ears & closes eyes) La la la la not listening la la la... *




Yeah, no kidding.  This is the weirdest D20 news I've heard in a long time.  And not in a good way...


----------



## JohnNephew (Apr 29, 2003)

Hand of Evil said:
			
		

> *
> Before the netnook of carnal knowledge there was a book from Lion Rampant (ARS MAGICA), .The Races after Dark  that you could only get at GENCON that was rather interesting take on sex. *




No, that was not Lion Rampant.  It was for a game called FIFTH CYCLE, if memory serves.  But even if I'm wrong in remembering that, I can say for certain that it was NOT Lion Rampant, since I worked there at the time, and I did see it in the booth of the people who had it (1989, maybe, or 1990?).


----------



## PowerWordDumb (Apr 29, 2003)

kenjib said:
			
		

> *Perhaps this book is specifically meant to bridge the gap between rpgs and "that other kind of roleplay."  Hmm....  A completely untapped market segment?  So maybe it will include variant rules for player participation/LARP activities.
> 
> *shiver*
> 
> ...




Anything that promotes more LARPing is certainly a terrifying concept, whether it involves someone playing the Gimp, or not.

Your *shudder* is seconded, my good man.  Can we get a vote?


----------



## MEG Hal (Apr 29, 2003)

Mark said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Now that you can discuss it in detail...
> 
> Did they shoot your best side...?  *




LMAO
 
Yes my best side--camera lens still on.


----------



## kenjib (Apr 29, 2003)

PowerWordDumb said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Anything that promotes more LARPing is certainly a terrifying concept, whether it involves someone playing the Gimp, or not.*




Oh my aching sides!!!!!

Darn you man, that was not a mental picture I wanted to see -- especially in the rpg context!!!!!!

I actually think dice would make it worse.


----------



## myrdden (Apr 29, 2003)

Hmmmm....

This can't be a good thing for the gaming industry.

Although Morrus says it is confirmed, I'll believe it when I see it.

Myrdden


----------



## Gez (Apr 29, 2003)

Morrus said:
			
		

> *AV has confirmed to me that this is for real.  He's offered to do an interview, so I'll try to set something up.*




Then again! You're doing that troll once more ?  

I'll believe it when I'll see the Psionic Setting.


----------



## The Sigil (Apr 29, 2003)

One other question for AV...

Did he purchase from the Tolkien estate the right to the name "Valar," which, unless I'm mistaken, is Intellectual Property of the Tolkien Estate?

I found it a bit funny that "Valar" publishing would be doing a sex-book on elves - specifically mentioning Arwen... considering the connotations of the "Valar" and elves in Tolkien's works.

Which reminds me - did he also get permission to use Arwen's and Conan's names?  I don't know if it falls under "free use" when it's "commercial speech" (as an advertisement/press release clearly is).

--The Sigil


----------



## herald (Apr 29, 2003)

PowerWordDumb said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Anything that promotes more LARPing is certainly a terrifying concept, whether it involves someone playing the Gimp, or not.
> *





ARRRRGGGGG!!!! Now I have a D20 Modern version of "Pulp Fiction" running through my head. 

Saddly, it makes the movie make much more sense.


----------



## herald (Apr 29, 2003)

The Sigil said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Which reminds me - did he also get permission to use Arwen's and Conan's names?  I don't know if it falls under "free use" when it's "commercial speech" (as an advertisement/press release clearly is).
> 
> --The Sigil *




Conan should be something he could use since it is a name used in common parlayance. Arwen, well, I think he is skating on thin ice, as well as using "Dungeons and Dragons" compatability. I'm begining to think that he didn't write up the faq.


----------



## Kilmore (Apr 29, 2003)

Okay.  Just got my surprise of the day.  I have to admit that it's not the "what" but the "who" that got me.

Well, here's what I think.  First off, AV has the absolute right to do this as a writer in a free country and a gaming author under the OGL / D20 thing.  The only thing I think would restrict him would be the conditions of his employment with WoTC, and apparently that's been resolved as well.

Am I surprised to see a book on D&D hanky-panky?  Not in the least.  I would expect that with the freedom of the D20 liscence, such a thing would HAVE to be done by somebody.  Not for my personal benefit, but only because the opportunity is too wide open.

Perhaps AV is trying to expand the possibilities of the OGL by (please pardon me) stretching it's legs out a little bit.

Will we draw flack from those opposed to our hobby?  I'll be surprised if we don't.  Especially since it's the project of someone so closely associated with the cornerstone.  I could see the critics right now:  "See, those earlier books were the primers, now they're releasing their true agendas!"  On the other hand, if it were released by someone not associated with the original publisher, it could be more easily explained as a fringe.

Personally, if I were AV, and I felt I needed to do this book, I would have done so under a flimsy pseudonym and without the official D&D stationery on the cover.  This would have created a little firewall between the critics and the company, and also provided fodder for us for secretive whispering and giggling, enhancing notoriety.

But then, I don't have a business degree.

Will I buy this?  I don't think so.  My game isn't kid's stuff, to be honest, but I'm really not interested in running a "The Story of O" campaign.  If that's someone else's game, enjoy.  If there's useful information beyond that, I'll read the reviews.  

I'd be especially interested in reading reviews by someone originally put off by the concept.


----------



## Oni (Apr 29, 2003)

I just have to ask.  Why???

Seriously do any of you have a need in your game for this sort of supplement?


----------



## Kilmore (Apr 29, 2003)

Oni said:
			
		

> *I just have to ask.  Why???
> 
> Seriously do any of you have a need in your game for this sort of supplement? *




Fact is, I don't have a need in my game for MOST kinds of suppliments.  It might work for someone else though.  (shrug)


----------



## mkarol (Apr 29, 2003)

Oni said:
			
		

> *Seriously do any of you have a need in your game for this sort of supplement? *




I'll tell you when i actually see what it is?  Right now all we know is that it is about sex and has some sexy pictures.  

I don't think ill _use_ much of it, but i'll probably buy it since i am a WOTC stooge and buy everything they make for d&d and think, for now, that VP, inc. is a sub of WOTC.

And I look forward to The Sigil's review


----------



## The Sigil (Apr 29, 2003)

mkarol said:
			
		

> *And I look forward to The Sigil's review  *




LOL.  Nice one. 

--The Sigil


----------



## Robbert Raets (Apr 29, 2003)

Oni said:
			
		

> *Seriously do any of you have a need in your game for this sort of supplement? *




_*Need*_ is such a hard word in this context..... But I will be, er, another bad expression in this case, 'checking it out'....


----------



## Ghostwind (Apr 29, 2003)

Here's a thought to throw out amongst the wolves...

Would you rather have seen Avalanche with their track record of racy covers do a book like this or have someone like Anthony who is likely to approach the subject in a mature and adult manner? 

I'm intrigued by the idea myself. I've long thought that the genre needed a good shot in the arm to offer folks who would like a more mature setting something more. Until the final product comes out, no one will really know whether it is cheescake or something better. Just sit back and wait...


----------



## Darrin Drader (Apr 29, 2003)

I think this has a lot of potential. I'm not quite certain exactly what gaming group this would be right for, but hey, why not experiment with it?


----------



## Darrin Drader (Apr 29, 2003)

I think this has a lot of potential. I'm not quite certain exactly what gaming group this would be right for, but hey, why not experiment with it?


----------



## Voadam (Apr 29, 2003)

Ghostwind said:
			
		

> *Here's a thought to throw out amongst the wolves...
> 
> Would you rather have seen Avalanche with their track record of racy covers do a book like this or have someone like Anthony who is likely to approach the subject in a mature and adult manner?
> 
> I'm intrigued by the idea myself. I've long thought that the genre needed a good shot in the arm to offer folks who would like a more mature setting something more. Until the final product comes out, no one will really know whether it is cheescake or something better. Just sit back and wait... *




Says the man who already authored a pdf with photoshopped art.   (It wasn't racy models though, just norse god images, and I remember you saying you had no control over the art in there).


----------



## Arcane Runes Press (Apr 29, 2003)

Geoffrey said:
			
		

> *
> 
> 1. Most gamers are heterosexual males.
> 2. A majority of females would rather look at unclothed women than unclothed men. *




Well you're definitely right on point 1.

But in regards to point 2:

Wuh? 0_o

I think your perspective is a bit.... skewed on this one. 

Personally, I think if they want the book to be seen as a serious take on sexuality in D&D/fantasy, they'd better have a good male to female artwork ratio. 

To do otherwise is to give even more weight to the idea of the book as simply an exercise in pandering. 

Patrick Y.


----------



## Red Baron (Apr 29, 2003)

Sorry... Did you just say "artwork"?!?


----------



## Mark (Apr 29, 2003)

Today's news has generated a ton of traffic and made EN World very slow.  If this keeps up, _this site is gonna go down like a Valar Prestige Class..._


----------



## Mystic Eye (Apr 29, 2003)

Ghostwind said:
			
		

> *Here's a thought to throw out amongst the wolves...
> 
> Would you rather have seen Avalanche with their track record of racy covers do a book like this or have someone like Anthony who is likely to approach the subject in a mature and adult manner?
> 
> I'm intrigued by the idea myself. I've long thought that the genre needed a good shot in the arm to offer folks who would like a more mature setting something more. Until the final product comes out, no one will really know whether it is cheescake or something better. Just sit back and wait... *




At the risk of getting mauled by the masses I was privy to some of the material  that Anthony had and all I can say is it was all very tastefull and it is a real project.


----------



## trancejeremy (Apr 29, 2003)

I don't have it, but Mongoose released a book as a PDF that had sex as the subject. Nymphology.

Anyway, this doesn't seem to be about sex, but fetish sex, which much like furries, is something I have zero interest in. 

I remember a story in an early issue of Dragon, (before the fiction policy was changed to be non-dungeon crawl related), that had an elf reading a copy of PlayElf.  That I wouldn't mind.  This however seems to be something like "Bondage Elf Babes". 

I'm sure there's a market for it, much like I'm sure there would be a market for a Whoopi Goldberg-Bea Arthur XXX lesbian video, but it's not something I have an interest in.


----------



## Arnwyn (Apr 29, 2003)

Well, I feel kind of silly now. I was just thinking back to that bit of foreshadowing we all had in that one thread, where A.V. asked if we'd be interested in seeing more "mature" books, maybe even a spin-off label, and would we defend it. I said "sure", why not. I liked stuff in the BoVD and find it useful (posession rules? Yeah. Sacrifice rules? Sure. Demon lords detailed? Uh-huh).

But it wasn't supposed to be this way!  I guess it goes back to one of The Sigil's original posts in this thread - what is the definition of "mature"?

What irks me though is that someone sees a use in this book. I've been waiting for _how long_ to get a book on kingdom-management/building, economics, and fully detailed player character merchant rules, and *this* is what comes out? For the love of pete, you'd think that more gamers out there would find a D&D economics and rulership book a hundred times more useful than a D&D sex book. And if more people find the reverse true, then I will truly detach myself from the D&D community (more than I already have).

Sheesh.


----------



## Bendris Noulg (Apr 29, 2003)

Mystic Eye said:
			
		

> At the risk of getting mauled by the masses I was privy to some of the material  that Anthony had and all I can say is it was all very tastefull and it is a real project.



Glad to hear it!

I'd certainly like to have AV show up to comment, regardless, as too often the _assumption_ of tastelessness is tossed about.


----------



## Ghostwind (Apr 29, 2003)

Voadam said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Says the man who already authored a pdf with photoshopped art.   (It wasn't racy models though, just norse god images, and I remember you saying you had no control over the art in there). *




Egyptian Gods was a bit more risque but did use the same the Photoshop techniques.


----------



## BiggusGeekus@Work (Apr 29, 2003)

arnwyn said:
			
		

> * For the love of pete, you'd think that more gamers out there would find a D&D economics and rulership book a hundred times more useful than a D&D sex book. *




Heh.

[ tangent ]

Anyhoo, check out _A Magical Medieval Society: Western Europe_  Review link here: http://www.enworld.org/reviews/index.php?sub=yes&where=active&reviewer=Simon+Collins&product=AMMSWE

[ /tangent ]


----------



## Farganger (Apr 29, 2003)

arnwyn said:
			
		

> *What irks me though is that someone sees a use in this book. I've been waiting for how long to get a book on kingdom-management/building, economics, and fully detailed player character merchant rules, and *this* is what comes out? For the love of pete, you'd think that more gamers out there would find a D&D economics and rulership book a hundred times more useful than a D&D sex book. And if more people find the reverse true, then I will truly detach myself from the D&D community (more than I already have).
> 
> Sheesh. *




Interesting!  The "fully detailed player character merchant rules" just leapt out at me.

Having spent a good bit of my life in "business" - I must say that the publication being discussed in this thread, for all its potential flaws, at the very least promises more interesting diversion than assuming the role of a banker or carpet merchant.  

It's all relative, of course, but for now I'll withhold judgment.


----------



## Mallus (Apr 29, 2003)

*My question is...*

...how in the world you DM {BSDM?} a game like this in front of actual, living, breathing people? 

How would the participants keep a straight {or bent, if that's your persuation} face during the game sessions. Joking is a problem at every gaming table I've been it over the course of 17 years... it boggles the mind what a fantasy RPG whose central focus is sexuality would be like in play.

Would you have to buy the DM a few drinks before each session? 

I've DM scenes of flirtation, sexual tension, crossed gender lines with NPC's and it can be great fun. But I couldn't imagine doing it all the time...


----------



## Arnwyn (Apr 29, 2003)

Farganger said:
			
		

> *Interesting!  The "fully detailed player character merchant rules" just leapt out at me.
> 
> Having spent a good bit of my life in "business" - I must say that the publication being discussed in this thread, for all its potential flaws, at the very least promises more interesting diversion than assuming the role of a banker or carpet merchant.  *



 That's my career, actually - I'm a senior financial analyst and CMA.

But, in a roleplaying environment, I somehow see PCs acting as merchants during their adventuring travels (you're going somewhere, so why not make some money while you're at it; as well, we've all heard stories of adventurers who set up inns as a side-line business) as coming up far more often than sex (with a whole book about it!) during a D&D gaming session.

If that's not the case, then I stand by my previous comment about detaching myself from the D&D community...


----------



## kenjib (Apr 29, 2003)

Bendris Noulg said:
			
		

> *Glad to hear it!
> 
> I'd certainly like to have AV show up to comment, regardless, as too often the assumption of tastelessness is tossed about. *




Well what should he expect by the press release?  His stated qualifications for this book are fetish and the occult.  By saying this, he is stating that he will apply this realm of expertise toward the book content.  He also references his photographer's gallery which contains content definitely on the bleeding (yuck yuck  ) edge of erotic art.  Honestly, how should he expect us to read a press release like that?

I don't think it's at all unfair to expect the book to cover the content very clearly implied in the press release.  Do you really think it is?

If the assumption is unfounded and the book isn't really about these things, then my guess is that it's intentionally misleading.  The same cheap marketting tactic worked for both BoVD and Dragon #300, after all.


----------



## smetzger (Apr 29, 2003)

1) The 'normal' d20 license does not allow you to indicate compatability with Dungeons & Dragons.

2) The press release clearly states compatability with D&D.

3) AV helped write the OGL and d20.

I must therefore conclude that AV has entered a special agreement with WOTC and he is _not_ using the general d20 license.

This is weird because I would have thought WOTC would not have gone for this type of thing.


----------



## heirodule (Apr 29, 2003)

Ghostwind said:
			
		

> *Here's a thought to throw out amongst the wolves...
> 
> Would you rather have seen Avalanche with their track record of racy covers do a book like this or have someone like Anthony who is likely to approach the subject in a mature and adult manner?
> *




I have no reason to belive that a self styled occultist and BDSM wierdo who contracts with a bloodsport photographer with low technical expertise will aproach this subject in a mature manner.

He starts the whole thing off by mentioning how we all used to picture Arwen nekkid. How mature. NOT!

Boris Vallejo art might have made me consider otherwise, but no.

Oh, and I love how his last point in the tip sheet is that there is a growing desire for face-to-face relationships away from computer screens. As if an erotic D&D session is just what our fragmented and alienated society needs.


----------



## Xyros (Apr 29, 2003)

Oni writes:
I just have to ask. Why???

Seriously do any of you have a need in your game for this sort of supplement?
--------------------------------------------------

No, not an overwhelming need.  

On the other hand, the homebrew campaign world I’ve been playing and DMing in for several years _does_ include (or has included) carnal magicians (wizards employing sexually-based magic), bluebooked sex scenes involving two married players, and creatures and situations drawn from the original “Guide to Carnal Knowledge.”  

A resource guide of this nature is not necessary, but it would be useful, provided – as others on this thread have mentioned – that it deals with the topics in an adult manner.  I would want this product to provide ideas and inspirations more than it might rules.  

Sex mechanics for D&D would indeed be a waste of time, as these things can always be handled better through dramatic roleplaying.  Prestige classes employing sex magic, though, or statistics for creatures of a carnal nature, or descriptions of societies where both sex and magic exist (and if they exist, sooner or later they will be combined), and just overall a meta-discussion of possible sexual situations in the game as the topic evil is addressed in _The Book of Vile Darkness_ would not be bad additions


----------



## Larry Fitz (Apr 29, 2003)

I tried not to post about this, really I did....  ok, I held back for a couple of hours though...

If this is a book on erotic fantasy, and is about what sex is like in a fantasy world (call me silly, but isn't it pretty much the same as in the real world),  then why is the sample art an elf (half-elf?) in a bikini that is part naugahyde, part light chainmail peering cautiously down what is presumably a dungeon hall with about a third of her sword coated in red blood? What does that have to do with sex in a fantasy setting at all?

After seeing the liberal use of blood and other viscous fluids on the site of the photographer, as well as the indications that Anthony's experience with an Oregon based bondage group somehow adds to his qualifications to do a book on the erotic side of fantasy gaming, I do not believe that what we are going to get will be much more than a "coffe table" book of elf porn. Kind of like Madonna's "Sex" book meets "The Quintessential Elves Handbook." On the other hand I do believe that Anthony has the skills necessary to make the book more than that, but the article and the indicators so far don't lead me to believe it will be.

The photographer has a palpable dearth of male models on his site (can we say "dearth" on ENWorld?). While his direction and artist's eye are not that great, his technical expertise is very good (his butterfly shots are stunning). His models for the most part seem to be bored and do not evoke the mood of the scenes he places them in. If the same carries through to the D20 book, you'll have bored looking young women in various poses looking like they'd rather be at a rave or the mall.

To address one of the previous posters, perhaps the biggest failing of the D20 movement is that it does not really inspire publishers to put out what's needed. Instead they put out what everyone seems excited about. When Twin Crowns came out, people got excited at the prospect of naval adventuring, in very short order a handful of books based on that came out. People were excited by PrC's so dozens of PrC splat books are produced. People were excited over unusual settings, look at all the unusual settings coming out. Many DM's want and need economic primers and books on making the day to day existence of their players seem more realistic, they want to make the game a more immersive experience, but instead of getting useful material on how to do that, they get more pandering and munchkinism. The problem is that unless there is a "buzz" about a particular thing DM's want, there is no impetus to produce it. "Buzz"=word of mouth advertising=increased sales. That's why you will see more books about what faeries look like getting it on with dwarves before you will see them on how to lay out the countryside surrounding a major city in your world so that it can realistically support the population of that city.

I don't need a book of D20 erotica, I certainly don't need one that gets to claim compatability with WoTC products when so many excellent products cannot. I don't like peanut butter in chocolate chip cookies, and I don't like actors who try to foist their political agendas on me, not even if I agree with them. I have a sex life, I have a gaming life, I don't need them to cross pollinate, thanks anyway.


----------



## Mallus (Apr 29, 2003)

heirodule said:
			
		

> *I have no reason to belive that a self styled occultist and BDSM wierdo --snip--*



People who live in glass castles shouldn't throw polyhedral dice...

Really, this isn't anything to get angry about. While I have no reason right now to believe this product will be anything but a train-wreck, I have to admit I'm a little curious, albeit mainly because it seems so unworkable. 

And there's always been a pornographic/BSDM subtext to genre entertainment {femme fatales, bug-eyed monsters absconding with girls in see-through spacesuits, Boris Vallejo's Amazon's in iron lingerie, Anne Rice's or better Laurel K. Hamilton's saucy vampires}. In an odd way its about time...

And for those who want to dismiss this as mere {hmmm, full-on Devil's advocate mode engage} pornography, remember that a defining characteristc of porn is that it is comsumed alone. This product is meant to be participatory --it practically demands one risk embarrassment. 

I'll give its creators points for moxie, that's for sure.


----------



## Shemeska (Apr 29, 2003)

Well.... my first response was to giggle about the idea. Then I found out its legit and saw the website of the photographer.


     That said maybe I can convince them to do some Yugoloth photomorphs *cough*pr0n*cough*... especially the furry spellcasting kind. 

     *ignores the rest of this thread and stares at self in the mirror*


----------



## kenjib (Apr 29, 2003)

ooooo!  Larry takes the gloves off and lays down some smack!  



			
				Larry Fitz said:
			
		

> *Many DM's want and need economic primers and books on making the day to day existence of their players seem more realistic, they want to make the game a more immersive experience, but instead of getting useful material on how to do that, they get more pandering and munchkinism. The problem is that unless there is a "buzz" about a particular thing DM's want, there is no impetus to produce it. "Buzz"=word of mouth advertising=increased sales. That's why you will see more books about what faeries look like getting it on with dwarves before you will see them on how to lay out the countryside surrounding a major city in your world so that it can realistically support the population of that city.
> *




I agree with everything in your post, but I have a question.  Are you guys gonna make a book on fantasy economics?  That would be great!

I would actually love to see a book that re-writes the entire D&D economy from the bottom up, including the gear prices.  The D&D economy is so screwed up from the bottom up that it seems like it would be difficult to patch it together and produce a quality supplement without a fundamental upheaval.


----------



## Geoffrey (Apr 29, 2003)

Patrick Y., many months ago I read in Cosmopolitan (the woman's magazine) a survey amongst women. I can't remember the percentage, but way over 50% of the women would rather see female nudity than male nudity. This is not to imply that the woman are all latent lesbians. We need to remember that women are not as aroused by visual stimuli as are males. I remember when I worked at Waldenbooks and homosexual men bought 9 out of 10 of the Playgirls sold.

Anecdotal evidence that a majority of women would rather see female nudity than male nudity:

1. My wife says so.
2. Several of my female friends say so.
3. Women's magazine are full of scantily-clad women.
4. I've been told by several people that women, when presented with a photo of a beautiful nude woman, often fantasize about _being that woman_ rather than _touching that woman_. But when presented with a photo of a nude hunk they tend to just not be interested.


Ergo, I hope that this product heavily emphasizes female models rather than male.


----------



## Gez (Apr 29, 2003)

On this subject...



			
				Geoffrey said:
			
		

> *a majority of women would rather see female nudity than male nudity*




... One must not forget that if a woman's body is beautiful naked, this ain't so true of a man's body. Pretty curves on one side, over-abundant hair and a goofy-looking appendage on the other. Men are better looking when clad.


----------



## Larry Fitz (Apr 29, 2003)

Hey Kenj! 

This is more a Harald Henning/Joe Unfried kind of project than something I should spearhead. They are both more knowledgeable on the subject and much more detail oriented. We've had some conversations about the subject in the past. I'll bring it up and see if it's something LI might want to do. The question unfortunately is "Would it sell?" 

The other problem is the scope, do we present only a single version? Should this be a capitalist economy? A barter system, communism, feudalism, oligarchal collectivism or even mercantile meritocratic distribution style economy are all viable models for a fantasy setting, which would you want to see explored or are you hoping for a 196-320 page book that details all of them, so different regions could have different systems... hmmm... ok, I'm beginning to get intrigued, but I suspect it might bore most other people.

Do you think I slotted up in there a little harsh as I lay my smack down?  

BTW 1 out of 1 Larry's girlfriends surveyed agree that women would rather see scantily clad or nude women than men, unless I'm the model, and believe me when I say a book of pictures of me would *ONLY* sell that one copy.


----------



## Kichwas (Apr 29, 2003)

Oni said:
			
		

> *I just have to ask.  Why???
> 
> Seriously do any of you have a need in your game for this sort of supplement?*




Since I have no desire to add:

"Ungh... Unghh... Oooohh, yeah baby yeah!"

To my roleplay voice [at the game table]...

The book to me just seems non topical to RPG gaming...


That said, given that it's Anthony Valterra, now I know how and why the Book of Vile Darkness got approved, and why Dragon started getting wierd in the last year and a half...

A suprise to say the least... One I didn't need to know.

I don't think I ever had any desire to know that he was really into S&M and occult...

Too much information, bad visual...


----------



## Kichwas (Apr 29, 2003)

Gez said:
			
		

> *... One must not forget that if a woman's body is beautiful naked, this ain't so true of a man's body. Pretty curves on one side, over-abundant hair and a goofy-looking appendage on the other. Men are better looking when clad. *



Certainly modern western and western-influenced cultures think so. But it wasn't always so. Classical Greece seems to have preferred the male form, and I'd wager the same was the case in east asia until recently.

-shrug-


----------



## Mark Chance (Apr 29, 2003)

arcady said:
			
		

> *I don't think I ever had any desire to know that he was really into S&M and occult...
> 
> Too much information, bad visual... *




Hear, hear!

After 40 years of people shrieking "Whatever I do in the privacy of my own home is nobody's business but mine!", how nice it would be if people finally starting keeping such things private.

What was it the late Patrick Moynihan said about redefining deviancy?


----------



## mkarol (Apr 29, 2003)

For what it is worth, Valar Project, Inc. is a Washington based corporation incorporated on 02/11/2003 and lists AV as the Agent of service (rather than a profesional agent sucs as CORPORATION SERVICE COMPANY which WOTC uses).   Makes one wonder how long this idea has been kicking around and who is really behind it (i.e. whether AV is out on a limb, so to speak).


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Apr 29, 2003)

This is simply pathetic.   If this book is released with links to Dungeons & Dragons instead of just some typical cheap d20 book I'm done with WOTC.  As it is now I don't really care for the dugeonpunk, videogame power-up mentality of 3e as it is.  Now they are putting out a D&D SEX book?  What kind of pathetic loser needs this kind of book?   This is sad.  If this true I can only hope it starts a backlash against Hasbro & WOTC and they end up selling the IP to someone who cares about it beyond just how much they can screw the game up to make more $$$.  A nude of a goddess in a copy of the Legends and Lore?  Fine.   A S&M D20 book?  Pathetic!  



No, I'm not a prude, yes I have porn DVD's.


This is really bothering me.


----------



## seasong (Apr 29, 2003)

My impression of Mr. Valtera is that he has always maintained a very professional front, both corporately and online. He's also a pretty cool guy - he was exceedingly helpful and informative during the kickoff of the WotC Setting Search (which got me involved in ENWorld), and he's consistently been attentive to ENWorld and generous with his schedule.

He has a life outside of that, however. And some of that life includes fetishism, S&M, paganism and the occult. And he's producing a product, _outside of WotC, mind you_, that explores some of those themes in a roleplaying context. At no point in that litany do I see anything wrong.

I just think it's a stupid product.

1. This is unlikely in the extreme to cover things to the extent that GUCK does. Sorry, just a fact. I'd be more interested if I'd heard Valtera was financing an illustrated GUCK. Now that would be an awesome product!

2. This is hardly the first product of its kind. Calendars of this sort have existed almost since the first print run of Tolkien finally sold out. Some of those calendars were even artistically interesting. But the odds are stacked against it.

3. This is hardly the first product of its kind. Retouched photos? We live in the Internet age. We live in the Photoshop age. I find it hard to believe they are that rare.

4. Perhaps most damning, the ad copy stinks on ice. If they can't even bother to pay adequate attention to their _ad copy_, how much faith can I put in a multi-page product? Or, alternately, if there's no writing (which the ad copy leads one to believe there is), why is this news at a d20 site?


----------



## kenjib (Apr 29, 2003)

Larry Fitz said:
			
		

> *Hey Kenj!
> 
> This is more a Harald Henning/Joe Unfried kind of project than something I should spearhead. They are both more knowledgeable on the subject and much more detail oriented. We've had some conversations about the subject in the past. I'll bring it up and see if it's something LI might want to do. The question unfortunately is "Would it sell?"
> *




I certainly can't say.  I also don't know if it would sell better if it was based on the standard D&D economy instead of trying to re-shape it like I suggested.  Who knows?




			
				Larry Fitz said:
			
		

> *The other problem is the scope, do we present only a single version? Should this be a capitalist economy? A barter system, communism, feudalism, oligarchal collectivism or even mercantile meritocratic distribution style economy are all viable models for a fantasy setting, which would you want to see explored or are you hoping for a 196-320 page book that details all of them, so different regions could have different systems... hmmm... ok, I'm beginning to get intrigued, but I suspect it might bore most other people.
> *




I think the primary focus would be on a couple of things.  First, economics Europe during the dark ages and early rennaisance, from feudal to mercantile colonialism would probably be the most common systems used by folks.  Second, you'd probably want to cover anything else you need for Twin Crowns, right?



			
				Larry Fitz said:
			
		

> *Do you think I slotted up in there a little harsh as I lay my smack down?
> *




Hehe.  Naw.  I think it's interesting how different the reaction is to this versus previous mature vs. anti-mature threads.  It's very strange and seems almost like some kind of heretofore unspoken line has been crossed.  I'm reminded of those situations where someone gets carried away and says "yeah, we all eat cheese wiz straight from the can while wearing our wives panties, right?   Right?  ....um....well neither do I, of course."   



			
				Larry Fitz said:
			
		

> *BTW 1 out of 1 Larry's girlfriends surveyed agree that women would rather see scantily clad or nude women than men, unless I'm the model, and believe me when I say a book of pictures of me would ONLY sell that one copy. *




Well, the press release did say that the images would be heavily Photoshopped...  You too can be a ripped and raging barbarian hunk warrior sans loincloth!


----------



## Bulletproof (Apr 29, 2003)

seasong said:
			
		

> *....
> 
> And he's producing a product, outside of WotC, mind you,
> *




That remains to be seen.  To say that an OGL product is "compatible with Dungeons and Dragons" means that someone at WOTC has to approve that use of trademark in their marketing.  A.V. is the guy that publishers contact to do the approving, so obviously approving it himself would be a conflict of interest.  It's an endorsement IMO.  

Who approved it at WOTC?  And by approving it, isn't WOTC endorsing it?  If not, it sure seems like it.  Does Hasbro know about it?  

That last question may seem irrelevant, but we know how the media can twist and distort things, and they're not going to mention WOTC, they'll mention Hasbro.  And that could be bad for the OGL, which is bad for all gamers.  A.V. has given critics a lot of ammo, IMO.

OTOH, maybe whoever created the press release just screwed up and didn't understand the OGL.  Like seasong said, it wasn't a very well done release, and to me it almost looks like it slipped out accidently, since VP doesn't seem to even have a website yet.


----------



## cildarith (Apr 29, 2003)

Bulletproof said:
			
		

> *
> 
> That remains to be seen.   *




http://www.gamingreport.com/article.php?sid=8260&mode=&order=0

They don't want to touch this with a 10' pole!


----------



## BlackWych (Apr 29, 2003)

Here's the WotC responce:

WotC Responce


----------



## Balsamic Dragon (Apr 29, 2003)

*Warning actual mature content.*

Okay people, this is probably not what you are expecting to hear, at least from me, but thinking it over, I don't really have too much of a problem with this, provided it is done right.

I was recently interviewed by a Journalism student who was doing an article for her class on D&D.  She knew absolutely nothing on the subject except from what she had learned in her research.  After interviewing several people and sitting in on a session, she had a bunch of questions.  One was:  

"what is the connection, if any, between D&D and porn?"

Everyone protested that while, yes, some of the older art was kind of soft-core, that was changing and there really wasn't any sort of connection.  And I agree, ... generally.  

But then I realized that my husband and I had, in our bedroom, a copy of a XXXenophile graphic novel that is pretty much D&D porn.  We don't use it to game with, but it's a cool book and Phil Foglio does some of the only decent porn for couples, so there you go.

So from a "mature" point of view, if people have a hobby that they invest a goodly percentage of their time and interest in, they might well eventually start thinking about mixing it with other interests, and one of those might be sex.

I was pretty outspoken against the BOVD because it was a) immaturity posing as maturity, and b) presented topics such as rape to be used in D&D games.  I'm still against this.  But if Anthony V (not going to try to spell), puts out a book that has cool fantasy erotica, both of men and women, in a tasteful way, I'm willing to take a look at it.

Balsamic Dragon


----------



## BiggusGeekus@Work (Apr 29, 2003)

BlackWych said:
			
		

> *Here's the WotC responce:
> 
> WotC Responce *




Hmmmm.  I think I'll check that out ...



> "Wizards of the Coast is in no way associated with the product, "The Book of Erotic Fantasy," referenced recently on Gamingreport.com. We find the subject matter distasteful and inappropriate and do not endorse, condone, or approve of its use with the Dungeons & Dragons game. While the OGL license allows anyone, even our employees, to produce products that are compatible with Dungeons & Dragons, Wizards does not approve or control the theme of any third-party D20 product.
> 
> For more information about the OGL, see www.wizards.com/d20. "
> 
> ...




Gosh.  I'm still left up in the air.  Do you think they like it or not?


----------



## Bendris Noulg (Apr 29, 2003)

Bulletproof said:
			
		

> That remains to be seen.  To say that an OGL product is "compatible with Dungeons and Dragons" means that someone at WOTC has to approve that use of trademark in their marketing.  A.V. is the guy that publishers contact to do the approving, so obviously approving it himself would be a conflict of interest.  It's an endorsement IMO.



But is it?

I've gone over it a few times, and there's something I'm not to sure of: _Is_ it a press release, or are we reading it as written by the reporter after communicating with Anthony?  If the former, than yeah, there's a question to be raised (although I'm still thinking the sub-label discussed by Anthony Valterra previously is at the heart of this, which would result in automatic approval in some regard, even if it's to "go ahead and do whatever you want.").  If the later, than there isn't really a problem since it would be Damon White's miswording of the introductory paragraph regarding it being an OGL game.


----------



## Harlock (Apr 29, 2003)

cildarith said:
			
		

> *
> 
> http://www.gamingreport.com/article.php?sid=8260&mode=&order=0
> 
> They don't want to touch this with a 10' pole! *




Then either they have approved the "compatible with 3rd edition Dungeons and Dragons" bit or they have not.  If not, AV violated the OGL (unlikely, he's a lawyer and works with the OGL all the time) or he's found a loophole.  We'll see how much WotC/Hasbro dissaproves of it by whether or not AV remains employed by them.  Personally, I'm with Flexor the Mighty: if this can be traced back to some form of tacit approval by WotC, then I'm pretty much giving up on them.

WotC can deny involvement all it wants, but so far the indications, other than one press release, are that WotC/Hasbro has allowed this.  This could really hurt a "Family Friendly" Hasbro.  I'd think that alone could earn Valterra a pink slip.  I know many companies have clauses that allow outs for people that tarnish the company's image.


----------



## Kichwas (Apr 29, 2003)

Question from someone who hasn't been paying attention lately:

Anthony Valterra still heads up the RPG division at WotC right?


----------



## Bendris Noulg (Apr 29, 2003)

> We find the subject matter distasteful and inappropriate and do not endorse, condone, or approve of its use with the Dungeons & Dragons game.



Alright...  "Innapropriate" I can see them saying.  But "distasteful"?  There are a lot of gamers into D&D because of Erotic Fantasy and have run their game as such for years.

Tsk tsk...  Every time these folks take a step forward, they take another one backwards.


----------



## Olive (Apr 29, 2003)

The Sigil said:
			
		

> *Seriously, I must admit that I am SHOCKED by the tone of this thread.  I thought I would see a lot more "Huzzahs!"  Instead, it's been, for the most part, one big indifferent shrug, with almost a resigned sigh... and it appears to be something that not a lot of people feel they want and/or need.
> 
> After being hammered on numerous "Vile" threads, my faith in the gaming community is a little stronger today... I guess gamers may want some "mature/peurile" (depending on the view point of the observor) material , but not "blatantly pandering" material.  *




What I want is rules useful to my game. This book is of no interest to me. Rules for what evil guys actually get for sacrifice, as opposed to doing it for jolies, are what i got from BoVD. I thought it was well thought out and useful. I want usful crunch to expand upon what i want to put in my games.

this book doesn't sound what like what i want from my game, but i also couldn't care less if it is published. i don't think having a range of different topics covered in gaming books is a bad thing.


----------



## BlackWych (Apr 29, 2003)

arcady said:
			
		

> *Question from someone who hasn't been paying attention lately:
> 
> Anthony Valterra still heads up the RPG division at WotC right? *






He's the catagory manager but for how long more?....


----------



## Olive (Apr 29, 2003)

*Re: Warning actual mature content.*



			
				Balsamic Dragon said:
			
		

> *I was pretty outspoken against the BOVD because it was a) immaturity posing as maturity, and b) presented topics such as rape to be used in D&D games.  I'm still against this.  But if Anthony V (not going to try to spell), puts out a book that has cool fantasy erotica, both of men and women, in a tasteful way, I'm willing to take a look at it.
> 
> Balsamic Dragon *




This is pretty funny. I'm assuming that a) you're assuming that it was immiturity posing as maturity because b) rape is never mentioned, and was never going to be in the book.

I mean, if you want the book, whatever, but please learn about what you're criticising before you criticise it.


----------



## Geoffrey (Apr 29, 2003)

What a bunch of sissies at WotC. It also strikes me as a bit hypocritical that WotC published the Book of Vile Darkness and soon thereafter gets all snotty about the Book of Erotic Fantasy.


----------



## Kichwas (Apr 29, 2003)

Bendris Noulg said:
			
		

> *Alright...  "Innapropriate" I can see them saying.  But "distasteful"?  There are a lot of gamers into D&D because of Erotic Fantasy and have run their game as such for years.*



Given the book of Vile Darkness I find WotC's reaction to be pure hypocracy...

It's one thing to disaprove of this kind of material... but when you've already put out something on the same level, you have no room left to speak...

It would be like Larry Flint accusing Hugh Hefner of moral indecency.


----------



## Bulletproof (Apr 29, 2003)

Ok, it's clear that WOTC and Hasbro want nothing to do with it, at least in hindsight.   I say Hasbro as well because one of gamingreport's comments on the WOTC response mentions:

"Re: WotC's Response to the Book of Erotic Fantasy (Score: 1)
by Realmprotector (realmprotector@gamingreport.com) on Apr 29, 2003 - 03:37 PM
We spoke with both WotC and Hasbro it is my understanding this statment reflects both companies thoughts. "

But still no comment on the use of WOTC's trademark in the press release.  Did WOTC approve the use of their trademark "Dungeons and Dragons" in the press release?   Who at WOTC did so?  Anthony Valterra?  His boss?  How can they not think of that as endorsement?

Or is it a mistake in the press release, proving that even A.V. can screw up on OGL issues?  Or is it even a press release from A.V.'s company and not a accidental info-leak?


----------



## Zappo (Apr 29, 2003)

Hm... when the BoVD was about to be published, people posted apocalypthic prophecies about the sky falling, D&D-haters rising from the grave, the general public coming into your house with torches and pitchforks. 

As you might have inferred, I didn't quite agree. I was right. I'm sticking to that opinion: _this or any other book won't affect D&D's reputation among the general public in any way, and even if it did, it would just improve sales_.



While I don't run a campaign with sexual themes, I can certainly see other DMs running it and other players playing it in a mature and serious manner. Not the average gamer, certainly. I am glad to see a true professional like AV doing this, as opposed to some guy selling PDFs from his mother's basement.



I'm curious for the book's content, besides the pictures. Will it be of any importance (like, I dunno, sex magic rules, or fluff for the various races), or will it just be secondary to the images?



All of that said... I don't need it, just as I don't need any of the books that are currently out. However, it's something new and weird, something which elf book #213 isn't. This makes it rank fairly high on my "buy if I have a sudden availability of money" ladder.


----------



## Olive (Apr 29, 2003)

Kilmore said:
			
		

> *Will we draw flack from those opposed to our hobby?  I'll be surprised if we don't.  Especially since it's the project of someone so closely associated with the cornerstone.  I could see the critics right now:  "See, those earlier books were the primers, now they're releasing their true agendas!"  On the other hand, if it were released by someone not associated with the original publisher, it could be more easily explained as a fringe.*




I've said it a million times, but i'll say it again. These people already assume our hobby is filled with 'deviant' sex and devil worship. books like this don't surprise them, they surprise us who know that it isn't!

If the major publisher can release a book with rules for human sacrifice and drug use and one of the second bigest can release a book with arcane symbols all over it, and these books don't get a mention, then i don't see why this book, which probably won't get distribution in many FLGS's anyway, would.


----------



## Olive (Apr 29, 2003)

arcady said:
			
		

> *Given the book of Vile Darkness I find WotC's reaction to be pure hypocracy...
> 
> It's one thing to disaprove of this kind of material... but when you've already put out something on the same level, you have no room left to speak...
> 
> It would be like Larry Flint accusing Hugh Hefner of moral indecency.  *




Oh come off it. The BoVD did not have anything in it to do with sex. if demon worship isn't an appropriate topic for a fantesy game, then i don't know what is (and most of the book is more or less about that topic when you get down to it).

This book, at elast from the write up, is going to have sex rules for DnD. What did the BoVD have that compares to that?  indeed.


----------



## Shadowdancer (Apr 29, 2003)

arcady said:
			
		

> *Certainly modern western and western-influenced cultures think so. But it wasn't always so. Classical Greece seems to have preferred the male form, and I'd wager the same was the case in east asia until recently.
> 
> -shrug- *




If I remember correctly what I learned in my art history classes, ancient Greece was the ONLY -- repeat, ONLY -- culture in history in which the representation of nude male forms was predominate. East, West, North, South, the only culture in history.


----------



## sunbeam60 (Apr 29, 2003)

*Isn't this what the OGL is all about?*

Yo,

To be quite frank, I really don't see what the fuss is about. I mean, really, what are we discussing?

a) Is the product endorsed by WotC? Nope, they said they found it distasteful.

b) Is the product going to be any good?
Who knows, we'll see when it comes out.

c) Is it right to make this product?
Well, if you don't think it is right, I really don't see how you can support the OGL. I mean, the very idea of the OGL is that anyone can produce whatever they want for D&D as long as they don't violate trademarks or similar. 

I'm sure someone has produced an open source pr0n game, but in what way will that ever tarnish OpenRPG?

d) Are you going to buy the product?
Now see, this I actually find interesting. Will this thing have a market? Personally I think it will sell more than most non WotC products.

So it's about sex, big deal. I don't know about you, but I stopped giggling a long time ago. We all do it or we all want to.

The only thing that concerns me is that I'm afraid it might be a bit male chauvinistic, which I think might turn people away from RPGs. But if some girl is interested in joining a gaming group and she finds them drooling over this book at the first session, she'll just get an early heads up instead of a late one. Personally I don't hang around girls who aren't smart enough to realize that this product doesn't tarnish other RPG products. I don't hang around any guys who can't do the same either.

The entire point of the OGL, as I see it, is to ensure a wealth of different products for D&D so that sales of the PH will remain high. If some people want to give fantasy fetishism a try and buy the PH to do so, WotC will be happy, Anthony will be happy, we'll all be happy.

Regarding the photographs, we will obviously see what Anthony wants us to see. The photographer is just a guy for hire, so I don't think you need to expect girls with guns in their mouths.


----------



## Piratecat (Apr 29, 2003)

arcady said:
			
		

> *Given the book of Vile Darkness I find WotC's reaction to be pure hypocracy...
> 
> It's one thing to disaprove of this kind of material... but when you've already put out something on the same level, you have no room left to speak...
> 
> It would be like Larry Flint accusing Hugh Hefner of moral indecency.  *




Err - Arcady, have you actually read the BoVD? I was surprised how non-vile most of it was; with the exception of rolling my eyes at a few items and one spell, it didn't bother me in the least. More importantly, it provided me with a plethora of good gaming rules and plot hooks. As a result, I have to think that your comparison - however pithy - is flawed.

Will the Book of Erotic Fantasy match the BoVD is fun, usable game rules? I have trouble seeing how. Thus, I'll be surprised if I purchase it. Mostly, I just find the concept sort of embarrassing for our industry.


----------



## Geoffrey (Apr 29, 2003)

I can imagine all kinds of stuff in this book that could be used in a game:

1. Rules for seduction for beautiful evil witches and such. Can your paladin resist?

2. Magical spells that require sexual components.

3. Magical spells that enhance one's sexuality or beauty in various ways.

4. Anatomical details for various races. Just where do elves have hair, for example? How long is their gestation period? What is their cultural view on homosexuality? Abortion? Pre-marital sex? Polygamy? Etc.

5. Rules for strengthening one's abilities through indulgence or abstinence from sex.

6. Rules for sex and fertility goddesses.

7. Evil magic devices that involve sexual torture.

8. Good magic devices that can restore sexual purity.

9. Rules on sexual rites and beliefs in various religions. I can imagine, for example, that some good religions would be very promiscuous while others are very abstinent. Evil religions would also be varied. I can imagine an evil religion that forbids all fertility and all pleasure (including sex).

10. Etc.


----------



## Simplicity (Apr 29, 2003)

Geez, ENWorld, backlash much?

It's obvious WotC did not endorse this product.  The said as much in their response.  I think the D&D reference may have just been a screw up, personally.  (Kind of ironic that AV was getting so mad at other companies... but whatever.)

Let's say that WotC DID endorse this product.  What's the big deal?  

Do you actually feel that companies either have to be "family-friendly" or not?  Do you only buy movies from "family-friendly" studios?  Do you only watch news on "family-friendly" networks?  
Maybe you'd like to see Walmart (infamous for censoring anything they don't approve of) as the only store around, but this sort
of thinking really worries me.  A company should not be forced to enforce some sort of moral code on all of their customers.

A company produces many products, and those products can be for many audiences.  In fact, any company that doesn't try to reach out to new audiences will likely die.  Why do you care that
a company produces things that you don't like, for some audience that you're not a member of, when you know that they also produce things that you do like for your audience?


----------



## Shadowdancer (Apr 29, 2003)

The important question is: Will this product turn the Orc and Pie adventure into something out of "American Pie?"

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

Seriously, I realize this is one of those knee-jerk reaction topics for many people, but I don't see a problem with it as long as it is handled in a mature fashion. People who want to use this product in their games will. People who don't want to use it won't. It's as simple as that.

As far as people outside the hobby using it as ammuntion against us, this sort of subject matter (sexuality, fetishism) has been creeping into mainstream popular culture for years. It should be no surprise that it is showing up in D&D. After all, D&D is showing up more and more in popular culture as well.

You don't have to like it. But you do have to respect the rights of those you do want the product. As long as they don't try to force it upon you, they have the right to explore those topics.


----------



## Mark Chance (Apr 29, 2003)

Shadowdancer said:
			
		

> *You don't have to like it. But you do have to respect the rights of those you do want the product. As long as they don't try to force it upon you, they have the right to explore those topics. *




That sounds disturbingly similar to recent legal arguments in favor of virtual child pornography.

Slippery slope, and all that.

Again, I'm reminded of Moynihan writing about how American culture consistently defines deviancy down.


----------



## Balsamic Dragon (Apr 29, 2003)

Olive said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Oh come off it. The BoVD did not have anything in it to do with sex. if demon worship isn't an appropriate topic for a fantesy game, then i don't know what is (and most of the book is more or less about that topic when you get down to it).
> 
> This book, at elast from the write up, is going to have sex rules for DnD. What did the BoVD have that compares to that?  indeed. *




I disagree with your view that the BOVD did not have anything to do with sex.  I have skimmed through it, although I don't own it, and I read the support articles in Dragon. 

However, that's a discussion for a different thread.

Balsamic Dragon


----------



## pennywiz (Apr 29, 2003)

Mark Chance said:
			
		

> *I'm reminded of Moynihan writing about how American culture consistently defines deviancy down. *




_He's dead, Jim._


----------



## Simplicity (Apr 29, 2003)

Mark Chance said:
			
		

> *
> Again, I'm reminded of Moynihan writing about how American culture consistently defines deviancy down. *




Maybe that's because American culture has realized that the
very concept of deviancy is a poor one.


----------



## Danyon Dehlmari (Apr 29, 2003)

Well now... I'm not even sure where to begin.

First off- I'm all for a book that handles the subject in a tasteful way that will benefit a campaign world, give greater depth to character relationships etc....

--I'm all for it.

HOWEVER.....

I looked at that website of the photographer. Some of that is just outright disturbing. They still have time. I can't suggest _enough_ to find a new photographer and to not support someone who produces those kind of pictures.

And, if it really IS being done in a tasteful manner--

I'll expect NOT to see pages and pages of nudity, as that's not worth my money. 

Ed Stark once said that the BoVD would be like what "Saving Private Ryan and BlackHawk Down" are to movies.

I think I'd like to hear the movie comparison for this book.


----------



## Olive (Apr 29, 2003)

Balsamic Dragon said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I disagree with your view that the BOVD did not have anything to do with sex.  I have skimmed through it, although I don't own it, and I read the support articles in Dragon.
> 
> ...




I can't help myself. 

a) you broght it up, i was simply responding
b) The dragon articles and the book itself were pretty different, by different authors. I don't think that the stuff in dragon was NEARLY as bad as people made it out to be, but i thought some of it was a bit dumb. That being said, I'm planning to use the spell searing seed some time. I think it helps make sense of a few things.


----------



## Mark Chance (Apr 29, 2003)

Simplicity said:
			
		

> *Maybe that's because American culture has realized that the
> very concept of deviancy is a poor one. *




Ah.

I guess the agency my wife works for can just go ahead and close down all of its foster homes, and urge that the children being cared for in them be returned to the sexual predators.

Then we can close the women's shelters and finally decriminalize rape.


----------



## zorlag (Apr 30, 2003)

*-*

As usual, I won't second guess about the quality of the product... I do think there is a market for a GOOD product of this sort. If it is just pictures and fluff text I can get those elsewhere. .)

Z.


----------



## The Sigil (Apr 30, 2003)

Danyon Dehlmari said:
			
		

> I think I'd like to hear the movie comparison for this book.



Um, the Goth version of _Debbie Does Dallas_? 

--The Sigil


----------



## Piratecat (Apr 30, 2003)

Folks, use good judgment when you post to this thread, please. I'd rather not shut it down.


----------



## Darrin Drader (Apr 30, 2003)

Mark Chance said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Ah.
> 
> ...




This depends on your definition of deviancy. Some perople define homosexuality as deviancy. Yes, it is deviant from the majority of the population, but there are a number of consenting adults who would argue that its just fine for them.

Fine. I have no problem with anything sexual that consenting adults do in their bedroom.

Anything having to do with children is simply wrong, illegal, and evil. If the general public ever tries to embracce child porn, child rape, or any other sexual acts involving children, I'll become a die hard conservative republican. Of course neither of these things are actually likely to happen.

As for the agency your wife works for, they provide a very important service. It would only be better if such places didn't exist because people were never victimized in this way. Unfortunately that will never happen as long as the human species is on this planet.


----------



## mkarol (Apr 30, 2003)

Mark Chance said:
			
		

> *
> I guess the agency my wife works for can just go ahead and close down all of its foster homes, and urge that the children being cared for in them be returned to the sexual predators.
> 
> Then we can close the women's shelters and finally decriminalize rape.
> *




*de·vi·ant *
adj. 
Differing from a norm or from the accepted standards of a society.

n. 
One that differs from a norm, especially a person whose behavior and attitudes differ from accepted social standards. 

*crime*
n. 
An act committed or omitted in violation of a law forbidding or commanding it and for which punishment is imposed upon conviction.

----
Sex in a furry costume is deviant.  Sex with a furry creature (i.e. animal) is a crime.  American culture is becoming tolerant of changing norms.  Crime is another story and confusing the two is abhorrent.

The product at question may well be deviant in that it is not the normal set of rules for the average player who wants to be a hero and slay evil things (but not to graphically) and steal their stuff (because, hey, they are evil so the heros can have it) but never actualy talk about things like sex or demons or drugs; golly gosh no!


----------



## Jeph (Apr 30, 2003)

Uh . . . AV leads a satanic cult?


----------



## Darrin Drader (Apr 30, 2003)

Jeph said:
			
		

> *Uh . . . AV leads a satanic cult? *




Why do people always confuse the terms occult and Satanic. Satan is a Christian god. They can keep him.


----------



## Mark Chance (Apr 30, 2003)

Baraendur said:
			
		

> *
> Why do people always confuse the terms occult and Satanic. Satan is a Christian god. They can keep him. *




While you query about the confusion of satanic and occult is a good one, you are simply wrong about Satan's status in Christian theology. Satan is not now nor has he ever been depicted as a god in Christianity or Judaism.


----------



## Bulletproof (Apr 30, 2003)

Jeph said:
			
		

> *Uh . . . AV leads a satanic cult? *





The press release doesn't say that it was "satanic", or even say "cult", but does leave a lot to the imagination as to how these "experiences have guided him in the creation of this product".  

"Anthony Valterra helped found a fetish club (Oregon Guild Activists of S/M) and an occult church (Church of the Blood Red Moon) as well as engaging in a wide variety of other unusual adventures. He has used these personal experiences to guide him in the creation of this product."


----------



## BlackWych (Apr 30, 2003)

Bulletproof said:
			
		

> *
> 
> 
> The press release doesn't say that it was "satanic", or even say "cult", but does leave a lot to the imagination as to how these "experiences have guided him in the creation of this product".
> ...





Some how I don't see the church of the Blood Red Moon as a church for good. It sounds more like Malar worshipers. However satan or malar or whatever the man has some serious issues.


----------



## MeepoTheMighty (Apr 30, 2003)

BlackWych said:
			
		

> *
> 
> 
> Some how I don't see the church of the Blood Red Moon as a church for good. It sounds more like Malar worshipers. However satan or malar or whatever the man has some serious issues. *




Or, you know, he doesn't.  There are thousands of people in bd/sm groups, and thousands of people in pagan religions.  Just because you're not familiar with either of them doesn't mean that he "has issuses."


----------



## JeffB (Apr 30, 2003)

I REALLY didn't need a rundown on AV's personal-life  "Adventures" as some kind of indication on the quality of the book.

Is there a PUKE Smiley?


----------



## Simplicity (Apr 30, 2003)

Please don't shut the thread down, PC....  This is the juiciest news ENWorld has had in a while.  It would be a shame to have it all go away...  I will try to be civil.



			
				Baraendur said:
			
		

> *
> This depends on your definition of deviancy. Some perople define homosexuality as deviancy. Yes, it is deviant from the majority of the population, but there are a number of consenting adults who would argue that its just fine for them.
> 
> Fine. I have no problem with anything sexual that consenting adults do in their bedroom.
> ...




Exactly.  Consenting adults in the privacy of their own home...  Why should anyone care?  Why does there need to be a deviancy label?  Anyone else readSalon around here?  There are some great discussions about sexual privacy and Sen. Santorum's comments about homosexuality lately there on this very topic.  What exactly brought the term deviancy into this discussion anyways?  It wasn't about child pornography or rape.  That's my problem with the word "deviant."  You just placed AV into the same category as rapists... Why?  Because he's part of an S/M club?  They're 
consenting adults!

I'm sorry if I'm skirting the boundaries of "no politics in ENWorld," I just hate to see such a nasty backlash against someone just because he (essentially) came out of the closet.


----------



## Olive (Apr 30, 2003)

BlackWych said:
			
		

> *Some how I don't see the church of the Blood Red Moon as a church for good. It sounds more like Malar worshipers. However satan or malar or whatever the man has some serious issues. *




Or is practising his right to engage in what ever religious and sexual practices he sees fit, as a consenting adult with other consenting adults?

Who has issues?


----------



## Olive (Apr 30, 2003)

Simplicity said:
			
		

> *Anyone else readSalon around here?  *




yes.


----------



## Kichwas (Apr 30, 2003)

Olive said:
			
		

> *Or is practising his right to engage in what ever religious and sexual practices he sees fit, as a consenting adult with other consenting adults?*



I wonder if this was done as a protective measure. With all of that Red Moon stuff out of the closet, if WotC goes after him for putting out this book, he can claim religious persecution...

Technically, the supreme court has already ruled (Bowers v. Hardwick, 1986) that you don't have a right to engage in the sexual practices of your choice in the privacy of your home with consenting adults. In fact, there's a current case before them where they've been asked to re-rule on this issue. One concerning a Texas sodomy law (Lawrence v. Texas, 2003).


----------



## Dr. Confoundo (Apr 30, 2003)

Woo-hooo!

Sounds like that Gnomish Kama Sutra we've all been clamoring for is about to become a reality.

"And we call this position 'The Lazy Mind-Flayer and the Jolly Aboleth'... No, stretch your tentacles just a litlle more..."

Doc


----------



## alsih2o (Apr 30, 2003)

lol.....



 6 hours later- lol


----------



## caudor (Apr 30, 2003)

First off, I'm all for free speech.

At the same time, I'm very concerned about this topic as well.  I looked at those bloody pictures (literally), and then thought about the group of 15-year-old kids I just introduced to D&D.  

Speaking of kids...have you ever introduced a kid to D&D?  Have you ever felt the need to make clarifications to a parent or friend that things are all OK...insuring them the vocal minority is wrong about the 'dark side' of D&D?  It has been a long time since I've had to 'defend' the game, and I hope it stays that way.

As long as this stuff stays out of reach of kids (out of easy reach in local gaming shops) and doesn't get associated with D&D via CNN or some other mass media outlet, then I have no problem with folks enjoying the stuff.

I wish AV luck on his venture (I value his freedom to do so), but I do worry about the overall impact to the hobby...and mostly the kids.

I hope many in this forum are right; I hope there is no impact at all.


----------



## Tidus4444 (Apr 30, 2003)

kenjib said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Oh my aching sides!!!!!
> 
> ...




Ummm, I'm probably gonna regret asking this but.... what's larping?  If it's inapropriate for the board PM me for it.


----------



## fusangite (Apr 30, 2003)

This product is obviously a case for tightening-up the Open Gaming License. Clearly, this sort of thing was neither foreseen nor intended by WOTC. 

To me, this represents every bad tendency I see in the RP world; if adolescent boys want to sit around and masturbate together, they can find some other pretext. 

What I don't want is for anyone to mistakenly believe that sexual relations have a place in D&D or be put off the system because of such a perception.


----------



## Kichwas (Apr 30, 2003)

caudor said:
			
		

> *At the same time, I'm very concerned about this topic as well.  I looked at those bloody pictures (literally), and then thought about the group of 15-year-old kids I just introduced to D&D.
> 
> I many in this forum are right; I hope there is no impact at all. *



I don't think the outside world will care one hoot what we do...

But on the inside of the gaming community, it seems there's a noted effort of late to take the 'PG' out of RPG...

I'm a very progressively liberal minded person, and I happen to feel the USA is way too prudish in it's approach to sex, but the combined impact of this, the Book of Vile Darkness, and similar items is taking things to an angle I personally don't care for.


----------



## EricNoah (Apr 30, 2003)

Tidus4444 said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Ummm, I'm probably gonna regret asking this but.... what's larping?  If it's inapropriate for the board PM me for it. *




LARP means Live Action Role Playing.  Instead of sitting around pretending you're having adventures, you act it out with costumes and stuff.  It's sort of a step between a tabletop RPG and a play.  Nothing inherently sexual about it.


----------



## heirodule (Apr 30, 2003)

Bendris Noulg said:
			
		

> *Alright...  "Innapropriate" I can see them saying.  But "distasteful"?  There are a lot of gamers into D&D because of Erotic Fantasy and have run their game as such for years.
> *




Yeah, and do you think they think their games are actually in good taste?


----------



## TiQuinn (Apr 30, 2003)

Does anyone recall Vigilante by Steve Jackson Games?  In a nutshell, it was a "LARP" in which the object was to actually kill people.  Though it was presented as a LARP, it was essentially a joke/commentary with plenty of disclaimers.  Anyways, this reminds me quite a bit of Vigilante.  I'll believe it when I see it.


----------



## Mark (Apr 30, 2003)

Next thing you know there will be "snuff" modules where groups of characters get together to go out and kill the...

Umm...

Erm...

_*Backs slowly away from his books...*_


----------



## Bendris Noulg (Apr 30, 2003)

Simplicity said:
			
		

> I just hate to see such a nasty backlash against someone just because he (essentially) came out of the closet.



Absolutely agreed!

Indeed, these threads are starting to disturb me...  It's akin to saying, "it's okay to play D&D so long as it's suitable to be part of the WGN Power Pack.  Inspiration _will not_ be obtained from _Heavy Metal_, _Conan_, _Gor_, _Silverglass_, or any other unacceptable source, be it fantasy or not, regardless of whether it's what got you into D&D or not."

Really, folks, Erotic Fantasy has been part of the Sword & Sorcery genre for a _long_ time.  Heck, even _Dracula_ was risque for its time.  I'm more shocked by the lack of acceptance for this aspect of fantasy than I am that the book is in production.


----------



## Bulletproof (Apr 30, 2003)

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Simplicity 
I just hate to see such a nasty backlash against someone just because he (essentially) came out of the closet.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



> *Originally posted by Bendris Noulg*
> 
> Absolutely agreed!
> 
> ...




A.V. didn't just "come out of the closet".  

He is leveraging news of his controversial lifestyle, and possibly his position at WOTC, for a controversial product for personal gain.  Fans and publishers in the industry have a right to lash out at him for doing so, because he invited the criticism.  He brought the personal issues up in a business context, and legitimized criticism of them.

He knew there would be controversy, and may have even planned on it for marketing reasons.    No one forced him to include his "personal experiences" in a press release.  He expected a backlash, and I don't feel sorry for him.

The press release was poorly done, IMO.  However, I want to know more about the product and look forward to his "candid interviews" before I form an opinion of the book itself.  And I do remember that A.V. has done a lot of good things for this industry, so I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt.


----------



## TiQuinn (Apr 30, 2003)

So, I guess it's real...

Well, I won't be buying it since I doubt Borders or Barnes and Noble will carry it.  

Bendris pointed out that Conan, Heavy Metal, and several other fantasy books and mags have plenty of erotic material.  While that's true, I wonder how many people want to roleplay erotic material.  I suppose if AV wants to risk putting everything on the line (i.e., I have a tough time seeing him continuing working at Wizards), there's gotta be a big enough market.

Anyways, I think it's going to be a fringe product, which is fine.  Personally, it sounds distasteful to me.


----------



## Bendris Noulg (Apr 30, 2003)

heirodule said:
			
		

> Yeah, and do you think they think their games are actually in good taste?



Who's to say otherwise until having participated in it to find out?  Indeed, there are fantasy novels that don't involve eroticism, but as my last post indicates, there are more than a few.  Some of that stuff is amongst the best available in the genre, often far superior to the 8th-grade drivel WotC passes off as literature.

And anyone thinking that an immature mind needs this material to run an obscene game loaded with gratuitous filth needs to go back over the Core Rules a few more time.  There's more than enough in there for someone with such intentions to use in such a manner (Innuendo to lure the unsuspecting girl away from her parents, Diplomacy and _charm_ spells to seduce the married man, grappling rules and _hold_ spells to commit murder and rape, etc.).

This material isn't for perverts or imbalanced individuals; They don't need it compared to the rules already available in the Player's Handbook to "get off" on such things.

At the same time, I do find it interesting that with all the "It's a D&D world..." arguements used to justify various behaviors and activities that it's assumed that any product that handles sex in a non-taboo manner isn't suitable material.


----------



## Tiefling (Apr 30, 2003)

Bendris Noulg said:
			
		

> *Who's to say otherwise until having participated in it to find out?  Indeed, there are fantasy novels that don't involve eroticism, but as my last post indicates, there are more than a few.  Some of that stuff is amongst the best available in the genre, often far superior to the 8th-grade drivel WotC passes off as literature.*




That's a bit insulting to 8th-graders, don't you think?


----------



## trancejeremy (Apr 30, 2003)

> Really, folks, Erotic Fantasy has been part of the Sword & Sorcery genre for a long time. Heck, even Dracula was risque for its time. I'm more shocked by the lack of acceptance for this aspect of fantasy than I am that the book is in production.





There's a huge difference between eroticism and fetishism.  The latter is closer to De Sade than Dracula.

Still, the end result probably won't be worse than a Piers Anthony novel, and many of those used to be marketed towards kids.


----------



## Simplicity (Apr 30, 2003)

Bulletproof said:
			
		

> *
> A.V. didn't just "come out of the closet".
> 
> He is leveraging news of his controversial lifestyle, and possibly his position at WOTC, for a controversial product for personal gain.  Fans and publishers in the industry have a right to lash out at him for doing so, because he invited the criticism.  He brought the personal issues up in a business context, and legitimized criticism of them.
> ...




First off, so what if he's leveraging his position at WotC?  He wouldn't be the first person.  Monte Cook ring a bell?  Sean K. Reynolds anyone?  That's what the d20 license is all about...  You make a name for yourself, and you can produce your own products.  AV has made a name for himself in the industry, and he SHOULD be able to use it, just like everyone else has.  What else is going to set a product apart if not for the author's talent?

Secondly, while he may have known that there was going to be controversy, the fact that he belongs to an S/M club was going to come out...  He's writing a book of Erotic Fantasy.  Don't you think someone was going to ask him why?  And why shouldn't he be honest about his life?  Why shouldn't he be in control of how aspects of that life come out (i.e. in the press release)?

Let me think here...  
Probability that book will be big seller: Pretty low.  
Probability that there will be personal and professional fallout: Pretty high.  

The guy's risking his personal and professional reputation on something he believes in, and that a whole lot of people don't.  That takes serious balls, whether you think it's a cheap marketing trick or not.


----------



## BiggusGeekus (Apr 30, 2003)

trancejeremy said:
			
		

> *Still, the end result probably won't be worse than a Piers Anthony novel, and many of those used to be marketed towards kids. *




I have vivid recollections of being a pre-teen and reading _Split Infinity_.  That man scarred me.


----------



## TiQuinn (Apr 30, 2003)

Simplicity said:
			
		

> *
> The guy's risking his personal and professional reputation on something he believes in, and that a whole lot of people don't.  That takes serious balls, whether you think it's a cheap marketing trick or not. *




Very true.  Whatever you may think of him or his product, you have to admit, he's taking a big time risk.


----------



## Simplicity (Apr 30, 2003)

trancejeremy said:
			
		

> *
> There's a huge difference between eroticism and fetishism.  The latter is closer to De Sade than Dracula.
> *




I think you're confusing fetishism with sadism...
Dracula is quite fetishy...  Neck fetishes all over the place.


----------



## Felon (Apr 30, 2003)

Bendris Noulg said:
			
		

> *Indeed, these threads are starting to disturb me...  It's akin to saying, "it's okay to play D&D so long as it's suitable to be part of the WGN Power Pack.  Inspiration will not be obtained from Heavy Metal, Conan, Gor, Silverglass, or any other unacceptable source, be it fantasy or not, regardless of whether it's what got you into D&D or not." *




Nothing more disturbing than people who think that fantasy begins with ElfQuest and ends with Pern. The gelding of fantasy literature is one of the sadder things to happen in my lifetime. Very much like Las Vegas, fantasy novels and mags used to be one the ballsiest, baudiest places in the world to escape to. Now the market's expanded to a family-oriented crowd, and with all the rugrats running around people only have the vaguest recollection of what we've traded in for a friggin' Harry Potter Happy Meal.

I recall more than a couple of Fritz Leiber's saucier Fafhrd & the Grey Mouser tales that consisted of little more than the boys traveling to the ends of the world for a good shag. Ah, them were the days.


----------



## rounser (Apr 30, 2003)

> The guy's risking his personal and professional reputation on something he believes in, and that a whole lot of people don't. That takes serious balls, whether you think it's a cheap marketing trick or not.



He doesn't necessarily deserve any respect for that, though.

At the heart of d20 is an assumption that the tone of d20 product in general (in negative cases, poor quality products for instance, or as in this case and IMO, poorly themed products) won't reflect on D&D as a whole....or even if it does, who cares so long as we're making money.


----------



## mkarol (Apr 30, 2003)

Felon said:
			
		

> *
> recollection of what we've traded in for Happy Meal fantasy.
> *




Hear! Hear!  or is it Here! Here!  Oh well, in any case, thank you for your post and the implication that not every book, article, movie, or expression need be 'happy meal' safe.


----------



## WanderingMonster (Apr 30, 2003)

Mark said:
			
		

> *Today's news has generated a ton of traffic and made EN World very slow.  If this keeps up, this site is gonna go down like a Valar Prestige Class...  *




That was beautiful, man.


----------



## rounser (Apr 30, 2003)

I think this can be likened to a Tragedy of the Commons, where you get some parasites and opportunists weakening the foundations laid by the hard work of others.  I'm beginning to come around to Tracy Hickman's way of thinking in that respect - how dare you taint our game?

Not frothing at the mouth here, just a bemused recognition that he may have a point...


----------



## Bulletproof (Apr 30, 2003)

Simplicity said:
			
		

> *
> 
> First off, so what if he's leveraging his position at WotC?  He wouldn't be the first person.  Monte Cook ring a bell?  Sean K. Reynolds anyone?  That's what the d20 license is all about...  You make a name for yourself, and you can produce your own products.  AV has made a name for himself in the industry,
> *




Only as a business manager, as far as I know.  Has he actually done any game design?  (Not on topic, I know, just curious)



> *
> and he SHOULD be able to use it, just like everyone else has.  What else is going to set a product apart if not for the author's talent?
> *




Monte and Sean never did anything that was a conflict of interest while employed at WOTC.  I would say this qualifies as a conflict of interest, especially seeing WOTC's hurried response that they feel his product is "distasteful", but that's just my opinion.  Even if what he did was legal, it doesn't mean I have to consider it to be ethical, or that I can't criticize him for it.



> *
> Secondly, while he may have known that there was going to be controversy, the fact that he belongs to an S/M club was going to come out...  *




This is possible, but I don't think so.  Even if it was going to come out, he was not obliged to put it in a press release and use it as a selling point.



> *
> He's writing a book of Erotic Fantasy.  Don't you think someone was going to ask him why?  And why shouldn't he be honest about his life?  Why shouldn't he be in control of how aspects of that life come out (i.e. in the press release)?
> *





I have no problem with him including the information in the press release.  I just don't think it's sane to expect everyone to accept it quietly and without criticism.  

To be even more clear, I don't think he deserves personal attacks, but his business decisions are open game.  He's blurred the line between his personal life and business.  It would not have been dishonest to keep it quiet; no one asked him about his personal life, and he did not have to bring it up in a press release, even if he felt it would come up later.  And if it came up later, he could say "none of your business".  He's made it an issue and needs to deal with criticism of it.



> *
> Let me think here...
> Probability that book will be big seller: Pretty low.
> Probability that there will be personal and professional fallout: Pretty high.
> ...




All this I agree with.  Whether it is actually a cheap marketing trick or not...I actually doubt it.  Given the information about his personal life,  I think that he just really wants to produce this product, and maybe that's what he was trying to get across with that revelation.  I merely think people have a right to be critical of him for doing so.


----------



## thalmin (Apr 30, 2003)

Hand of Evil said:
			
		

> *Don't get me wrong, sex is good but I keep it out of my games, it is a side bar, but that does not mean I will not pick it up.  I like fantasy, I like D&D, it will make an interesting collectable.
> 
> Before the netnook of carnal knowledge there was a book from Lion Rampant (ARS MAGICA), .The Races after Dark  that you could only get at GENCON that was rather interesting take on sex. *



Actually, The Races After Dark was included with some copies of "Fifth Cycle", an rpg from Shield Laminating.


----------



## fusangite (Apr 30, 2003)

Bendris and Felon seem to have the idea that because fantasy literature contains sex, fantasy games should contain sex. While D&D is related to fantasy literature, it is game, not a literary form. While one can find sex in virtually every literary genre, instances of it in commerically available games are pretty few and far between. And there is a good reason for this.

We must remember than while books and movies are essentially individualized activities and experiences, games are social activities. The definition of appropriate social activities is very different from the definition of appropriate individual activities. 

Now just as I'm sure there exist people who play _BDSM Twister_ and _Illuminati Orgy_, I would suggest that these are not normal social activities and are as inappropriate for commercial publication as the book we are currently discussing.


----------



## Psionicist (Apr 30, 2003)

http://psionicist.online.fr/stuff/av.gif


----------



## Darkness (Apr 30, 2003)

fusangite said:
			
		

> *I'm sure there exist people who play BDSM Twister and Illuminati Orgy*



SUBSCIRBE 

[/hong] 

- _Or strip poker_ Darkness


----------



## rounser (Apr 30, 2003)

Goldfish Fanciers, eh?


----------



## Bendris Noulg (Apr 30, 2003)

trancejeremy said:
			
		

> There's a huge difference between eroticism and fetishism.  The latter is closer to De Sade than Dracula.



True by today's standards.  However, in the Victorian Era, Dracula was not initially received well by some folks due to it's erotic implications.  It's clear that the line of acceptibility has shifted to a degree.  I dare say, in another century, who's to project where that line will be then?



> Still, the end result probably won't be worse than a Piers Anthony novel, and many of those used to be marketed towards kids.



Heck, you ever seen the Spice Girls movie?  There's enough S&M undertones throughout that film to fill a fetish shop, and the average viewers were 14 year old girls.


----------



## Felon (Apr 30, 2003)

rounser said:
			
		

> *I think this can be likened to a Tragedy of the Commons, where you get some parasites and opportunists cashing in on the foundations laid by the hard work of others.*




Eh? People who publish d20 products using the OGL are parasites and opportunists? Isn't that what it's there for? Kindly elaborate.



> *I'm beginning to come around to Tracy Hickman's way of thinking in that respect - how dare you taint our game?*




She and Margaret Weis should be convicted for crimes against sword and sorcery. Newsflash: erotic fantasy was around before they picked up a pen. Those two played more than a small part in the gelding of the fantasy genre, turning badass barbarians into elven princesses. And they think there's onus upon everyone who comes after them to respect that? Well, I see a lot of other indignant folks in this thread seem to think so.

If I must choose between a genre that's "tainted" with mature content and one that's sterilized with tame, PG-rated pap, I'll take the former thank you very much.


----------



## Ghostwind (Apr 30, 2003)

Having walked away from this thread and the story in general, I had time to ponder it. Re-examining the initial press release, I think some folks may be reading a lot into it that isn't really there.

First off, the press release does contain quotes from Anthony Valterra but does not specifically state that he personally is writing it, only that he is "heavily involved" in it.



> "The gaming community is mostly college age and up", says Anthony Valterra, one of the founders of Valar Project. "For years the subject of sex in a fantasy world has been whispered about in private or the subject of Internet speculation. We are simply taking a subject that everyone is curious about and bringing it to life."




There is nothing in this quote that would lead one to believe the book to be equivalent to porn. For all we know, it could be as dry as a college textbook on reproductive behaviors between animal species.

The "Tip Sheet" has all the earmarkings of a successful publicity ploy to provoke a response. It combines factoid information such as the statistical figures along with "professional qualifications" intended to sound equally factual. The likelihood of Anthony founding a club is always possible, but for the acronym to spell out ORGASM is just too convenient with the context of the press release.



> "The Book of Erotic Fantasy" is created using Wizard of the Coast’s "Open Game License." This license has no approvals and no royalties and is modeled after the Linux "Open Source" movement. This is the first time that a print product has attempted to make use of this philosophy. This radical and innovative idea has revolutionized and revitalized the role-playing game industry by allowing anyone to create products compatible with the Dungeons & Dragons? game system. Anthony Valterra has overseen the license for the last three years.




Notice it doesn't say the product is directly compatible. It merely says the license has allowed for the creation of compatible products. However, later in the article a quote supposedly from Anthony states:


> "This book reveals the erotic side of the high fantasy genre (elves, dragon, fairies etc.) and contains roleplaying rules that are compatible with the best selling Dungeons & Dragons roleplaying game.
> 
> This product will bring new levels of realism to the roleplaying genre. Rather than illustrations, photos of models were taken. These images were then run through Photoshop to create a realistic fantasy world." Anthony Valterra, Valar Project, Inc.




This would run completely contrary to everything Anthony has stood for in his position at Wizards of the Coast. For a person who is directly charged with overseeing operations that include monitoring of the OGL, to make a statement like this on the record is illogical. There is a lot about the initial press release that sounds more like a casual conversation than an official formal press release.

The fact remains that there really is not much information we know other than this initial press release and the now very public outcry about it. As has been mentioned several times on this thread, the initial reactions to the _Book of Vile Darkness_ were very parallel to what we see here. Rather than condemning something that no one has ever seen, why not wait for more details before someone is nominated for crucifixation followed by tar and feathers?


----------



## WanderingMonster (Apr 30, 2003)

A few one-liners that spring to mind:

* I guess now we'll have to redefine "hardcore gaming".

* This whole venture must put WotC between a rock and a hard place!

* _Now_ adventurers will actually have a use for the 10' pole.

* Will this game require a DM or an S/M, I wonder?

* Wood Elves.


----------



## Simplicity (Apr 30, 2003)

Psionicist said:
			
		

> *http://psionicist.online.fr/stuff/av.gif *




Oh, dear god, this is really funny.


----------



## frankthedm (Apr 30, 2003)

1. i will buy it, TBH i hought this would of been out a while ago with the OGL.

2. Perhaps this will be a parting shot from Anthony to wotc. He may already know he is being downsized for another reason or he wants wotc to fire him to escape a contract he can't shake.

3. i bet there are a few groups that cross those sorta lines.

4 . a lot of pervs will love this...like me


----------



## Angcuru (Apr 30, 2003)

*slaps forehead*

*BOOK OF EROTIC FANTASY = OPTIONAL PURCHASE!*

If you don't want to include it in your game, don't buy the book and leave the rest of us alone. I'll probably give this thing a looksee and if I think it makes sense, I'll pick it up.  I won't use it anytime now, at least until I find a more mature gaming group.  I think a very powerful but little touched-on force in the game world(and any world for that matter) is love&romance.  Sure, most of that can be dealt with through good role-play, but eventually things start to get intimate, and that's where this book comes in.  If it's anything like the GUCK (which is VERY useful on SO many levels), it's a must-buy.  (Rules for pregnancy, birth, and child write-up come in very handy.)

A lot of people have to realize that simple because there can be sexuality in the game does not mean the game becomes a porn-fest.


----------



## Mark (Apr 30, 2003)

WanderingMonster said:
			
		

> *A few one-liners that spring to mind:
> 
> * I guess now we'll have to redefine "hardcore gaming".
> 
> ...




You forgot the new Feat - _Erotic Weapon Proficiency_...


----------



## Bulletproof (Apr 30, 2003)

Great Cleavage


----------



## Ghostwind (Apr 30, 2003)

Mark said:
			
		

> *
> 
> You forgot the new Feat - Erotic Weapon Proficiency...  *




Damn, that was priceless Mark....


----------



## rounser (Apr 30, 2003)

> Eh? People who publish d20 products using the OGL are parasites and opportunists? Isn't that what it's there for? Kindly elaborate.



No, that's not what I mean, and you know it.  I don't think I have to elaborate, given the theme of the product that this thread is all about.  Have a bit of a think about what I might mean given that context.


> She



He.


> and Margaret Weis should be convicted for crimes against sword and sorcery.



Yeah, good one mate, keep blowing that hot air.  Pretend that Dragonlance did nothing for the development of D&D.  Pretend that Ravenloft did nothing, Desert of Desolation did nothing, Rahasia did nothing.


> Newsflash: erotic fantasy was around before they picked up a pen. Those two played more than a small part in the gelding of the fantasy genre, turning badass barbarians into elven princesses. And they think there's onus upon everyone who comes after them to respect that? Well, I see a lot of other indignant folks in this thread seem to think so.



D&D has it's roots in pulp swords & sorcery fantasy, but I don't associate it with Gor-like themes, and when it's atmosphere is attached to such bollocks, there's no way back.  It's a one-way street.


> If I must choose between a genre that's "tainted" with mature content and one that's sterilized with tame, PG-rated pap, I'll take the former thank you very much.



It's not mature content, it's about nekkid elves.  It's lame content, IMO.


----------



## Bendris Noulg (Apr 30, 2003)

fusangite said:
			
		

> Bendris and Felon seem to have the idea that because fantasy literature contains sex, fantasy games *should* contain sex.



Indeed, sir, you are mistaken.  I do not indicate at all that RPGs _should_ contain sex.  My stance is that they _can_ and that material related to such shouldn't be condemned as "elvish porn" by those that think they _shouldn't_.  Too often such condemnation is more telling of the individual's lack of knowledge or willingness to accept that other people have different tastes than of the product itself.

After all, I am by far more of a fan of Lord of the Rings than I am of Corben's Den, but I wouldn't look down at someone playing a D&D game in the later's highly eroticised setting.  At the same time, taking the two into account, I'd be more open about who I played a LotR-centric game with than I would one based on Den, the reason being that I can anticipate a younger group understanding and participating in the spirit of Middle Earth while I would have more stringent requirements about who I played a Den-centric game with due to the themes present in the setting.


----------



## Zeddan (Apr 30, 2003)

Felon said:
			
		

> *
> She and Margaret Weis should be convicted for crimes against sword and sorcery. *




She = He

Common Error


----------



## bwgwl (Apr 30, 2003)

wow.

i'd have to say i'm really surprised by the tenor of this thread and the reaction to this upcoming product.

a lot of people who are absolutely blasting this book are many of the same people i've seen before supporting the Book of Vile Darkness.

so... demon worship, human sacrifice, and torture are OK and good to include in one's games, but consensual sex and eroticism are not?

most of the negative comments i've read on this thread about this book are pretty much _exactly_ the same things i was thinking to myself when the BoVD got published.

what kind of messed up world are we living in where violence is acceptable and sexuality is not?


----------



## Bendris Noulg (Apr 30, 2003)

rounser said:
			
		

> Yeah, good one mate, keep blowing that hot air.  Pretend that Dragonlance did nothing for the development of D&D.  Pretend that Ravenloft did nothing, Desert of Desolation did nothing, Rahasia did nothing.



Again, this, like Valar's upcoming book, is a matter of taste.  Adventure wise, I found Desert of Desolation to be excellent.  The rest of their adventures came across as tasteless and far too easy to solve.  Their Dragonlance books seemed over-simplified and childish when I first read them at the age of 13.  While I certainly admit that elements of their work is decent (I own Sovereign Stone, after all), overall it's uninspiring to me, often full of watered-down themes with the elements I'm most interested in shoved into the background, out-staged by the melodramatic angst of their characters.

So, indeed, you are right, they did contribute to the development of D&D.  However, I'd say we disagree as to whether that contribution was for good or for ill.



> D&D has it's roots in pulp swords & sorcery fantasy, but I don't associate it with Gor-like themes, and when it's atmosphere is attached to such bollocks, there's no way back.  It's a one-way street.



But is it being attached?  First, it's a 3rd Party product, so none of the advertising or content can even mention D&D.  Second, it doesn't seem to be a d20 product, so there's nothing to outwardly associate it to D&D or even AU for that matter.

As such, it's strictly just an RPG, and even if it was designed with an entirely different game engine it would still be associated to RPGs as a whole.


----------



## Felon (Apr 30, 2003)

rounser said:
			
		

> *No, that's not what I mean, and you know it.  I don't think I have to elaborate, given the theme of the product that this thread is all about.  Have a bit of a think about what I might mean given that context.*




Lemme see, some people don't like the premise of the product so without even knowing about the actual content folks are willing to go ahead with flaming the designers of such products and calling them "parasites". 



> *He.*




Sorry, like Zeddan said, common mistake...especially after reading his Y-chromosone-deficient work. You _absolutely_ sure? 



> *Yeah, good one mate, keep blowing that hot air.  Pretend that Dragonlance did nothing for the development of D&D.*




I didn't say they did nothing. They DID do something: they gelded fantasy and "developed" it into something more Happy-Meal-friendly. 



> *D&D has it's roots in pulp swords & sorcery fantasy, but I don't associate it with Gor-like themes, and when it's atmosphere is attached to such bollocks, there's no way back.  It's a one-way street.*




What do you base that on? Why just a few days ago, people were bemoaning a lurid cover from a Mind Flayer book, and how such artwork was undoing years of effort spent watering-down fantasy into something bland and inoffensive.



> *It's not mature content, it's about nekkid elves.  It's lame content. *




More accurately, it's content you aren't really all that informed about at this stage.


----------



## mkarol (Apr 30, 2003)

bwgwl said:
			
		

> *what kind of messed up world are we living in where violence is acceptable and sexuality is not? *




That seems consistant with the U.S. sense of (im)morality.  Maybe when the Europeans wake up in a few hours they will comment the other way.


----------



## Angcuru (Apr 30, 2003)

mkarol said:
			
		

> *That seems consistant with the U.S. sense of (im)morality.  Maybe when the Europeans wake up in a few hours they will comment the other way. *




Wellll..... that's only the 'moral' minority that actually bothers to speak up.  Y'know, Women's Christian Temperance Union, ect.  If you were to ask the other 95% of us in the US, we like the sex and as for violence...it's entertainment as long as it's fake.  If things keep heading in the direction they are nowadays, eventually all the movies coming out of Hollywood will consist of buck-naked supermodels riding down the highway on Harleys humping and spraying hot metal into crowds of children simultaneously.  So....how are things in Europe?


----------



## Olive (Apr 30, 2003)

fusangite said:
			
		

> *This product is obviously a case for tightening-up the Open Gaming License. Clearly, this sort of thing was neither foreseen nor intended by WOTC. *




I pretty sure that a) they can't and b) if it's open, then it's open. WotC propably wouldn't have wanted Afganistan d20 either, but it happened.


----------



## MeepoTheMighty (Apr 30, 2003)

Simplicity said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Oh, dear god, this is really funny. *




No it's not.


----------



## Piratecat (Apr 30, 2003)

Angcuru, a gentle reminder: please don't hijack with political themes. This isn't a conversation about American vs European morality.


----------



## rounser (Apr 30, 2003)

> Lemme see, some people don't like the premise of the product so without even knowing about the actual content folks are willing to go ahead with flaming the designers of such products and calling them "parasites".



You don't need to know the content to criticise a theme, and that theme is made pretty clear by the press release.

This theme adds nothing constructive to D&D, IMO, and is actually destructive to the atmosphere of the game and it's reputation.  That behaviour could be called parasitic - you're weakening something communal for personal benefit.  You don't see it that way, that's fine - it's just my observation, and one that I only support tenuously.


> Sorry, like Zeddan said, common mistake...especially after reading his Y-chromosone-deficient work. You absolutely sure?



More hot air.


> I didn't say they did nothing. They DID do something: they gelded fantasy and "developed" it into something more Happy-Meal-friendly.



More ignorance.


> What do you base that on? Why just a few days ago, people were bemoaning a lurid cover from a Mind Flayer book, and how such artwork was undoing years of effort spent watering-down fantasy into something bland and inoffensive.



Swords and sorcery fantasy without these themes is bland?


> More accurately, it's content you aren't really all that informed about at this stage.



I know it's theme, though, and I can criticise it on that level.

(Note on where I stand wrt vile etc.:  I wasn't one of those who railed against the BoVD.  I _did_ later rail against some of the content in Porphyry House Horror, and that's a different kettle of fish, IMO.)


----------



## Harlock (Apr 30, 2003)

Angcuru said:
			
		

> *I think a very powerful but little touched-on force in the game world(and any world for that matter) is love&romance*




_First of all, this is a response to many people, not just Angcuru whom I have quoted here._

We must have very different definitions of Love and Romance.  Images of half naked blood splattered women with guns in their mouths, and a flayed cow's head don't exactly cry out love and romance to me.  Sure, we can wait and see what this book turns out to be, but many folks would like to be heard before this book hits the shelves.  As far as what Anthony Valterra does in his bedroom, you're right, it's completely his business, but he is the one that made it a matter of public record with this press release.  A book of love and romance I have no problem with, a book that needs to list the founding of a Sadism and Masochism fetish club and an occult church as apparent job experience while also listing a link to what I find to be grossly offensive and yes, deviant pictures, I do have a problem with.  Anthony Valterra did not keep this to the privacy of his bedroom, had he done so, none of us would be having this conversation right now.

Does he have a right to publish this book?  Certainly.  Do I have a right not to buy it?  Certainly.  Do we have a right to debate it's merits in the D&D community?  You betcha.  Does anyone have the right to tell one side or the other to ignore it?  That's censorship and I am pretty sure neither side on this issue is fond of that.  More than likely no one can stop this from happening at this point.  But maybe, just maybe some opinions can be heard.  Also, I think it is vitally important to remember that Valterra was asking on these very boards a short time ago about a subdivision of WotC putting out "mature" content and that despite what WotC says in their Press Release many will certainly question there involvement or lack thereof if Anthony Valterra is still employed by them.  Add to that the use of "This book reveals the erotic side of the high fantasy genre (elves, dragon, fairies etc.) and contains roleplaying rules that are compatible with the best selling Dungeons & Dragons roleplaying game," being previously taboo with regards to the OGL without special permission and WotC is implicated in some fashion.  Does more information need to come out?  Certainly.  I know there are a lot of publishers that would love to use that compatible line in big bold print all over their products.  I know that WotC is saying they disapprove, but that does not mean they were ignorant of this or not involved in tacit approval.


----------



## Angcuru (Apr 30, 2003)

WotC should just wake up and realize that D20 works so well, that eventually SOMEONE is going to publish material about ANYTHING IMAGINABLE.  If you can think of it, chances are some has published, in in the process of publishing, or is eventually going to publish it.  

I can see it now:  Adamantine Chef for the d20 system.


----------



## Angcuru (Apr 30, 2003)

Harlock said:
			
		

> *
> 
> First of all, this is a response to many people, not just Angcuru whom I have quoted here.
> 
> We must have very different definitions of Love and Romance....   *





Umm...... I never went into detail about what I define as Romance/Love, but sexuality is an undeniable part of it.  Fetishes and morbid activities are NOT, though.

  I have NO idea where you got that blood spatter ladies about to blow their own brains out while holding severed cow's heads stuff from.  You have some bad sushi or something?


----------



## Harlock (Apr 30, 2003)

Angcuru said:
			
		

> *
> 
> 
> Umm...... I never went into detail about what I define as Romance/Love, but sexuality is an undeniable part of it.  Fetishes and morbid activities are NOT, though.
> ...




Nope, not bad sushi.  There's a link in the press release that touts the talents of the photographer they used for the art.  Follow that link and check out his gallery.  This is used in this advertisement to show us how great this photographer is.  I don;t think it's that great.  You won't be confused after you see a sample of his works, I assure you.


----------



## GameMaster_Press (Apr 30, 2003)

This thread is really beginning to get nasty.
Hey, can't some of us disagree with one another without resorting to slaps at each other?

I haven't posted on this before, but I'd like to say that I believe this is an irresponsible product to create. I am not saying that AV hasn't the right to publish it, but to do so while an exec at WoC is hurtful to that company and to the whole d20 system. I can't see how AV will be able to continue in his current position. I am certain that there are numerous stockholders in Hasbro that will be chomping at the bit to run him off.
In my opinion, this makes gamers look like freaks. I remember when we had to put up with all the crap from people back in the 80's, and it wasn't fun. 
This is bad for all of us and should be deplored by any serious gamer, on principle, especially if put out by someone with such a high profile.


----------



## Cedric (Apr 30, 2003)

You know what would impress me greatly? If they commissioned Olivia to do some of the artwork. 

If you are in a large bookstore sometimes, see if they have any of her works, like "Let Them Eat Cheesecake." 

I believe most people would re-evaluate their opinion of erotic art based on her drawings alone. 

Cedric


----------



## Bendris Noulg (Apr 30, 2003)

Harlock said:
			
		

> Images of half naked blood splattered women with guns in their mouths, and a flayed cow's head don't exactly cry out love and romance to me.



But is that what's going to be in the book?  Sure, the photographer involved in the project did such pictures, but that doesn't indicate what will be included in this material.  Indeed, there are many other pictures in the gallery, a lot of which seemed far more fitting.  Yet, rather than point at the artwork that is (quite logically) more akin to this book's theme, you'd rather point at the pictures who's content is quite the opposite and base your rejection of the book on those.

Indeed, only one image has been directly associated with this project: The one in the report.



> A book of love and romance I have no problem with, a book that needs to list the founding of a Sadism and Masochism fetish club and an occult church as apparent job experience while also listing a link to what I find to be grossly offensive and yes, deviant pictures, I do have a problem with.



This is, indeed, what more attracts me to it: I know that whatever take Anthony gives this material won't be the squeaky-clean white-wedding take that most people are comfortable discussing (itself an oddity since it seems to be more and more the minority).  Rather, it will address sex in a straight-forward, non-taboo, direct manner that won't pander words or dance around social norms.



> Anthony Valterra did not keep this to the privacy of his bedroom, had he done so, none of us would be having this conversation right now.



Indeed.  Having made known his own lifestyle, the bigotry of many has so easily bubbled to the surface.



> Add to that the use of "This book reveals the erotic side of the high fantasy genre (elves, dragon, fairies etc.) and contains roleplaying rules that are compatible with the best selling Dungeons & Dragons roleplaying game," being previously taboo with regards to the OGL without special permission and WotC is implicated in some fashion.



I still question if that was from Anthony himself or written by the reporter that posted the story.  Indeed, the story does not read like a press release at all.


----------



## Harlock (Apr 30, 2003)

Angcuru said:
			
		

> *
> 
> 
> Umm...... I never went into detail about what I define as Romance/Love, but sexuality is an undeniable part of it.  Fetishes and morbid activities are NOT, though.
> ...




To be more clear on why I said what I did directly to you is that you said this, ". I think a very powerful but little touched-on force in the game world(and any world for that matter) is love&romance. Sure, most of that can be dealt with through good role-play, but eventually things start to get intimate, and that's where this book comes in."

But from the sounds of the Press release, especially in going so far as to indicate the founding of an S&M club and using a fetish photographer as selling points, or at least as proof they have a background in this field, this book is indeed more about Bondage and Fetishism than about love.  Again, I could be wrong, but the inclusion of these items on the tip sheet seem to indicate what we have in store for this book.


----------



## Ghostwind (Apr 30, 2003)

Here's a quote from one of the book's designers which was posted on RPGnet's forums:

"_Hi folks. 

My name is Eliza Gauger, and I'm one of the artists working on this project. I'm also a longtime gamer and will probably be modelling for this project, as well. We'll see. 

The fact that there's been such a huge response in less than 24 hours since the press release gladdens my heart. It means there's interest, be it positive or negative. 

The blonde elf girl is a local model, and the image itself hasn't been altered except to add the pointy ears and the background. Everything else is real. Actually, most everyone in the book are local models. And not all of them are going to look like Vallejo paintings, either. Frankly, that's a relief to me. I'm so, SO tired of the rippling-muscles, flowing-hair genre. There's going to be a fair amount of that, but not everything. (I bet a bunch of you are going to start bitching about fat chicks now, right?  ) 

While I'm on the subject, not everything in the book is going to be cheesecake. Some of it is horror-based, some of it just realism, etc. And no, there's no pornography. This stuff is going to be a hell of a lot less pornographic than, say, Playboy. And it's not fetishistic, either. Doug CAN photograph other things, y'know... 




			its call HYPE. 
its what Advertiser do. They make something sound Better or more scandleous that it actual is to get ppls attention.
		
Click to expand...



A-yep. Mind you, I haven't read the finished product yet, so maybe I'll eat my words later on. But I think Valterra is smarter than to throw away intelligent interest in the book by making it a big fluff piece. 

As for Wizards' response: Eh. They sell Pokemon for a living, so we can't expect them to approve of anything with more than a PG rating."_

Gee, sounds like it might not be as vile as everyone is predicting...


----------



## MeepoTheMighty (Apr 30, 2003)

Wow...even Mongoose stuff is more pornographic than Playboy.


----------



## Harlock (Apr 30, 2003)

Bendris Noulg said:
			
		

> *I still question if that was from Anthony himself or written by the reporter that posted the story.  Indeed, the story does not read like a press release at all. *




Here's the quote directly from the release on gamingreport.com

*"This book reveals the erotic side of the high fantasy genre (elves, dragon, fairies etc.) and contains roleplaying rules that are compatible with the best selling Dungeons & Dragons roleplaying game. 

This product will bring new levels of realism to the roleplaying genre. Rather than illustrations, photos of models were taken. These images were then run through Photoshop to create a realistic fantasy world."*
Anthony Valterra, Valar Project, Inc.

No emphasis is added by me. It is treated as a direct quote from Anthony Valterra.


----------



## Harlock (Apr 30, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Ghostwind quoting some other lady from some other site._
> *While I'm on the subject, not everything in the book is going to be cheesecake. Some of it is horror-based, some of it just realism, etc. And no, there's no pornography. This stuff is going to be a hell of a lot less pornographic than, say, Playboy. And it's not fetishistic, either. Doug CAN photograph other things, y'know... *






> _originally posted in the press release news blurb thingy at gamingreport.com_
> *Some of the erotic fantasy images that will be in the upcoming product are available to be viewed, used in articles, or previews of the book at request. Some of these images contain no nudity and would be acceptable to mainstream publications.*




The use of some of these images indicates that some others do contain nudity.  I know everyone has differing tolerances and definitions of pornography but the first litmus test I use is, "Does everyone have on clothes?"  An yes, this is a definite two way street for me.  I'd prefer no bare chested men.  Does that say I am ashamed of my body?  Quite the contrary, I'm perfectly okay with my body, I just have a high regard for modesty and self control and being clothed is an indication of that rather than an immature view of sexuality or the beauty of the human form.  Am I offended a whole lot by having these morals in this day and age?  Heh, yeah, I am.  Does that make you better than me?  I dunno.  Excersising self control and self-mastery is a pretty individual and spiritual experience.  It's also very satisfying to me, but I understand it is not for everyone.  You can judge however you choose.


----------



## Green Knight (Apr 30, 2003)

> Does anyone have the right to tell one side or the other to ignore it? That's censorship and I am pretty sure neither side on this issue is fond of that.




That's NOT censorship. Censorship is when you're forbidden to say or publish something* under penalty of law*. Someone refusing to buy your work and telling their friends not to buy it, either, ISN'T censorship. Am I censoring WoTC when I tell friends not to buy Sword & Fist because it's an error-riddled piece of crap? Hardly. And to say otherwise is to say *I* don't have the freedom to speak my mind about something and the freedom to protest something. They have as much right to publish what they like as I have to say "It's crap, I won't buy it, and I suggest you don't buy it, either". 

Anyway... 



> A generation of fantasy roleplaying game enthusiasts grew up wondering what the elf maiden looked like without those gauzy robes. They read "Lord of the Rings" and fantasized about Arwen. They read Conan and wondered if other fantasy heroes compared to the prowess of the legendary barbarian. In 2003 all the curiosity about sex in the realms of fantasy will be satisfied.




WTF? Whoever wrote this needs to speak for himself. I never once said to myself "I wonder how Arwen looks naked?" or "I wonder who's got a bigger penis? Aragorn, King Arthur, or Conan?" The hell? 



> Anthony Valterra helped found a fetish club (Oregon Guild Activists of S/M) and an occult church (Church of the Blood Red Moon) as well as engaging in a wide variety of other unusual adventures. He has used these personal experiences to guide him in the creation of this product.




Let's file this under the "WAY Too Much Information" category. And if these are the experiences he's used to help him create this book, then as someone else pointed out, it's safe to say the sorts of things we can expect from this book. Case in point: 



> The photographer for "Book of Erotic Fantasy" is Doug Safford a well-known fetish fashion photographer. Some of his work can be viewed at http://www.hypnox.com.




And... 



> Some of the erotic fantasy images that will be in the upcoming product are available to be viewed, used in articles, or previews of the book at request.* Some* of these images contain no nudity and would be acceptable to mainstream publications.




Ah. "Some". Not all, apparently. 



> With the release of the Harry Potter books and movies and the release of The Lord of the Rings movies the fantasy genre is undergoing a renaissance.




Wasn't the Marquis de Sade alive during the Rennaissance? If so, it's an appropriate comparison. 

If someone wants sex in their game, I don't see why they need a game supplement to somehow integrate it into their games. But the argument's academic because as I said, before, they have a right to publish what they like. Likewise, I have the right to accept it or reject it for whatever reason, and suggest to others to do as I do, and THEY have a right to accept it or reject it, WHATEVER my opinions of the product are. 

Not a fan of Dragonlance, so when I don't buy it and tell friends Dragonlance sucks and make fun of the Knights of Salamy am I censoring it? No, even though I'm rejecting it because of content, as I will this. Yet rejecting this for its content is somehow censorhip when rejecting a Dragonlance book for content ISN'T censowship? Had I known just how much Sword & Fist was packed full of errors at the time, I would've rejected it, too. Again, because I don't care for its content. Same goes for Rifts books, which has a rules set which I feel is totally out of whack, something which I tell people all the time. Is THAT censorship? The Lord of the Rings and Farscape RPG's I rejected not out of dislike for the content but due to their price and lack of need. Any censorship taking place, there? As I said, censorship ONLY occurs when, BY LAW, you're punished for saying or publishing something by the state. When a consumer makes a choice, WHATEVER the reason for that choice, that's not censorship. The same freedom that allows Anthony Valterra to publish this book allows me to say what I like about it to whomever will listen, and allows me to refuse to put up money for it. 

Sorry, but I'm not a fan of the whole "Saying bad things about something or someone is censorship" argument, which is completely BS. 

Anyway, I just hope to God one of the posters over at Gaming Report is right. I do NOT want to see people LARPing this at Cons!


----------



## Angcuru (Apr 30, 2003)

Harlock said:
			
		

> *Excersising self control and self-mastery is a pretty individual and spiritual experience.*




Very true.  Why only be proficient with yourself when you can specialize?  But seriously though:  It helps to do a good bit of soul-searching.


----------



## Felon (Apr 30, 2003)

rounser said:
			
		

> *You don't need to know the content to criticise a theme, and that theme is made pretty clear by the press release.*




No, you just can't be all that open-minded to do so. 



> *Swords and sorcery fantasy without these themes is bland?*




Depends on what's replacing it, I suppose. If it's replaced with a lot of gully-dwarf-and-tinker-gnome-filled adolescent garbage, then I'd have to say yes. I have to ask you out of morbid curiosity, if nothing else: what exactly would you describe as the good qualities that works like the Dragonlance saga replaced R-rated sexual and violent content with? Are you going to say those stories are more imaginative, better-crafted than, say, Fritz Leiber's spicy tales? More cerebral, with all those 12-year-olds reading them? What are the strengths of those books, whose sole purpose seemed to be to capture readers who were just outgrowing Nancy Drew and The Hardy Boys, introducing one sy lame cutesy one-note-joke critter after another? Tell me fantasy is just as rich with Tasselhoff Burfoot than it was with Karl Wagner's Kane. 



> * I know it's theme, though, and I can criticise it on that level.*




Sure, and forfeit any right to accuse other people of ignorance and hot air.


----------



## Harlock (Apr 30, 2003)

Green Knight said:
			
		

> *That's NOT censorship. Censorship is when you're forbidden to say or publish something under penalty of law. Someone refusing to buy your work and telling their friends not to buy it, either, ISN'T censorship. Am I censoring WoTC when I tell friends not to buy Sword & Fist because it's an error-riddled piece of crap? Hardly. And to say otherwise is to say *I* don't have the freedom to speak my mind about something and the freedom to protest something. They have as much right to publish what they like as I have to say "It's crap, I won't buy it, and I suggest you don't buy it, either".  *




Yes, I knew on a second through of my post someone would misunderstand that because I misstated myself.  I meant to say it is near to endorsing censorship which I know no one here wants to do.  I also very nearly added this line directly after that: Because if censorship were allowed the Jack Chickites, PMRC, or some other ultra intruding group would likely have gone after D&D back in the heyday of the fallout from the Satanism reputation.  I do know what censorship is, but thanks for calling it out in spite of the fact that I had hoped it would be apparent what I had meant to say.


----------



## Simplicity (Apr 30, 2003)

Harlock said:
			
		

> *As far as what Anthony Valterra does in his bedroom, you're right, it's completely his business, but he is the one that made it a matter of public record with this press release.  ...[snip]...  Anthony Valterra did not keep this to the privacy of his bedroom, had he done so, none of us would be having this conversation right now.
> 
> Does he have a right to publish this book?  Certainly.  Do I have a right not to buy it?  Certainly.  Do we have a right to debate it's merits in the D&D community?  You betcha.  Does anyone have the right to tell one side or the other to ignore it?  That's censorship and I am pretty sure neither side on this issue is fond of that.*




So, it's okay to have an alternative lifestyle, as long as no one 
ever discovers it?  It's one thing to criticise someone's work (which by the way, doesn't exist yet).  It's another thing to say
that someone deserves criticism because they made their sex life
public.

As for the photographer being graphic:
1) Most of those pictures were not bloody, animal-head-filled, or violent.  Most were just straightforward pictures.  But if you have some problem with artists who cover such topics, then I guess Pablo Picasso wouldn't measure up to your standards either... Guernica)

2) Even if the pictures were overly violent...  Haven't you noticed after killing hundreds of monsters and people that D&D is ALL ABOUT violence?  Violence IS the solution to most of your problems in D&D.  Why not have someone who understands the subject matter?

I was never arguing that you didn't have the right to speak up
against this product.  I don't think anyone was.  However, 
I have the right to speak up against you speaking up against 
this product


----------



## Green Knight (Apr 30, 2003)

> Yes, I knew on a second through of my post someone would misunderstand that because I misstated myself. I meant to say it is near to endorsing censorship which I know no one here wants to do. I also very nearly added this line directly after that: Because if censorship were allowed the Jack Chickites, PMRC, or some other ultra intruding group would likely have gone after D&D back in the heyday of the fallout from the Satanism reputation. I do know what censorship is, but thanks for calling it out in spite of the fact that I had hoped it would be apparent what I had meant to say.




Well, I don't think it's near to endorsing censorship, either, but nevermind. As long as we can both agree that we don't want to see people LARPing this at Cons, then it's all cool.


----------



## Angcuru (Apr 30, 2003)

Simplicity said:
			
		

> *Even if the pictures were overly violent...  Haven't you noticed after killing hundreds of monsters and people that D&D is ALL ABOUT violence?  Violence IS the solution to most of your problems in D&D.  Why not have someone who understands the subject matter?
> *




Thing is, violence and gore have no place in a book about eroticism.


----------



## Shadowdancer (Apr 30, 2003)

TiQuinn said:
			
		

> *Well, I won't be buying it since I doubt Borders or Barnes and Noble will carry it. *




Maybe it will be sold at convenience stores, in a plastic cover and kept behind the sales counter.

After this comes out, can Bondage Fairies d20 be far behind?


----------



## Kilmore (Apr 30, 2003)

> what kind of messed up world are we living in where violence is acceptable and sexuality is not? [/B]




A world where violence is a social activity and sex is private.  For better or for worse.


----------



## Tiefling (Apr 30, 2003)

There must be some catalytic effect of messageboards that causes people to get very vocal about things that mean nothing and will never have a tenth of the impact that people predict they will.

But I'll be damned if I know why.


----------



## Harlock (Apr 30, 2003)

Simplicity said:
			
		

> *
> 
> So, it's okay to have an alternative lifestyle, as long as no one
> ever discovers it?  It's one thing to criticise someone's work (which by the way, doesn't exist yet).  It's another thing to say
> ...




You misunderstand me.  I was not criticising the work, I was criticising that apparently S&M and the occult are listed as "previous work experience" for this project.  That bodes ill to me.  Also, no one discovered this and "outted" Valterra.  He chose to take this out of his bedroom.  As far as Picasso, sorry, I never liked him.  I prefer him to Chagal as far as modern art goes, but that picture was a painting and a very unrealistic one at that.  It hardly compares to snapshot realism of photography.  Kind of the difference between abstract nudes and a WWII pin-up painted on the side of an airplane.

Violence is the mainstream solution to D&D, I agree.  I'm also allowed to dislike that aspect of the game.  I prefer the roleplaying and a more gritty aspect of death as a finality.  I think taking away the raise dead and ressurect spells goes a long way to cure the "attack first, probe later" mentality so prevalent in the game (lookie!  An actual discussion of game rules and mechanics in this thread, woohoo!)  

As for saying you were never arguing that I didn't have the right to speak up against this product, I never said you were.  I was making a blanket statement trying to remind folks on all sides to think beore they post so the mods don't shut it down.  That goes for me too.  Double for me since I said it, I suppose.    Anyway, no worries, I wasn't picking on anyone specifically for the great majority of that post, which is why I had the italicized disclaimer at its beginning.  It was more a response to what I felt was the spirit of this thread at that time.

EDIT: Oh, no problems Green Knight and as far as the  LARPing this book publically at cons, I'm with you.


----------



## Oni (Apr 30, 2003)

Geoffrey said:
			
		

> *I can imagine all kinds of stuff in this book that could be used in a game:
> 
> 1. Rules for seduction for beautiful evil witches and such. Can your paladin resist?
> 
> ...





While some of these seem fairly reasonable to me, I have to say these aren't the sorts of things I thought of when I read the press release.  Quite frankly the press release left a very bad taste in my mouth.  I mean Arwen naked, Conan's sexual prowess....what in the heck, thats just childish.  Not to mention the listing of AV's supposed qualifications.  Given the things the press release touted, I get the impression that the final product could have skewed view for sure.


----------



## rounser (Apr 30, 2003)

> No, you just can't be all that open-minded to do so.



I'm going to release a kids show with a press release with equivalent themes to those for this book.  You'd say that the parents who'd object would be closeminded.  That's a whole truckload of nonsense in my book.


> Depends on what's replacing it, I suppose. If it's replaced with a lot of gully-dwarf-and-tinker-gnome-filled adolescent garbage, then I'd have to say yes. I have to ask you out of morbid curiosity, if nothing else: what exactly would you describe as the good qualities that works like the Dragonlance saga replaced R-rated sexual and violent content with? Are you going to say those stories are more imaginative, better-crafted than, say, Fritz Leiber's spicy tales? More cerebral, with all those 12-year-olds reading them? What are the strengths of those books, whose sole purpose seemed to be to capture readers who were just outgrowing Nancy Drew and The Hardy Boys, introducing one sy lame cutesy one-note-joke critter after another? Tell me fantasy is just as rich with Tasselhoff Burfoot than it was with Karl Wagner's Kane.



I wasn't even discussing the books, nor their "literary merit".  Dragonlances' modules offered enough progression for the state-of-the-art of AD&D (which includes artwork and the mistakes made in the railroading), and your petty attacks on how well written the Dragonlance books are is just more hot air.


> Sure, and forfeit any right to accuse other people of ignorance and hot air.



You're criticising a known quantity whose contents some of us know, and I consider your assessment ignorant, your lack of knowledge of Tracy's gender suggests you're ignorant, and I do indeed label your vacous namecalling in place of a sensible argument "hot air".  To pretend that we know nothing about the tone of this product after that press release, and that it's therefore immune from criticism of it's "tenor", is nonsense.


----------



## mythusmage (Apr 30, 2003)

*A Few Points*

1. On Human Sexuality.

Take a college level course on the subject sometime. Some of the stuff people do to themselves and to others gets burnt bone raw.

2. Innocence

Innocence does not mean the person won't do certain things. As a matter of fact, an innocent is more apt to do certain things because he doesn't understand that they are wrong.  You never leave a child alone with the floodgate controls.

3.On Porn

Dirty books are fun.

4. Elves and Sex

Elves don't do porn. They're too tasteful for that. Orcs would do porn, but they're usually too busy participating to run the camera.

Ending this on a serious note, I could go into detail about my stance on sex and sexuality, but this really isn't the place for it. I will say I do feel sorry for people who need something like BDSM to gain some kind of human contact. Maybe if we showed our kids we loved them more, this sort of thing would become vanishingly rare.

Folks, sex isn't about the act, it's about people. It's a way to become closer to others in a lasting way. Forget this and it becomes a rapid descent into extreme behavior.


----------



## Harlock (Apr 30, 2003)

Oni said:
			
		

> *
> 
> 
> While some of these seem fairly reasonable to me, I have to say these aren't the sorts of things I thought of when I read the press release.  Quite frankly the press release left a very bad taste in my mouth.  I mean Arwen naked, Conan's sexual prowess....what in the heck, thats just childish.  Not to mention the listing of AV's supposed qualifications.  Given the things the press release touted, I get the impression that the final product could have skewed view for sure. *




That's how I feel as well, which has me more confused in light of the response from the "model/art person" someone quoted from another board.  Given her response I am left thinking this was a cheap publicity stunt akin to the Dragon 300 bit and if it is, I don't appreciate that either.


----------



## rounser (Apr 30, 2003)

> A world where violence is a social activity and sex is private. For better or for worse.



There's a theory that sex is instinctually not done in public because it compromises the possibility for adultery, and the taboos are genetically based.  Go figure - and remember, it's just a theory.


----------



## Simplicity (Apr 30, 2003)

Angcuru said:
			
		

> *
> Thing is, violence and gore have no place in a book about eroticism. *




Really?  Because I'm not sure I agree.

Dracula is a pretty clear example of violence and eroticism.
The story of Bluebeard has similar themes.
You'll be hard pressed to find any modern werewolf movies that don't cover the erotic aspects of lycanthropy.  Werewolves are doomed to kill the one they love after all, aren't they?

In fact, horror in general nowadays is pretty inextricably entwined with sexual themes.  What made Norman freak out in the Psycho movies?  Sexual thoughts.  Who did Jason try to kill in Friday the 13th movies?  The teenagers having sex...  The Scream movies even point it out as a horror movie rule: If you have sex in a horror movie, you're going to die.      

Sure, in normal life, I find sex and violence are good to keep separate.  Since when is D&D normal life?


----------



## Edmonton boy (Apr 30, 2003)

I think this press release, and the follow-up from WotC, are part of a carefully planned "troll" of mass media designed to produce coverage of D&D. I say this not because of how "outrageous" the book is, or how "scandalous" it all is, but because there are clues in the press release itself.

First, the use of the Dungeons & Dragons trademark is a dead giveaway that Wizards gave their approval to the announcement. The only reason they would do so is to strengthen the D&D brand; forget all that junk about a special deal with AV or it being part of severance or an attempt to get fired. It's designed to ensure that all the resulting attention is tied back to D&D.

Second, the announcement doesn't just mention D&D, it provides "seed" info that has no purpose except to help a mainstream journalist write an article. There are many, many examples. Here are a few:

"• Dungeons & Dragons™ was created 30 years ago and has 1.6 million players on a monthly basis. It is one of the most recognized brands in America with over 90% aided recognition."

This is not aimed at a d20 audience. It's not aimed at distributors or retailers, or at end consumers. This is aimed directly at the mass media, and designed for easy pickup into the news cycle.

Here's another example:

"• Anthony Valterra helped found a fetish club (Oregon Guild Activists of S/M) and an occult church (Church of the Blood Red Moon) as well as engaging in a wide variety of other unusual adventures. He has used these personal experiences to guide him in the creation of this product.

• Anthony Valterra is available for candid interviews."

This is the journalist's angle--you can almost imagine the tagline: Games are All Grown Up, or Not Just For Kids? The invitation to interview Anthony is another line that's clearly designed to make this story easier to write for your average overworked, underinformed mass media journalist.

Here's another example:

"• Some of the erotic fantasy images that will be in the upcoming product are available to be viewed, used in articles, or previews of the book at request. Some of these images contain no nudity and would be acceptable to mainstream publications."

Why do you even _mention_ mainstream publications in a d20 press release? You don't. This isn't.

Yet another example:
"• “The Book of Erotic Fantasy” is created using Wizard of the Coast’s? “Open Game License.” This license has no approvals and no royalties and is modeled after the Linux “Open Source” movement. This is the first time that a print product has attempted to make use of this philosophy. This radical and innovative idea has revolutionized and revitalized the role-playing game industry by allowing anyone to create products compatible with the Dungeons & Dragons? game system. Anthony Valterra has overseen the license for the last three years."

See, you don't need any of this UNLESS you are writing for an entirely new audience (say, Newsweek readers).

I'm sure that Valar is incorporated on its own, and has no formal legal relationship with WotC, but I'm equally sure that it is a puppet company with no purpose besides generating stories about D&D in the mass media.

The real question is: how long before this hits slashdot, and then how long before a mainstream new source picks it up?


----------



## Ghostwind (Apr 30, 2003)

Edmonton, you hit the nail on the head perfectly and said it exactly in the way I was not only thinking and trying to get across, but in a manner that is precise and clear. Glad someone else sees the forest for the trees...


----------



## Bendris Noulg (Apr 30, 2003)

Harlock said:
			
		

> No emphasis is added by me. It is treated as a direct quote from Anthony Valterra.



My bad...  I had returned to the article a few times to send out links to it, and after repeated viewings of the first paragraph, I forgot it was mentioned by Anthony later in the story.

Hmmm...



			
				Harlock said:
			
		

> You misunderstand me.  I was not criticising the work, I was criticising that apparently S&M and the occult are listed as "previous work experience" for this project.  That bodes ill to me.  Also, no one discovered this and "outted" Valterra.  He chose to take this out of his bedroom.



Actually, I think this goes a long way of indicating the nature of some of the content:

1. Sex will be discussed in a straightforward manner, not just skirted around due to personal hang-ups.

2. Items which are generally viewed as taboo (in America, at least) won't likely be represented as evil or counter-culture.

3. Homosexuality (if discussed in the book) will similarly not be represented unjustly.

4. The relationship between sex and pagan magical rituals may likely be discussed in detail, with theory adjacent to rules.

As such, his listed "qualifications" would indicate that he isn't going to base it on research (the source of which may be biased) or simply made-up (which may be as accurate as it is misinformed), but based on actual practices from religions, historical and current, as well as personal experience as well as a _substantial_ part of the fantasy genre.

After all, if someone's going to write a book for Erotic Fantasy RPGs, who would do the better job: A person that has fully and completely embrassed his own sexual life on a physical and spiritual level, or someone that appears "normal" but could very well likely have certain hang-ups resulting from being raised in a sterile/purile environment and out of touch with their own desires?


----------



## Liquid Snake (Apr 30, 2003)

*Would somebody please think about the children!*

I think a lot of people are overreacting with all of this "D&D is going straight to Hell" attitude.

The "Book of Vile Darkness" was, as Piratecat pointed out,  quite non-vile. It had some interesting ideas on evil, and some crude but really cool artwork and that's it.

D&D has survied lots of things and certainly this book won't do anything but raise some eyebrows (unless some really freakish circumstances come to be).

Personally I don't think I'll buy it. The people working on the "Book of Unlawful Carnal Knowledge" on this forums are doing a great work. 

A great FREE work.


----------



## Simplicity (Apr 30, 2003)

Harlock said:
			
		

> *
> Violence is the mainstream solution to D&D, I agree.  I'm also allowed to dislike that aspect of the game.  I prefer the roleplaying and a more gritty aspect of death as a finality.  I think taking away the raise dead and ressurect spells goes a long way to cure the "attack first, probe later" mentality so prevalent in the game (lookie!  An actual discussion of game rules and mechanics in this thread, woohoo!)
> *




A more gritty aspect of death as a finality?  You're still going out and killing the bad guy.  Just because you reserve "the smackdown" for the end of the story doesn't mean that the story isn't violent.  It definitely doesn't make it less violent just because death is final (though it does make character death more meaningful).

Violence is a natural ...ahem... climax to the progression of a D&D story.  And without it, the ...uh... story's just not the same.  If you take the violence away from D&D, I don't think it's D&D anymore...


----------



## Bendris Noulg (Apr 30, 2003)

*Conspiracy Theory*



			
				Edmonton boy said:
			
		

> See, you don't need any of this UNLESS you are writing for an entirely new audience (say, Newsweek readers).



Yowza...

Damn.  I'm watching you.  Yer smart.


----------



## Green Knight (Apr 30, 2003)

> Oh, no problems Green Knight and as far as the LARPing this book publically at cons, I'm with you.




*shivers at the thought of a fat, balding, overweight gamer in his 30's who plays a nubile elf female coming on to him at a Con* 

EEK!  



> 1. Rules for seduction for beautiful evil witches and such. Can your paladin resist?




That's one definitely a keeper. Of course, beautiful evil witches probably already have access to spells like Charm Person or love potions, so it's not like they already aren't capable of doing just that. Anything beyond that and you're getting into ground you should leave alone. I.E. forcing people to do certain things with their characters based on a skill check roll. For example, Intimidate doesn't work on PC's. It's up to you whether your character is scared or not. Would you want that to be forced onto your character, that he HAS to check against Intimidate, and if he fails then he's scared witless of the Intimidator? Likewise, would you want your character to be as easily seduced as that? 



> 2. Magical spells that require sexual components.




Would this be so vastly different than your standard ritual that you need to describe it? And what spells would use sexual components? 



> 3. Magical spells that enhance one's sexuality or beauty in various ways.




Beauty I can see. But does anyone really need a magical version of Viagra in their game? And if such a thing existed, wouldn't Wizards get laid more often than Barbarians?  



> 4. Anatomical details for various races. Just where do elves have hair, for example? How long is their gestation period? What is their cultural view on homosexuality? Abortion? Pre-marital sex? Polygamy? Etc.




Most of this is unnecessary. Gestation period is good, but really, who needs to know if elves have hair on their scrotum? As for the rest, that depends on culture. Just like the human race has wildly varying cultural norms, the same goes even for elves and dwarves, especially between different campaign settings. What's the point of detailing any of that if culturally, Evereska elves believe different things than Evermeet elves? And that's just in one campaign world. 



> 5. Rules for strengthening one's abilities through indulgence or abstinence from sex.




Err ... what? Gaining strenth through chastity? If that were possible, then the Comic Book Guy from The Simpsons would be the strongest man in the universe! 



> 6. Rules for sex and fertility goddesses.




What rules does one need beyond knowing their alignment, favored weapon, portfolios, and the Cleric Domains they offer? 



> 7. Evil magic devices that involve sexual torture.




Question: On which players would those devices be used on? The female ones? What female player wants to have her character sexually assaulted? D&D's supposed to be an escape from reality. It's supposed to be fun. How is playing a sexually assaulted character fun? Who wants to pretend to be a rape victim? Players already hate it enough when they're taken prisoner, but sexually assaulted? 

And for the guys: Really, who would want to ever play their character again after he got Gimped by a Zed wannabe? Anyone ever read KotDT? Remember when Bob burned his character sheet after his character was put through an adventure based off of "Deliverance" by that crazy-ass DM Nitro? SOOOO-WEEEEEEEEEEE! LOL! 



> 8. Good magic devices that can restore sexual purity.




Wasn't this an episode of Night Court? You step into a teepee or something and get your virginity back. Dan went in and came out as a 10-year-old. Again, I fail to see the point. A magical item that returns your virginity? If for some reason you need such a thing, you can make it up for your own campaign. But I doubt that the need for something like that will be so common that it needs to be put into a published book. 



> 9. Rules on sexual rites and beliefs in various religions. I can imagine, for example, that some good religions would be very promiscuous while others are very abstinent. Evil religions would also be varied. I can imagine an evil religion that forbids all fertility and all pleasure (including sex).




Again, unnecessary. The DM can come up with this on hiw own. Or this can be extrapolated from the portfolios held by a deity (I.E. A deity of marriage would be more abstinent "wait until marriage" type, while a deity of love would be more loose). 



			
				Oni said:
			
		

> While some of these seem fairly reasonable to me, I have to say these aren't the sorts of things I thought of when I read the press release. Quite frankly the press release left a very bad taste in my mouth. I mean Arwen naked, Conan's sexual prowess....what in the heck, thats just childish.  Not to mention the listing of AV's supposed qualifications. Given the things the press release touted, I get the impression that the final product could have skewed view for sure.




Gotta agree with you, Oni. Stuff like gestation periods for non-human races would be nice, but given the press release, I very much doubt we'll be getting anything like that.


----------



## Darrin Drader (Apr 30, 2003)

*Re: Would somebody please think about the children!*



			
				Liquid Snake said:
			
		

> *The "Book of Vile Darkness" was, as Piratecat pointed out,  quite non-vile. It had some interesting ideas on evil, and some crude but really cool artwork and that's it.
> *




The only thing I found exceptionally vile about the BoVD was some of the art. I mean really, the Disciple of Mephistopeles gnawing away the flesh from his own hand? Blech. Makes me want to lose my lunch every time I look at it.

I really do like the book though.


----------



## rounser (Apr 30, 2003)

D&D _was_ at the height of it's popularity when the media was feeding on it the most...


----------



## Liquid Snake (Apr 30, 2003)

> I mean really, the Disciple of Mephistopeles gnawing away the flesh from his own hand? Blech.




Well maybe you're right. THAT one was kind of disturbing.


----------



## La Bete (Apr 30, 2003)

Tiefling said:
			
		

> *There must be some catalytic effect of messageboards that causes people to get very vocal about things that mean nothing and will never have a tenth of the impact that people predict they will.
> 
> But I'll be damned if I know why. *





Word.

I read 4 pages of the responses, got wound up. Took a walk to calm down. Read some more responses. More or less decided against replying, as any reply I could make would basically be having a go at someone - which is never the best idea, and especially in a thread as heated as this.

Seeing this comment however, sufficiently inspired me, as it eloquently stated my view.

Enjoy the rest of the show people!


----------



## Green Knight (Apr 30, 2003)

Good points all around, Edmonton Boy. Very interesting theory.


----------



## Arravis (Apr 30, 2003)

As a few others have said... I don't see the big deal. Diversity in material is the reason why an open gaming license will work in the long run. This is just one of those things that comes with that diversity. Personally, I don't think it's that big a deal nor anything I'll actually ever use in one of my campaigns. I might consider buying it just as a light and amusing read, but I can't imagine introducing anything within to any game I DM. Just my 2 cents...


----------



## Dr. Strangemonkey (Apr 30, 2003)

There could be some goodness to it.

Sex and sexuality have always been a part of heroic narratives as a whole.

All that Arthurian stuff with maidens in towers and people getting stabbed in the thigh and what not.

Not too mention episodes like Odysseus and Circe or Aeneas and Dido.

But, that I think is a minor point.

The real upshot is that these books have the potential to be either a terrible additional smudge on an industry that has always had a few or worth an amazing amount of money or a combination of the two.

I've worked the erotica section of used bookstores and "Yes, Virginia, sex does move units."

Not too mention scandal, can anyone tell me what the highest priced used role-playing product is and why?


----------



## MeepoTheMighty (Apr 30, 2003)

Dr. Strangemonkey said:
			
		

> *
> Not too mention scandal, can anyone tell me what the highest priced used role-playing product is and why? *




Probably B3: Palace of the Silver Princess. Released and recalled in the same day because of a picture of a tied-up woman being assaulted by a bunch of knife-wielding guys.

Am I right?  What's my prize?


----------



## rounser (Apr 30, 2003)

Come to think of it, the name "Valar Publishing" could have been custom-made to troll Tolkien Enterprises...


----------



## Bendris Noulg (Apr 30, 2003)

Green Knight said:
			
		

> Err ... what? Gaining strenth through chastity? If that were possible, then the Comic Book Guy from The Simpsons would be the strongest man in the universe!



Actually, yes...

The Hindus have a belief relating to a man's procreative fluids being related to imagination and creativity.  When a man has sex, he releases that creative energy, which must again "build up" over time.  As such, an artist, engineer or other "creative" type would practice abstainance during the pursuit of some goal in order to have a strong creative energy flow.

On the flipside, Celtic Druids performed sexual rights in which two Druids would have intercourse while other Druids would tie locks of the "performer's" hair with ribbons.  Later, these ribbons would be untwinned in order to release the creative energies captured during the act, thus empowering the magic they were attempting to perform.

Now, that's just two real world examples taken from real world religions.

And while it's true that this kind of stuff, and the rest, can be made up by the DM, a few DMs are likely not going to do so out of embarrasment from his peers, but will be more likely to say "I like this, I'm going to use it" because it's coming out of a book (and thus makes it easier to add more to).  Going further down the line, other DMs could quite possibly have not even thought about it due to a lack of knowledge or a limited amount of exposure to the genre (too much H&W/Salvator, not enough Corben or Moebius), and thus this work serves to provide exposure to a part of the genre that does indeed deserve some degree of professional representation beyond _Nymphology_.


----------



## Alzrius (Apr 30, 2003)

Well, given that our local authority figure has confirmed this, here are my reactions on taking this seriously...that is, having more belief this will happen than belief that this is a joke:

I think this deserves a chance before people begin stomping on it. The BoVD has been slammed up and down, but more people seem to like it than not now thats its out there (hence the recent wave of encouragement for it in the magazines). Same thing here.

Given some of the stuff we've been seeing recently, this isn't nearly as surprising as it could be. Like I pointed out before, _Nymphology_ was released by a major d20 company, and the GUCK is now being developed in high gear. This just seems like a natural extension of that...though it admittedly be a premature release in how early its coming...but thats what happens when people start touching this subject.  

Ahem, jokes aside, I think its almost sort of inspirational for AV to have a book like this made with his name on it. He's unafraid of any backlash (which is already considerable) for just being himself. This is very much in the vein of WotC's former CEO Peter Adkison (you'll know that if you've ever read John Tynes's Death of the Minotaur), and I think its admirable to be that willing to be so open about onesself, especially considering that most of us here at EN World know he's a great guy. I'll almost certainly be buying this just as a show of support.

On a sidenote: I find it hilarious that the GUCK, being developed here, now has real competition.

Secondary sitenote: Is it just me, or is it odd in that seven pages of this thread, AV hasn't himself dropped in to make a statement? He's usually really, really good about being quick to talk to us here.


----------



## Kilmore (Apr 30, 2003)

That's 7 pages in 14 hours, and I'm sure that Mr. Valterra has plenty on his plate right now.  

[Imagines AV sitting in his cozy little office this afternoon chilling out when he suddenly hears his boss shriek next door].   

Now, I think there's a 99.8% chance that it didn't happen like that, but I'm still imagining it.


----------



## RangerWickett (Apr 30, 2003)

Alzrius said:
			
		

> *This is very much in the vein of WotC's former CEO Peter Adkison.*




Curse you!  You must've changed the spelling before I could reply and condemn you!


----------



## Bendris Noulg (Apr 30, 2003)

http://ValarProject.com


----------



## Alzrius (Apr 30, 2003)

RangerWickett said:
			
		

> *Curse you!  You must've changed the spelling before I could reply and condemn you! *




 

I was reading back through Death of the Minotaur, and noticed that I had misspelled the name, so I went back and changed it. Better luck next time!


----------



## fusangite (Apr 30, 2003)

It seems that those who defend this absurd new publication continue to be able only to find precedent in fantasy literature. D&D is a kind of game; it is not a kind of literature. The only example of a game with sexual content that anyone has cited is strip poker. Strip poker is a perfect example -- no one sells strip poker sets/decks. 

There are sexual games people play; there are games people buy. I see no intersection between these categories. Why would we want D&D of all games to be the first to cross this boundary?

I have yet to hear a reason for wanting D&D, of all games, to set this precedent. Yet there are many reasons for opposing this. To note a few:
(a) the reputation of the game
(b) the danger of creating irreversibly bad first impressions of the game
(c) the danger of creating an uncomfortable, sexually-charged dynamic at adolescent gaming tables around the world


----------



## John Crichton (Apr 30, 2003)

Bendris Noulg said:
			
		

> *The Hindus have a belief relating to a man's procreative fluids being related to imagination and creativity.  When a man has sex, he releases that creative energy, which must again "build up" over time.  As such, an artist, engineer or other "creative" type would practice abstainance during the pursuit of some goal in order to have a strong creative energy flow.*



No, no, no.  You've got it all wrong, silly.  What you are talking about is from that episode of Seinfeld where George....


----------



## Bendris Noulg (Apr 30, 2003)

fusangite said:
			
		

> It seems that those who defend this absurd new publication continue to be able only to find precedent in fantasy literature.
> D&D is a kind of game; it is not a kind of literature.



Without the literature that inspired it (which, I'm _not_ sorry to say, includes a bit of Erotic Fantasy), D&D would not exist.  So, no, it's not literature, but many people get into fantasy gaming _because of_ literature and myth (even your own screen name is from such)



> The only example of a game with sexual content that anyone has cited is strip poker. Strip poker is a perfect example -- no one sells strip poker sets/decks.  There are sexual games people play; there are games people buy. I see no intersection between these categories. Why would we want D&D of all games to be the first to cross this boundary?



It's not:

http://www.bridalshowerfun.com/adultgames.htm



> I have yet to hear a reason for wanting D&D, of all games, to set this precedent. Yet there are many reasons for opposing this. To note a few:
> (a) the reputation of the game



Already trashed and muddied.  I've dealt with it for over 20 years; Grow a thicker skin.



> (b) the danger of creating irreversibly bad first impressions of the game



It's an OGL product, seperate from D&D.  However, see C.



> (c) the danger of creating an uncomfortable, sexually-charged dynamic at adolescent gaming tables around the world



Already there.  Can't count how many really bad Succubus encounters I had to deal with before I was 15 by DMs that didn't have a clue.  While I've been spared the pain, I'm sure there are plenty of Xenaphiles out there with some horrid games running (not to be mistaken for the Xenaphiles out there with good games going, mind you ).


----------



## Bendris Noulg (Apr 30, 2003)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> No, no, no.  You've got it all wrong, silly.  What you are talking about is from that episode of Seinfeld where George....



Afraid I don't get to watch Sienfeld, ol' chap (it's the kid's Disney Movie Time Slot).  I got this information from a book of Chakra Magic when I was researching Middle-East Religions to add some depth to my Al'Qadim region.


----------



## John Crichton (Apr 30, 2003)

Bendris Noulg said:
			
		

> *Afraid I don't get to watch Sienfeld, ol' chap (it's the kid's Disney Movie Time Slot).  I got this information from a book of Chakra Magic when I was researching Middle-East Religions to add some depth to my Al'Qadim region. *



Oh, I totally believe you and have read of similar things.  Gotta love histories of various cultures.  I think they are facinating.

I was just looking to inject a little good natured humor (as opposed to stating my opinion on this, which others have mirrored better than I could say).  And I wasted a perfectly good Seinfeld reference.  Dang.


----------



## Alzrius (Apr 30, 2003)

fusangite said:
			
		

> *It seems that those who defend this absurd new publication continue to be able only to find precedent in fantasy literature.*




Who cares about precedent? It's not like this needs to have a basis in previous works to be allowed to go forward. That said, I've pointed out that this is not the first work about sex and D&D, to say nothing of how other people have pointed out that this is not the first RPG supplement about sex either.



> *D&D is a kind of game; it is not a kind of literature. The only example of a game with sexual content that anyone has cited is strip poker. Strip poker is a perfect example -- no one sells strip poker sets/decks.*




You're right. Card games based around sex are something we've never seen before because nobody cares about such things. *cough*XXXenophile*cough* 



> *There are sexual games people play; there are games people buy. I see no intersection between these categories.*




Just because you do not see something does not mean it does not exist. Fortune-cookie reading for the day. 



> *Why would we want D&D of all games to be the first to cross this boundary?*




Firstly, it isnt. Secondly, why not? Believe it or not, some people can mention "sex" without breaking into giggles.



> *I have yet to hear a reason for wanting D&D, of all games, to set this precedent. Yet there are many reasons for opposing this. To note a few:
> (a) the reputation of the game*




Because slaying those demons and devils and such Vile Darkness makes us look too too good. If we can survive that, one isolated product won't hurt us.



> *(b) the danger of creating irreversibly bad first impressions of the game*




Because in this day and age, anything sexual is labelled under Very Bad Things.



> *(c) the danger of creating an uncomfortable, sexually-charged dynamic at adolescent gaming tables around the world *




You're right...from now on those poor kids won't ever be able to pick up a pair of d6's at a _Monopoly_ game without feeling hot under the collar after this...

Seriously, this will kill the industry about as badly as the BoVD did. The doomsaying is becoming passe.


----------



## Bendris Noulg (Apr 30, 2003)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> I was just looking to inject a little good natured humor (as opposed to stating my opinion on this, which others have mirrored better than I could say).  And I wasted a perfectly good Seinfeld reference.  Dang.



No you didn't...  I've seen enough episodes to imagine what that was like...

Let me guess...  George was trying to do something.  Kramer gave him some not-quite-accurate advise.  George is going celebate (not much of a real problem for him).  But then meets this girl...

_Or_...

Just occured to me...  Are you refering to the Cosmo episode?


----------



## Dark Jezter (Apr 30, 2003)

Bendris Noulg said:
			
		

> *No you didn't...  I've seen enough episodes to imagine what that was like...
> 
> Let me guess...  George was trying to do something.  Kramer gave him some not-quite-accurate advise.  George is going celebate (not much of a real problem for him).  But then meets this girl...
> 
> ...




No no, he's talking about the episode where George swears off sex in all forms, and he suddenly becomes super-intelligent.  Not to mention articulate, charming, and witty.


----------



## Bendris Noulg (Apr 30, 2003)

Oh, missed that one...  Sounds excellent.

Grrrr...


----------



## Alzrius (Apr 30, 2003)

Dark Jezter said:
			
		

> *No no, he's talking about the episode where George swears off sex in all forms, and he suddenly becomes super-intelligent.  Not to mention articulate, charming, and witty.  *




The rationale there is that when men stop concentrating on sex, a huge amount of brain-power is then freed up for other things in life.

Ironically, this rebounded on Elaine when she swears off sex, since the rationale is the opposite for women: sex for them is like taking out the garbage, the longer they go without it, the more it builds up and impedes everything else.

It was excellent. Thank heavens for reruns. That show will never die.


----------



## John Crichton (Apr 30, 2003)

Alzrius said:
			
		

> *The rationale there is that when men stop concentrating on sex, a huge amount of brain-power is then freed up for other things in life.
> 
> Ironically, this rebounded on Elaine when she swears off sex, since the rationale is the opposite for women: sex for them is like taking out the garbage, the longer they go without it, the more it builds up and impedes everything else.
> 
> It was excellent. Thank heavens for reruns. That show will never die. *



That's the ticket.  Thanks for summing it up, Alzrius.  

And now that I've (unintentionally) derailed this topic for a half-dozen posts, I now digress...


----------



## William Ronald (Apr 30, 2003)

I think Edmonton Boy has hit the nail on the head. The press release, which I thought was BADLY written, does seem to be angling towards mainstream publications.  (That said, I suspect many writers at mainstream publications are going to have a field day with the Book of Erotic Fantasy.)  I have seen some good press releases, and this is not in my top 10 list.


I am not entirely sure what to make of the book.  I doubt I will have much need for it, as sex and romance have been part of my campaign from time to time.  (In one instance, a couple at the gaming table brought their characters together.  There was both humor and a few touching moments.  A lot of things were left to the imagination.)  I tend to use rules for some aspects of my games but not others.  (Whoever said that having a DC role determines the actions of 

That said, I think the book will be a matter of personal taste. I do have some concerns, such as whether it will be done in a manner that I find tasteful.  Also, I have some concern about the flack that some gamers may take over it.  (Not so much for myself, as I have been gaming for 21 years.  More so for the younger crowd.)

MEG_Hal, as Anthony Valterra has not posted yet , maybe you could shed some light on the book? What is its philosophy and approach? (Obviously, don't betray any confidences.  It still might be helpful to clarify a few concerns.)

I suspect that Anthony Valterra will have  a lot to say when he reads this thread.  I am willing to give him a fair hearing.  We should afford the same courtesy to everyone else on this thread.
So, let's try not to make the moderators shut this thread down.


----------



## Corinth (Apr 30, 2003)

Since when do press releases have to abide by the terms of the OGL or the d20STL?  Only the products that actually employ those licenses have to abide by the terms; press releases don't.


----------



## Fenes 2 (Apr 30, 2003)

fusangite said:
			
		

> *I have yet to hear a reason for wanting D&D, of all games, to set this precedent. Yet there are many reasons for opposing this. To note a few:
> (a) the reputation of the game
> (b) the danger of creating irreversibly bad first impressions of the game
> (c) the danger of creating an uncomfortable, sexually-charged dynamic at adolescent gaming tables around the world *




Sorry to burst your illusion, but the reputation of the game has been shot to pieces already in some circles, some among them the "mature" roleplayers from WW fame, who consider D&D a puerile hack & slash fest for pre-teens. Others consider it a threat to the very souls of children, leading them into the darkness of pagan worship ("It has multiple gods in it").

Maybe only you care about the reputation the game has in other segements of the population, but if I cared about D&D's rep I would worry more about the hack&slash, childish power fantasy rap it got among some fellow gamers - people I am much more likely to interact with in a gaming enviroment than others.

The "danger of creating an uncomfortable, sexually charged dynamic at adolescent gaming tables around the world" is laughable. Teens will be teens, boys will be boys, and adolescent male teenagers will generate such an atmosphere without any book if their hormones rise. This book will not add anything their imagination (and a stack of girly magazines) did not already add to their game (or not).

As far as creating "irreversibly bad first impressions" I could not care less. The definition of what is bad is already contested - what would turn me off a game would attract others, and vice versa, and the people you play with matter more than what you play anyway.

So this book will not harm D&D. 

Personally, I oppose the attempt to keep D&D PG-13. I don't play with minors or immature people. Besides, if you really care about PG-13, the the very good SL sourcebook "Shelzar, City of Sin" has already crossed that line, and no one made a fuss about it.


----------



## Felon (Apr 30, 2003)

rounser said:
			
		

> I'm going to release a kids show with a press release with equivalent themes to those for this book.  You'd say that the parents who'd object would be closeminded.  That's a whole truckload of nonsense in my book.




There are shows on TV just for kids, there are shows for the entire family, and there are shows just for adults. For your premise to have merit, you would have to presume that there is no room for a strictly adult audience.  Just happy meal fantasy.



> I wasn't even discussing the books, nor their "literary merit".  Dragonlances' modules offered enough progression for the state-of-the-art of AD&D (which includes artwork and the mistakes made in the railroading), and your petty attacks on how well written the Dragonlance books are is just more hot air.
> 
> **snip the remaining inflammatory dreck**




I responded to your open-ended question "is sword & sorcery fantasy without these [lurid] elements bland?" And rather than try to mount a defense, you want to act like you were specifically discussing something else. 

Your debating technique appears to as follows: instead of providing any kind of substantial rebuttal, adopt a haughty attitude and keep throwing around the words "hot air" and "ignorance". If that fails to advance your position, become increasingly more hostile and resort to petty personal attacks while at the same time condemning the other side for displaying bad form.  Repeat and rinse.


----------



## Bran Blackbyrd (Apr 30, 2003)

Angcuru said:
			
		

> **slaps forehead*
> 
> BOOK OF EROTIC FANTASY = OPTIONAL PURCHASE!
> 
> ...



Damn you and your totally correct answer! 
Why can't more people realize little facts like this. It's common courtesy at it's most basic level.



			
				rounser said:
			
		

> *It's not mature content, it's about nekkid elves.  It's lame content, IMO. *




Ah, so you've read it already? Kindly give us a preview.
I think we've all seen how futile it is to blast a product that has not yet been released. You know next to nothing about this product, just like the vast majority of the people on this planet. Sure, one can make assumptions about what the tone of the book will be, but it's just a time-waster. Besides, we all know what happens when one makes an assumption. You make an ass out of u and mption.
--
Why is it that so many people have a right to an opinion, but other people seemingly don't have the right to buy what they want to? If you don't like it/want it don't buy it. The don't wants always say that a product shouldn't be published rather than just saying, "Well, I won't be buying it, but if other people want it they can go ahead and waste their money." I said this same thing about Deities & Demigods. The 'Don't Wants' kept demanding that the book not be published, ignoring the fact that if they don't want it, all they have to do is not buy it. They would have rather kept the book out of the hands of people who did want it. That's just selfish. I understand that some people are worried how this will tarnsih the image of RPGs and their players, but I honestly doubt that the impact will be that bad. How many people outside of the RPG community even know about most of this stuff? It would only (in their minds) confirm what they already assume about RPG players anyway. That's right, they already think it...
--
In all honesty, I probably won't be buying this. There are a slew of D&D and D20 Modern books coming out this year and I only have so much money. If this book ends up anywhere where I can get a look at it, I'll check it out. There is a real possibility that it could contain some crunchy, useful, and thought-provoking mechanics/rules. If it looks more useful than immature I may actually get it. Other people have already gone over what kind of cool rules this book might contain. I must say though, I think most people would prefer drawn artwork.
--
Hehe. Balsamic Dragon has the distinction of being the person here whose name I've been familiar with the longest (from the WoTC 3E boards pre-release). I've never asked, how do you pronounce your handle? I've heard Balsamic pronounced so many ways...

EDIT: Besides, this book couldn't possibly be a bigger embarrassment to the RPG community than LARPing is. 
I mean, have you seen some of the movie clips that have been posted here?


----------



## Mindcrime (Apr 30, 2003)

This book is for a really narrow niche market. If it was intended for a wider audience, I'm sure the press release would have been given to Morrus first.
And while I have zero interest in the subject matter (sex+gaming), I can see how there is this market for it. Roleplaying (outside of dice games and even larps) is a very common element to a lot of peoples' sex lives. This book will probably see more sales coming from the back pages of Heavy Metal, or from fetish stores, s/m and bondage stores, or even regular porn stores, than from the average gaming store.

I think it's cool someone stepped up to the plate to do a project like this. Because AV is involved, I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt and assuming he will handle the subject matter tastefully, if it gets into the hardcore s/m (which can, believe it or not, be presented tastefully and maturely, I believe. Ever see those fantastic HBO documentaries 'Real Sex'?) Being that he's personally involved in stuff like that, you can be sure he's all too aware of how it's perceived by people who are not.

Chris
http://www.bombshellstudios.com


----------



## jdavis (Apr 30, 2003)

Oops I just erased a huge post on the subject and I really don't care to retype it so I'll just hit the highpoints.
--
Book of Vile Darkness: Not terribly vile or dark just a book with a marketing strategy on making it sound adult. The content was no worse than what was covered in the movie Conan the Barbarian and nobody complains about it being "vile".
--
D&Ds bad rep: The more mainstream D&D becomes the less cool it becomes. Controversy of any kind helps to keep it seeming cool and cutting edge. If anything D&Ds reputation is a little too mainstream and accepted right now anyway, it's not the cool thing to do because it is accepted as ok now.
--
Adult games: Just go into a Spensers gifts store in a mall and you are sure to find all sorts of stuff on the shelves to make this look tame.
--
The Photographer: Wasn't really impressed. It wasn't really disgusting or vile or anything it was just sort of overdone and pushed to try and make it look artsy and cutting edge. You want disgusting you can Google up stuff 100 times worse on the internet in a matter of minutes. 
--
The Book: I'm not really interested in a book of doctored photos, erotic artwork is fine but this seems to have more in common with pasting celebrity heads on nude photos than it does with erotic expression. As far a rule book goes, I don't need these rules in my game as I game with 30 year old males who don't want to simulate sexual situations in our game as that would be sort of wierd for us. Erotica and fantasy go a long way back and that's fine but by what I've read this really doesn't get my attention as a must have item.
--
A.V.'s personal life in the blurb: thought that was a little unessessary. I mean to each his own and it doesn't bother me, but it was just poorly done and seemed to only be there to generate controversy.
--
The "Press Release": That was just silly, sounded like the WWE wrote it. Matter of fact the whole thing sounds like a bad Pro Wrestling angle to gain mainstream attention. Very Poorly done.
--
This thread: Seems people get uppity quick around here. One thing that bothers me is that people get all bent out of shape about what should and shouldn't be in the game. Please don't tell me what should or shouldn't be in my game of D&D. I have been gaming for almost 25 years now I will put whatever content I want into my game. If you don't like a product then don't buy it, but don't tell me I can't buy it because you don't think it belongs there. There is nothing wrong with adult content for the game, yes it may have to be screended for children but most things in the modern world should be screened for children. I have children myself, they hate D&D and think it is childish and silly and they think that people who game are stupid, but hey they like NSINC. Just because there are books with adult content out there it doesn't mean you are forced to use them, so just don't use them. This game may be able to be played by children but it isn't a childrens game. 

For those people who said they were going to quit gaming over this book,  that's like saying you are going to quit driving because you don't like Hondas. Get a grip, you are free to game how ever you like regardless of what material is published. 

It's sort of funny that a two paragraph blurb could generate so much feedback so quicky, of course that was probably the point. two or three months from now this will be basically forgotten, I doubt it will have any major long term affect but it is crazy that one badly written press release could generate 8 pages of post. I figure the news release will generate more feedback than the actual book will. That's what happened with the Book of Vile Darkness. What is actually going to be in this book will probably be tame compared to what people are imagining will be in it after reading the press release.


----------



## Bran Blackbyrd (Apr 30, 2003)

Edmonton boy said:
			
		

> *I think... -SNIP-
> The real question is: how long before this hits slashdot, and then how long before a mainstream new source picks it up? *




Very interesting. Very interesting indeed. Also, it's nice to see someone using more than just the knee-jerk section of the brain.


On another note people; are you familiar at all with the idea of sensationalism?
We all saw how futile it was to try and predict what the BoVD would be like from the info released about it before it was on the shelves. Speculate all you want, but remember that that's all it is, speculation.

And because I'm on medicine for the cold that's kicking my butt...
Scare your boyfriend, entertain at parties, confound your physician! For a mere 2000gp we'll teach you to cast Illusory Phallus! Call now and we'll throw in a pouch of Peasant Repellant for free. Never be bothered by pasty commoners again! Settle for nothing less than a go-getter with his eye on the dragon's hoard!
Warning, peasant repellant may also attract stirge and cause premature limb loss, not for use if you're pregnant, nursing, or undead.


EDIT: Ah, there we go. Snipped almost like on Usenet...


----------



## pennywiz (Apr 30, 2003)

Bran Blackbyrd said:
			
		

> *Besides, this book couldn't possibly be a bigger embarrassment to the RPG community than LARPing is. *




So let me get the ranking straight for things embarrassing to the RPG community (from least to most):

3} LARPing

2} This book

1} Knee-Jerk Reaction to Undefined New Things?


Have I missed anything?  Seems like a list of things embarrassing to the RPG Community should be a few pages long, yes?  Can we just list all of our names and be done with it?


----------



## jdavis (Apr 30, 2003)

pennywiz said:
			
		

> *
> 
> So let me get the ranking straight for things embarrassing to the RPG community (from least to most):
> 
> ...




Actually you forgot Vin Diesel, he's probably up there with LARPing.


----------



## Thresher (Apr 30, 2003)

Its an interesting read this thread, mostly to see peoples opinions from their own cultures which are very different to mine. They do seem to cling rather strongly to them, which is their perogative I guess even if if does worry me to see a lot of closed minds and judgement passed from people who havent even seen the book.

Somehow I can see it all flowing down the river of literature and barely making a ripple on the lives of most roleplayers hobby, its just another book and probably not that accessable or useful to most people. Maybe some weirdo christian from america, that big land over the sea will pick it up and see it as a product of sick minds poisoned by satan and brand the hobbiest's as a whole as being goat raping minions of the dark one.
Then again, maybe they wont 
And the opinions of weirdo christians 15000km away really dont concearn me either, most of them get televised over here at 4am on free to air TV telling me to send them money and I think its kinda funny, in a disturbing way.
(its also another reason to get satelite tv here...)
However if someone was to pick up the book, tuck it under their arm while spraying down a McDonalds with a machinegun the publicity could be wonderful. Though, bats# crazy madman rarely get motivated by erotic literature, so maybe its unlikely as much as my country being invaded by rabid christians who put me in a camp after tatoo'ing *BROKEN* on my forehead just so good wholesome folks know Im a roleplayer and it gives the deathsquad something to aim at.

There, that should give the doomsayers and paranoid among us something to think about   

As a side note, someone out there who runs one of these indi-publishing companies, write us something I could all use.
*A nice big book full of all kinds of Orky badness* 
Damn sick of books on sharp knives, telling me how to be evil and f#!#ing elves of every colour and subspecies!


----------



## Olive (Apr 30, 2003)

Edmonton boy said:
			
		

> *The real question is: how long before this hits slashdot, and then how long before a mainstream new source picks it up? *




I really don't think they'll be interested. If you're right about the intent of the news release (and i suspect you are), then they'll have already sent it to these places. It won't need slashdot.

DnD is pretty far off the media's radar these days. Everyone said 'The BoVD is goign to kill the hobby... the schools will be burning the books!!!' and it enver happened. Like one more S&M porn book is going to make a difference.


----------



## Kahuna Burger (Apr 30, 2003)

BiggusGeekus said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I have vivid recollections of being a pre-teen and reading Split Infinity.  That man scarred me. *




Add me to the list of "had her emotional development towards sex fundementally disrupted by pubescent reading of Peirs Anthony". (almost 30 and all better now, but my kids aren't laying a hand on that author without advance crib sheets on healthy sex)

Kahuna Burger


----------



## Zappo (Apr 30, 2003)

Noone outside the gaming community will care about this book.
People don't care about D&D.
There will be no new witch-hunts because of this book.
The general public will not shift their perception of D&D because of this book.
Even if they did, it would just improve sales.
I said the above in the BoVD times and I was right.
I'm saying it again and I will be right again.


----------



## Felon (Apr 30, 2003)

Olive said:
			
		

> *DnD is pretty far off the media's radar these days. Everyone said 'The BoVD is goign to kill the hobby... the schools will be burning the books!!!' and it enver happened. Like one more S&M porn book is going to make a difference. *




lol, I imagine that if any mainstream stores were to carry this book, they'd just see "erotic fantasy" in the title and stick in the section with all the Fabio-embossed covers. 

Hey, maybe that's actually the way to get more women into this hobby.


----------



## rounser (Apr 30, 2003)

> There are shows on TV just for kids, there are shows for the entire family, and there are shows just for adults. For your premise to have merit, you would have to presume that there is no room for a strictly adult audience. Just happy meal fantasy.



You're twisting and turning desperately there.  That point was in reference to your assertion that I'm closeminded for attacking something based on it's promised themes, so I presented an example of where your assertion is clearly false.  Now you're trying to pretend I was arguing something else; no luck there, try again.


> I responded to your open-ended question "is sword & sorcery fantasy without these [lurid] elements bland?" And rather than try to mount a defense, you want to act like you were specifically discussing something else.



Maybe *because I was*?  The context of only mentioning other modules might have given you a hint.

Which is more likely to "advance" the foundation of D&D - modules and setting material....or novels?  The novels are at best an abstraction of the game, as peripheral as D&D computer games are.


> Your debating technique appears to as follows: instead of providing any kind of substantial rebuttal, adopt a haughty attitude and keep throwing around the words "hot air" and "ignorance".



Yeah, that's all that's needed to refute your namecalling and counterattacks on someone who you're so informed about that you don't even know what gender they are.

Anyways, you seem to have this obsession with McDonalds references of your own.


> If that fails to advance your position, become increasingly more hostile and resort to petty personal attacks while at the same time condemning the other side for displaying bad form. Repeat and rinse.



I see a pattern here; you've changed tack from your attacks on Hickman to attacks on me.  Why attacks?  Because you don't have a decent defense, it's the only resort you have left.


----------



## herald (Apr 30, 2003)

Green Knight said:
			
		

> *
> 
> 
> 
> ...




No, He wasn't


----------



## Fenes 2 (Apr 30, 2003)

Rounser, can you tell me why D&D should cater only to PG-13 audiences? Most studios offer movies for different audiences. TV stations cater to different age categories with different programs. I fail to see why D&D should cater only to PG-13 gamers, and not offer other gamers what they want.

Why is it bad to offer some adult people material for their campaigns? How does it hurt your game? My game is not hurt by any other game, even if that game was just a racist slaughterfest where sick minds live out their genocide dreams.

Edit: Oh, yeah, I hate DL with a passion, mainly due to kenders and tinker gnomes. Tracy and Margareth have much to answer for for giving birth to those abominations, imho the very essence of puerile behaviour.


----------



## herald (Apr 30, 2003)

You know what bothers me. 

He broke the OGL. Thats it really. That's the only thing that bothers me. 

No lets say that he pushed out the book under the OGL guidelines and omitted the information about being compatable with Dungeon's and Dragons. 

Would he be taking as much flack right now if he had done such a thing? I really don't think so.

I aslo tend to think that it hurts the overall OGL/D20 system thing because he is getting away with something that others have been slapped down for. 

FFG (love or hate Jim Ward) had to destroy some of it products for being in violation of the D20 STL for including things like "Drawmij" in its works. Ironic considering that "Drawmij" is an old character of Jim's and it's his name spelled backwards. 

So, the irony is that to be fair, WOTC will have to slap down Anthony on his violation and in return Valar more than likely will put something else into print saying thier sorry. Which ofcourse will mean that they will get more publicity. 

I'm not sure how I feel about this. I feel that Anthony has a right to this book, but, he went about this all wrong. He could have avoided this stir up by just following the rules and put out the book. 

I'm not worried about ministers or rabid politics, I am worried about the makers of games, and the new makers of game who now see that the playing field is unlevel and that company insiders have things to thier advantage for thier side business. 

Reguardless, this is IMHO, and there are plenty of things that once brought to light, might change my mind.


----------



## rounser (Apr 30, 2003)

> Rounser, can you tell me why D&D should cater only to PG-13 audiences? Most studios offer movies for different audiences. TV stations cater to different age categories with different programs. I fail to see why D&D should cater only to PG-13 gamers, and not offer other gamers what they want.



I think in the long run it'll do D&D as a whole lot more of a disservice than it's worth.  You want rules for elf bondage in a book?  You really need that, or is it the "principle" of the thing?  

Besides, I accept the argument that it's a "look at me" troll stunt for the media.  Funny how it coincides with the release of 3.5, eh?


> Why is it bad to offer some adult people material for their campaigns? How does it hurt your game?



It damages how people perceive the game, which is part of the source of D&D's enjoyment - it's atmosphere.  Already we've seen stuff that you have to dodge if you don't want those associations with what's supposed to be escapism, and I'd rather a lid be put on it.  So, I'll call it as I see it - stupid theme that will do more harm to the game community than good - and leave you to go buy the dang thing.


> My game is not hurt by any other game, even if that game was just a racist slaughterfest where sick minds live out their genocide dreams.



Like it or not, violence and sex are apples and oranges, and the combination of them is another ball game again.  That's why playing Quake is socially acceptable in mixed company, but viewing porn on your computer isn't.  You can make "how wrong it is that murder isn't censored, but sex is" comparisons until the cows come home, but that's not the way the real world works.  The real world isn't morally theoretical, it's social.


----------



## Ghostwind (Apr 30, 2003)

herald said:
			
		

> *You know what bothers me.
> 
> He broke the OGL. Thats it really. That's the only thing that bothers me. *




No, he didn't. There is nothing in the OGL that governs press releases. It only applies directly to the product itself. Until now, no third party publisher has used that loophole out of courtesy, but that could very well change now that someone else has gone and done it.


----------



## Belen (Apr 30, 2003)

*AV/ WOTC in bed together (Mature company) and the BoEF!*

Ok all,

For those of us involved in the "What constitutes mature material" threads a few weeks ago, we heard Anthony Valterra (AV) ask us how we'd respond to a mature- content company connected to WOTC, but separate enough for them to have plausible deniability.

I do not care what WOTC says in any statement.  They ARE connected to this book.  Could someone who can search find AV's earlier comments?  The press release was designed to raise our hackles and get us familiar with this product.  After hearing Monte's true intent for the BoVD, I know that WOTC is playing our emotions again.  Not only are they behind this book, but the lack of their response from AV or any other WOTC employee shows that they are duplicitous in this "3rd party press release."  Let's not fool ourselves into thinking that WOTC is not behind the BOEF.

It now seems that AV was trawling the boards to get a pre-reaction to the announcement of the Book of Eroctic Fantasy (BoEF).  Judging by the poor reponse to his earlier vague requests, I'll bet he had no clue the type of reaction he would garner.

At the time he posted his questions, I asked him what his definition of "maturity" would be.  Puerile gross out or giggly sex do not a mature theme make.  It seems that he has made my worst fears come true.  His definition of maturity will make an 8th grader giggle, but will do little for those of us who'd like a truly mature book of game content.

How is it that blood and gore and erotica are mature?  Yes, it carries a mature label because kids shouldn't see it, but that is all.  

Love and romance; Overcoming disability; True friendship; and responsibility are mature themes.  Discussing elven nether-regions is not maturity, nor should we be subjected to it.  Frankly, it's disturbing.  Maturity should come from the GM and the players, not some publisher who never grew out of their middle school giggle phase.

Why can't we get a book that discussing mature gaming environments?  WHY DO WE NEED PUERILE CRUNCH!?

Dave


----------



## Fenes 2 (Apr 30, 2003)

rounser said:
			
		

> *
> I think in the long run it'll do D&D as a whole lot more of a disservice than it's worth.  You want rules for elf bondage in a book?  You really need that, or is it the "principle" of the thing?  *




I get a tad miffed if people try to prevent me from making a choice what I need or do not need in a game. I don't tell people "You don't need rules for mass warfare, just make it up." or try to convince others that roleplaying does not need rules for social skills since you can just play it out (incidentally, I am not of that opinion).



			
				rounser said:
			
		

> * Besides, I accept the argument that it's a "look at me" troll stunt for the media.  Funny how it coincides with the release of 3.5, eh?
> *




Might be something to it, but then why should I care about it?



			
				rounser said:
			
		

> * It damages how people perceive the game, which is part of the source of D&D's enjoyment - it's atmosphere.  Already we've seen stuff that you have to dodge if you don't want those associations with what's supposed to be escapism, and I'd rather a lid be put on it.  So, I'll call it as I see it - stupid theme that will do more harm to the game community than good - and leave you to go buy the dang thing.
> *




This I find ridiculous. If I cared about what others think of D&D I would have quit long ago, my own sister thinks it is puerile and stupid. Do you want your game to be associated with a "kill monster and take their stuff"-kiddie game? I don't care about ignorant opinions, I don't laugh at other hobbies either no matter how impossible it is for me to understand how anyone could enjoy it.



			
				rounser said:
			
		

> *Like it or not, violence and sex are apples and oranges, and the combination of them is another ball game again.  That's why playing Quake is socially acceptable in mixed company, but viewing porn on your computer isn't.  You can make "how wrong it is that murder isn't censored, but sex is" comparisons until the cows come home, but that's not the way the real world works.  The real world isn't morally theoretical, it's social. *




Your real world must work different than mine, but then I live in good old Europe, where sex is not as much censored as in the USA.

Again, why should I not be allowed to buy such a book for my campaign? Why should I care about the feelings of any person unable to cope with the fact that in the real world people have different tastets, different morals, and different takes on right and wrong? Why should I change my favourite game just so that others can feel clean when playing their PG-13 game?


----------



## JacktheRabbit (Apr 30, 2003)

Trolling?

By most people's opinion your post is more trolling than any AV posts here on ENWorld would be considered.


Beyond that your post is little more than an X-Files conspiracey invades WOTC. Are you next going to suggest we shall see erotic crop circles near the WOTC corporate office?


----------



## Tiefling (Apr 30, 2003)

rounser said:
			
		

> *I think in the long run it'll do D&D as a whole lot more of a disservice than it's worth.  You want rules for elf bondage in a book?  You really need that, or is it the "principle" of the thing?  *




It's been said before and I'm going to say it ONCE more: If you've seen and read the book, how 'bout giving us a real preview?



> *It damages how people perceive the game...*




Prove it.


----------



## herald (Apr 30, 2003)

Ghostwind said:
			
		

> *
> 
> No, he didn't. There is nothing in the OGL that governs press releases. It only applies directly to the product itself. Until now, no third party publisher has used that loophole out of courtesy, but that could very well change now that someone else has gone and done it. *




Ah, I admit this could very well be a hole in my understanding. I would have thought that "press release" would be considered a form of advertisement. But one second consideration, I could see how it would not. 

I still feel that Anthony kinda got away with something there, although it's sort of academic. I'm not saying anthing about his character, at worst on my issue with what he's done, he's strayed into a grey area. As far as his content, the "proof of the pudding is in the eating." I'll judge when it comes out. 

I'm however reassesing about how bad he has marred the whole OGL/D20 community. It might not be as bad as I thought. I'll wait and see on that as well.


----------



## Belen (Apr 30, 2003)

AV publically asked us if we'd like to see a mature content company linked to WOTC.  Why is it that people have a need to call someone a troll instead of actually discussing a topic?

Trolling the boards means exactly that.  Trolling for information just like people troll the ocean for fish.  (maybe I spelled it wrong, but the meaning is the same.)

In any event, AV did ask that question, so I'd love for someone to find his post from that thread!

Dave


----------



## WayneLigon (Apr 30, 2003)

DocMoriartty said:
			
		

> *... Are you next going to suggest we shall see erotic crop circles near the WOTC corporate office? *




*Steals idea for d20 Modern*

Alien.. _that_ would explain some of the bizarre _shapes_ , and... 

Not landing markers. Not 'here is food' signs.

Just alien porn spam.


----------



## herald (Apr 30, 2003)

We don't need "Purile Crunch".

We don't *need* anything when it comes to D&D.

D&D isn't a *need* it's a want.

Just because you don't need AV's book doesn't mean that someone else doesn't want it.

This is a small print publication. A year from now and you will forget it.

"Debbie does Dallas" didn't ruin the Dallas Cowboys. This book will not ruin D&D or WOTC.


----------



## Tsyr (Apr 30, 2003)

BelenUmeria said:
			
		

> *Trolling the boards means exactly that.  Trolling for information just like people troll the ocean for fish.  (maybe I spelled it wrong, but the meaning is the same.)*




No, actualy, it isn't, and they aren't, respectivly. Trolling has a very specific meaning and connotation. The meaning is not the same. I think the word(s) you are looking for might be "Poll" "Survey" "Ask" or "Questioned"...


----------



## JacktheRabbit (Apr 30, 2003)

Tsyr said:
			
		

> *
> 
> No, actualy, it isn't, and they aren't, respectivly. Trolling has a very specific meaning and connotation. The meaning is not the same. I think the word(s) you are looking for might be "Poll" "Survey" "Ask" or "Questioned"... *





Naw, his post is definately negative. Since none of those words you suggested have a negative connotation they won't work for him.


----------



## Mark (Apr 30, 2003)

Trawling, I believe, is what was meant...


----------



## cyferwolf (Apr 30, 2003)

bit of a rant here but,

look I dont mind mature content in games. i dont mind ravaging and terrorism and murder of younguns happening in a  game world becuase a lot worse happens in our current world. but i dont need mechanics for it, and i dont really want them, cause im not entirely comfortable with somebody who wants to do that as a pc.

similarly, i dont mind sex in my games. if some one says they wanna go have a rampant night, have a nice time and if necessary roll a percentile to see if somebody got pregnant. but i dont need mechanics for it, and i kinda wonder that anyone who wants them is taking the escape into fantasy a little too seriously. 

my beleifs aside though, i'm pretty sure this is a bad thing for dnd as a hobby. despiute all my good feelings towards the media, as soon as this comes out the fundies are gonna have a field day on the morning and afternoon talk shows w/ this. and despite my normal atitude of caring less about what the world thinks of me, I'd really rather not have dnd labeled as the hobby of perverts. 

anyway its just my two cents.

slightly edited to keep family friendly


----------



## alsih2o (Apr 30, 2003)

in fishing, trolling is done with a line, and trawling is done with a net. ymmv


----------



## Davelozzi (Apr 30, 2003)

*Re: AV/ WOTC in bed together (Mature company) and the BoEF!*



			
				BelenUmeria said:
			
		

> *After hearing Monte's true intent for the BoVD, I know that WOTC is playing our emotions again.  *




What was Monte's true intent for the BoVD?


----------



## Tiefling (Apr 30, 2003)

cyferwolf said:
			
		

> *my beleifs aside though, i'm pretty sure this is a bad thing for dnd as a hobby. despiute all my good feelings towards the media, as soon as this comes out the fundies are gonna have a field day on the morning and afternoon talk shows w/ this. and despite my normal atitude of caring less about what the world thinks of me, I'd really rather not have dnd labeled as the hobby of perverts.*




Didn't happen with the BoVD, or Nymphology, or any other such book. Why should it happen now?


----------



## Zappo (Apr 30, 2003)

So, this book will damage D&D's image with the masses?

...like the BoVD did?


----------



## Mark (Apr 30, 2003)

alsih2o said:
			
		

> *in fishing, trolling is done with a line, and trawling is done with a net. ymmv  *




Do you think he was using a line or a net? 

I'd guess it is best to use Trawl in this situation since Troll has a colloquial meaning on message boards counter-productive to the original supposition...as we have seen...


----------



## Belen (Apr 30, 2003)

I would not consider it negative.  I would prefer to see a discussion on the topic.  Maybe some people want to disillusion themselves to the truth, but I see this as a ploy to play on our emotions. 

Monte even said that WOTC marketed the BoVD as completely different than he intended.  We have seen how they treat their customers in regards to quality (seen any typos lately?). Why wouldn't they trick us in this manner as well.

heck, it recently came out that a lot of companies such as AOL own huge stock in the pron industry through 3rd party deals, so why would WOTC be different.

When AV asks if we want a "mature" WOTC label and then a few weeks later we have Valar, then what should we think?

In any event, I will not, and do not consider the BoEF to be "mature."  Any GM in their right mind can create a story that will suit the maturity needs of her game.  As I have said in the past gore and erotica are not mature, just child sensitive.

Dave


----------



## Belen (Apr 30, 2003)

Monte said that he was creating a Book of evil NPC options, not a book for mature gaming.  

He said that WOTC marketed the BoVD as a mature book with lots of Vile content, but that he had never intended to write it in that manner.


----------



## Umbran (Apr 30, 2003)

*Re: AV/ WOTC in bed together (Mature company) and the BoEF!*



			
				BelenUmeria said:
			
		

> *It seems that he has made my worst fears come true.  His definition of maturity will make an 8th grader giggle, but will do little for those of us who'd like a truly mature book of game content. *




Others are handling the troll factor, so I'll use this as a nudge...

Consider, for a moment, that the book isn't out yet.  You haven't seen it.  You don't know what the content is, or how it is handled.  Do you also judge movies before you've seen so much as a trailer for them?  Novels before you so much as read the blurb on the back cover?

So stop making assumptions before you see the thing!  Everybody, please.  Make up your mind once you've got the thing in your hands, and not before.  Anything less is simply not fair to Mr. Valterra, the product, yourself, or the people on these boards.

If it winds up being a pile of purile drek, then feel free to rip into it.  But don't go critiquing the thing sight unseen.  It's stupid.  

[/rant]


----------



## Aaron2 (Apr 30, 2003)

BelenUmeria said:
			
		

> *Monte said that he was creating a Book of evil NPC options, not a book for mature gaming.
> 
> He said that WOTC marketed the BoVD as a mature book with lots of Vile content, but that he had never intended to write it in that manner. *




Then why was it called a Book of -Vile- Darkness if he never intented to write a book with Vile content?

Aaron


----------



## rounser (Apr 30, 2003)

> I get a tad miffed if people try to prevent me from making a choice what I need or do not need in a game. I don't tell people "You don't need rules for mass warfare, just make it up." or try to convince others that roleplaying does not need rules for social skills since you can just play it out (incidentally, I am not of that opinion).



Mass combat and rules for social skills aren't comparable to rules associated with themes of elves in bondage, but that's just my opinion.


> Might be something to it, but then why should I care about it?



I don't know.  You seem pretty worked up about the principle of the thing, so it should matter to you.


> This I find ridiculous. If I cared about what others think of D&D I would have quit long ago, my own sister thinks it is puerile and stupid. Do you want your game to be associated with a "kill monster and take their stuff"-kiddie game? I don't care about ignorant opinions, I don't laugh at other hobbies either no matter how impossible it is for me to understand how anyone could enjoy it.



I was talking about the players as well, including in particular myself.  I don't want the D&D I love associated with this stuff in my mind, I don't want to dodge products and conversations, and yeah, personally I care about that more than I care about your right to buy RPG porno.  That's why I'm saying I'd rather the product didn't exist.


> Your real world must work different than mine, but then I live in good old Europe, where sex is not as much censored as in the USA.



I don't live in the USA, and you're doing no favours for the reputation of good old Europe by displaying such bigotry.


> Again, why should I not be allowed to buy such a book for my campaign?



Again, we're back to principles.  Get it through your head - I'd prefer your preferences were ignored and the book didn't exist.  My preferences don't amount to censorship though - I can say it's probably bad for the game, bad for what I associate with the game, and I have.


> Why should I care about the feelings of any person unable to cope with the fact that in the real world people have different tastets, different morals, and different takes on right and wrong? Why should I change my favourite game just so that others can feel clean when playing their PG-13 game?



I'm not saying you should give a toss about what I think.  My opinion isn't about you, it's about what I think of what the book offers D&D, and how responsible I think it's creation is.


> It's been said before and I'm going to say it ONCE more: If you've seen and read the book, how 'bout giving us a real preview?



Don't be facetious.  Go re-read the stuff about objecting to themes before you've seen the content.


> Prove it.



Gladly.  It has the potential to change how _I_ perceive the game, for instance.  I'm not saying you should care, but you asked for it.  And if you're going to make a pithy comeback to that answer after asking for it, you can go jump.


----------



## herald (Apr 30, 2003)

Aaron2 said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Then why was it called a Book of -Vile- Darkness if he never intented to write a book with Vile content?
> 
> Aaron *




Because:

1) There is a magic book in the DMG (From 1e to 3e) called the "Book of Vile Darkness" so he would have the tie in for his product. 

2) As stated before, he wanted to have a list of options for evil characters. (Spells, feats, powers, ect.)


----------



## Piratecat (Apr 30, 2003)

Aaron2 said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Then why was it called a Book of -Vile- Darkness if he never intented to write a book with Vile content?
> *




Because it's the name of a magic item.

Reminder:  Please remember not to sink to personal attacks or hostility, folks.  Thanks!


----------



## Belen (Apr 30, 2003)

We all know that very little "Vile" content exists in the BoVD.  I think this supports Monte's take on how WOTC treated that book.

As for commenting before I see the book, if I find the concept to be disturbing, then I feel that I have the right to speak up before that content can be published.  I have a definite problem with how they worded the press release and the lack of response from AV and WOTC people (ie. not faceless company) about this book.

I have looked at the content attached with the release and my reaction stems from actually taking my time to evaluate that content before posting my thoughts on the matter.  They included the material as an example of how the book will appear, so I think we do have some justification for our arguments.

Dave


----------



## Larry Fitz (Apr 30, 2003)

I'm upset that no one has given due consideration to what this book may do to the general perception of BDSM fetishists. After all having a photographer known for that kind of work, and given Anthony's specifc reference to his founding of a group for BDSM as a qualification for writing it, many honest, decent, hardworking fetishists are now going to be associated with the "Gamer" label, and not in the way they would like. Ordinary normal sadists will have to add lines to their personal ads

"SWM dom ISO sub NODND plz"

Of course it could open new avenues for them, they could specify elfin features. Sales of chainmail bikinis could go up, boosting our sluggish economy.  Maybe a follow up book featuring orcs and goblins...


"Ok there Betsy, hold the pie out a little more, oh yeah, that's it..." <CLICK>
"Now give them a ferocious look, they want your pie Betsy, but you're an orc and you're not letting them have it without a fight <CLICK> that's good, now growl for me<CLICK>..."

The saddest commentary is that the controversy over this will be limited to a small subset of people in our own hobby, despite the attempt to manipulate the mass media, it won't really happen, and instead of that leading to a cessation of attempts at sensationalizing our hobby, it will promote worse pandering to the lowest common denominator. 

Do the people who are so vehemently defending this book without seeing it first have any line they will draw? Is there not a subject for a gaming book that revolts you for reasons other than "There are too many of those already?" And for the people condeming the book for its subject matter, is it not possible to present certain subject matter (like sexuality in fantasy games) in a way that does not upset your sensibilities? 

For myself I find that this does violate the stricture against using WOTC trademarks in advertising. Who writes press releases? Marketing people write them. Are they meant to be "NEWS" items? Heck no, the language used is hyperbolic and the intent is to generate excitement about the new product in a biased manner. They are free advertising, if you want to use the loophole that they are not paid advertising and therefore exempt from the OGL rules, then fine. But I think WOTC sees it the same way I do, a WOTC employee tried to cash in on his association with the company while producing an independent book, that explains the press release distancing themselves so adamantly from the product. Maybe "Edmonton Boy" is right, maybe this is a conspiracy to generate controversy and sell more books, this one and several others. Maybe WOTC is playing us all like fiddles. Personally I doubt that, I think they will be in the strange position of having to actually fire AV in order to prove that they are serious about their disclaimer regarding this project.


----------



## Larry Fitz (Apr 30, 2003)

_edit: double post_


----------



## Fenes 2 (Apr 30, 2003)

rounser said:
			
		

> * Mass combat and rules for social skills aren't comparable to rules for elf bondage, but that's just my opinion. *




We have a need for neither, some people want either or both though. 



			
				rounser said:
			
		

> *I don't know.  You seem pretty worked up about the principle of the thing, so it should matter to you. *




I don't care about whether or not it is a publicity stunt - I do enjoy a discussion though.



			
				rounser said:
			
		

> *I was talking about the players as well, including in particular myself.  I don't want the D&D I love associated with this stuff in my mind, I don't want to dodge products and conversations, and yeah, personally I care about that more than I care about your right to buy RPG porno.  That's why I'm saying I'd rather the product didn't exist. *




Well, I don't want the D&D I love associated with hack&slashers, with people who play asexual characters or with people who play it like a tactical wargame in my mind. 

Guess what? Despite the fact that I know that a whole load of people plays it like one or the other way I described it the D&D I love is not associated in my mind with them. The D&D I love is played by me with a group of friends, and what others play does not affect it. 

Personally, if you can't stand the thought of me enjoying a more adult D&D than you do then I think you should change your way of thinking and feeling.



			
				rounser said:
			
		

> *Again, we're back to principles.  Get it through your head - I'd prefer your preferences were ignored and the book didn't exist.  My preferences don't amount to censorship though - I can say it's probably bad for the game, bad for what I associate with the game, and I will. *




I am not talking about censorship - I am talking about intolerance concerning a matter that does not impact on you in the slightest if only you could stop caring and thinking about how others play their game and what kind of material they buy and talk about.



			
				rounser said:
			
		

> *I'm not saying you should give a toss about what I think.  My opinion isn't about you, it's about what I think of what the book offers D&D, and how responsible I think it's creation is. *




Ever think how responsible it is to sprout the "for my peace of mind I'd rather you stop doing that stuff in your private homes" speech? Not only for D&D, but for society as a whole?

Edit: Cut some too personal remarks.


----------



## herald (Apr 30, 2003)

BelenUmeria said:
			
		

> *We all know that very little "Vile" content exists in the BoVD.  I think this supports Monte's take on how WOTC treated that book.
> 
> As for commenting before I see the book, if I find the concept to be disturbing, then I feel that I have the right to speak up before that content can be published.  I have a definite problem with how they worded the press release and the lack of response from AV and WOTC people (ie. not faceless company) about this book.
> 
> ...




You may feel that you have a right to speak about it. But that's as far as I would go. 

I don't feel that you have a right to convice others that it souldn't be printed. It's a privated business decission, and not a public work. 

You can act on convicing people not to buy the book after it's published. Everyone is entitled to thier opinions on a finished. That's what reviews are for. But given the limited information you have, it's not enough to draw a conclusion. 

You could make the arguement that you don't like the art you've seen. As a matter of fact I'll make that statement now.

I don't like the art that was presented for the project Valar has presented do far. It wasn't pleasing to my eye. I didn't find it titlating, but nor did I find it astheticly pleasing. 

I find the picture of the woman depicted as an elf very unnatural, and distorted. Granted, they wanted her to have a more slender appearance, but it seems like a Vargas trick done in reverse. Her head is enlarged to the rest of her body and making me mentally ask; "How on earth does her torso support that big mellon head of her's?"


----------



## rounser (Apr 30, 2003)

> Well, I don't want the D&D I love associated with hack&slashers, with people who play asexual characters or with people who play it like a tactical wargame in my mind.



Stiff biccies - those things have always been part of the game.


> uess what? Despite the fact that I know that a whole load of people plays it like one or the other way I described it the D&D I love is not associated in my mind with them. The D&D I love is played by me with a group of friends, and what others play does not affect it.



That's like comparing ignoring someone who annoys you with a high-pitched voice to someone who's engaging in BDSM in the corner.  Maybe you find hack & slashers as disturbing to your associations with the game (or moreso) than some others do with bondage (this book) and mass rape and perpetual dissection (Porphyry House Horror), but I doubt it.


> Personally, if you can't stand the thought of me enjoying a more adult D&D than you do then I think you should change your way of thinking and feeling.



I don't give a toss about your game or what you enjoy; it's the expansion of D&D's scope into territory I don't like which I'd rather didn't happen.  Your "rights" have nothing to do with my opinion.


> It is rather intolerant, and it sets a bad precedent for other, more important issues like freedom of speech, freedom of religion and similar rights. It is a long way to the "I don't want to get my neighborhood associated with those deviants, lets do something about it"-attitude, but it is the first step on that road.



You're not paying attention.  I'm not censoring you, I'm just stating my preference.  If that makes you want to turn thought police on me, you're the one with the problem here.


> I am not talking about censorship - I am talking about intolerance concerning a matter that does not impact on you in the slightest but for your admitted inability to stop caring and thinking about how others play their game and what kind of material they buy and talk about.



Why should you care that I'm "intolerant"?  I have an opinion that you want to prevent - you're the intolerant one here, pal.  And yeah, I think it does impact on D&D as a whole, and I do care about that game and what I associate with it.


> Ever think how responsible it is to sprout the "for my peace of mind I'd rather you stop doing that stuff in your private homes" speech? Not only for D&D, but for society as a whole?



You can do whatever you want in your private home, I don't care.  I'm saying that the themes of the product in my opinion sound irresponsible, parasitic and likely will do no good for D&D as a whole.  For individuals such as yourself, well, you can buy multiple copies, but that's not likely to change my opinion of what the book represents for D&D, and whether I wish it were published or not.

EDITED...


----------



## Dr. Harry (Apr 30, 2003)

Bendris Noulg said:
			
		

> *Absolutely agreed!
> 
> Indeed, these threads are starting to disturb me...  It's akin to saying, "it's okay to play D&D so long as it's suitable to be part of the WGN Power Pack.  Inspiration will not be obtained from Heavy Metal, Conan, Gor, Silverglass, or any other unacceptable source, be it fantasy or not, regardless of whether it's what got you into D&D or not."
> 
> Really, folks, Erotic Fantasy has been part of the Sword & Sorcery genre for a long time.  Heck, even Dracula was risque for its time.  I'm more shocked by the lack of acceptance for this aspect of fantasy than I am that the book is in production. *




  To recognize that this exists is one thing.  To hold that an individual has the freedom to engage in activity than a respondant finds repellent or reprehensible is an additional and separate item.  I - and *all* of the posts I have read that treat what we can reason about the product and its topic negatively - am willing to go this far.  In an abstract sense, I can be glad that the laws allowing the publication of this material exist because of other material that this protection extends to, or just on general principles.

   To hold that this means that I must endorse this material or else be labelled as some sort of book-burning reactionary is ludicrous.  I am actually quite relieved, myself, at the reaction that this announcement and the chosen photographer have garnered.

   To say that something should be allowed to exist is not to say that it is good, or even merely not-bad, and to say that something is bad does not imfringe on anyone else's freedom in any way.  To say that something shouldn't be is not to say that it shouldn't be allowed to exist.

   Personally, I find everything that has been revealed about this project repellent, that I won't buy it, and that I'll stop shopping in stores that choose to carry it - and that is my use of the same freedoms someone printing or eagerly awaiting this book has.


----------



## rounser (Apr 30, 2003)

> To say that something should be allowed to exist is not to say that it is good, or even merely not-bad, and to say that something is bad does not imfringe on anyone else's freedom in any way. To say that something shouldn't be is not to say that it shouldn't be allowed to exist.



Thank you for summarising so eloquently, Dr Harry.  The amount of outrageously overdramatic rhetoric about rights and censorship and intolerance being thrown around needed to be kicked in the head by just this sort of observation.


----------



## Balsamic Dragon (Apr 30, 2003)

Larry Fitz said:
			
		

> *
> 
> "Ok there Betsy, hold the pie out a little more, oh yeah, that's it..." <CLICK>
> "Now give them a ferocious look, they want your pie Betsy, but you're an orc and you're not letting them have it without a fight <CLICK> that's good, now growl for me<CLICK>..."
> ...




Bwahhahahahahaha!
ROTF!

Seriously, the more I think about this, the more I see a comparison with Xxxenophile, which didn't seem to harm Magic or corrupt Magic players.  You can have sex games, I just prefer mine to be female gamer friendly  

Balsamic Dragon


----------



## Piratecat (Apr 30, 2003)

rounser said:
			
		

> * Oh get a perspective, get a grip, and drop the thought police routine.... For individuals such as yourself, well, you can buy multiple copies, masturbate over them even, but that's not likely to change my opinion of what the book represents for D&D, and whether I wish it were published or not. *




Rounser, does Eric's grandma want to read this? I'm thinking not. Not only that, I *just* reminded people not to indulge in insults or personal attacks. Did you somehow miss that post - along with the age-old rule on these boards? And yes, this is an insult, and it would have been fairly easy to rephrase it.

Look, I know that this is a topic that people feel strongly about, but you need to actually consider what is appropriate here before clicking "Submit."  Moderators shouldn't need to babysit this thread.

Thanks to everyone who HAVE been self-editing. It's extremely appreciated.


----------



## Fenes 2 (Apr 30, 2003)

rounser said:
			
		

> *
> Stiff biccies - those things have always been part of the game.*




So what? People grow up, people change, no reason a game cannot change as well.



			
				rounser said:
			
		

> *That's like comparing ignoring someone who annoys you with a high-pitched voice to someone who's engaging in BDSM in the corner.  Maybe you find hack & slashers as disturbing to your associations with the game (or moreso) than bondage (this book) and rape (Porphyry House Horror), but I doubt it.*




No, that is like ignoring what happens in your neighbors house - something that is no business of yours anyway as long as no law is broken. Stop trying to pretend that the people who buy such a book will force the content on you by playing at the next corner. They can be even more easily ignored than the the guy with a high-pitched annoying voice.



			
				rounser said:
			
		

> *I don't give a toss about your game or what you enjoy; it's the expansion of D&D's scope into territory I don't like which I'd rather didn't happen.  Your "rights" have nothing to do with my opinion.*




And again, what matters if people expand the scope of D&D? Even WotC said it is about options, not restrictions. Or do you want to ban evil PCs as well?



			
				rounser said:
			
		

> *You're not paying attention.  I'm not censoring you, I'm just stating my preference.  If that makes you want to turn thought police on me, you're the one with the problem here.*




LOL. I stated already that I have no problem with people playing a different game than I do - I do have a problem with people who, for no reason at all, want to prevent me from buying material I could use in my game (or not... most of the material from any sorcebook I bought, WotC or d20, did not get used in my campaigns). Me, I state that my preference when I say that I will not buy a book, or use a rule - I don't state a preference by wishing no one would buy that book, or use said rule. I don't want to stop anyone from enjoying their game, or buying stuff they like (as long as it is legal) - but you apparently do.



			
				rounser said:
			
		

> *Why should you care that I'm "intolerant"?  I have an opinion that you want to prevent - you're the intolerant one here, pal.  And yeah, I think it does impact on D&D as a whole, and I do care about that game and what I associate with it.*




I don't want to prevent you from having an opinion - I am giving you the counsel to stop worrying about what other people play in the privacy of their homes.



			
				rounser said:
			
		

> *Oh get a perspective, get a grip, and drop the thought police routine.  You can do whatever you want in your private home, I don't give a stuff.  I'm saying that the product is in my opinion irresponsible, parasitic and will do no good for D&D as a whole.  For individuals such as yourself, well, you can buy multiple copies, masturbate over them even, but that's not likely to change my opinion of what the book represents for D&D, and whether I wish it were published or not. *




But you give a stuff about me buying whatever I like to play in the privacy of my home. 

No further questions, your honor.


----------



## herald (Apr 30, 2003)

rounser said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Why should you care that I'm "intolerant"?  I have an opinion that you want to prevent - you're the intolerant one here, pal.  And yeah, I think it does impact on D&D as a whole, and I do care about that game and what I associate with it.
> 
> *




But you are being intolerant. And no Fenes 2 is not being intolerant of you. If he was he would be right next to you forcing you to read and see everything in the book that hasn't been printed yet. 

It is illogical to try and defend your self that doesn't exist yet. 

This isn't like a hurricane, or a tornado, or defending yourself from a criminal attack. What we are talking about a book of ideas. Your using the same arguements that people bring up against "Catcher in the Rye", or "Slaughterhouse Five". 

I've said it one and I'll say it again. "Debbie does Dallas" didn't ruin the Dallas Cowbows. Even though she showed up in one of the chearleaders costumes in the movie. People are smart enough to see that. 

I still go to Disney World even though I know that there is a "Gay Day" event held there. (Note: I could care less what someones prefereance is.) I know that Disney doesn't endorse it, but it happens. I also know that Disney owns ABC TV and I'm often surprised how jokes get by on the "Drew Carry Show". But no one trys and stops them from creating thier shows.

At best this is a mile post for the RPG market. Not an end of the road sign.


----------



## Tiefling (Apr 30, 2003)

rounser said:
			
		

> *Don't be facetious.  Go re-read the stuff about objecting to themes before you've seen the content.*




Wrong. You objected to elf bondage, you even objected to it in this very post. That has nothing to do with theme and everything to do with content. Has Valterra stated that there will be elf bondage?



> *Gladly.  It has the potential to change how I perceive the game, for instance.  I'm not saying you should care, but you asked for it.  And if you're going to make a pithy comeback to that answer after asking for it, you can go jump. *




Don't switch the context. We've been talking about the public perception of the game. You know it and I know it, and I didn't think I had to specify that in my response. But I will now. Prove that this will significantly damage the public perception of the game in the way that all the BoVD-doomsayers falsely predicted it would, and will result in a lower influx of players.


----------



## rounser (Apr 30, 2003)

> So what? People grow up, people change, no reason a game cannot change as well.



That's true.  I'm allowed to say I'd rather it didn't change in that way though.


> No, that is like ignoring what happens in your neighbors house - something that is no business of yours anyway as long as no law is broken. Stop trying to pretend that the people who buy such a book will force the content on you by playing at the next corner. They can be even more easily ignored than the the guy with a high-pitched annoying voice.



Stop making analogies that don't apply.  My opinion that this book's themes will damage D&D has nothing to do with prying into anyone's business whatsoever.  The content isn't forced on me, but it'll enter and affect the game of D&D anyway, and I'd rather that didn't happen to D&D.


> And again, what matters if people expand the scope of D&D? Even WotC said it is about options, not restrictions.



Like most simplistic rules or assumptions, I think it breaks down if you extend it too far.  Take the "crunch good, fluff bad" that they also use as a rule of thumb.  Extended to it's logical conclusion, I also think that publication purely in this vein damages D&D, but you don't see people comparing that opinion to prying into the business of neighbors, do you?


> Or do you want to ban evil PCs as well?



No.  You'll have to do better than that.


> LOL. I stated already that I have no problem with people playing a different game than I do - I do have a problem with people who, for no reason at all, want to prevent me from buying material I could use in my game (or not... most of the material from any sorcebook I bought, WotC or d20, did not get used in my campaigns).



Again, I don't care about you or what you buy.  How I think it will affect the game, and whether I'd rather it were published or not is unrelated to that.


> Me, I state that my preference when I say that I will not buy a book, or use a rule - I don't state a preference by wishing no one would buy that book, or use said rule. I don't want to stop anyone from enjoying their game, or buying stuff they like (as long as it is legal) - but you apparently do.



Your enjoyment has nothing to do with my opinion that this sort of theme will change D&D in a way I don't like.


> I don't want to prevent you from having an opinion - I am giving you the counsel to stop worrying about what other people play in the privacy of their homes.



Here, I can cut and paste.  Stop making analogies that don't apply.  My opinion that this book's themes will damage D&D has nothing to do with prying into anyone's business whatsoever.  The content isn't forced on me, but it'll enter and affect the game of D&D anyway, and I'd rather that didn't happen to D&D.


> But you give a stuff about me buying whatever I like to play in the privacy of my home.



No I don't.  I keep repeating it, and you keep ignoring it.  I'm of the opinion that D&D would be better off without the book, whereas you're of the opinion that you'd like to enjoy it.  That's fine - there's no conflict here, see?


> No further questions, your honor.



Your arrogance even exceeds your inability to listen.  Case dismissed.


----------



## Belen (Apr 30, 2003)

It's not about what people play in the privacy of their homes.  It's not even about your right to buy and purchase such material.

The argument here is the blatant connection to WOTC, especially the Dungeons and Dragons brand label that should cause all our hackles to rise.  

Let's give an example:  This weekend, I plan to propose to the woman I love.  And while she games now, when I first met her, she did not and had a VERY negative view of the hobby, especially the name Dungeons and Dragons.  For me, I was lucky enough that she kept an open mind.  However, I can guarantee you that had the BoEF existed when I met her, then I never would have gotten to the point where I could propose to her.  

People may rant and rave about mainstreaming DnD, but that argument is completely bunk.  By providing a somewhat less arcane image, we are gaining new players, especially women to the game.  I think this is a GOOD thing.  It brings fresh, innovative ideas to the table.

If you want a BoEF, then fine.  Make it on your own and add it to your game as long as you know that your players can deal with it.  That's why we're in a creative hobby.  We do not need a standarized set of rules for sexual encounters.

We do not need a bondage image for the game because that's not what we're about.

It's a game to test imagination, teamework, and friendship.  I mean, can you really tell me that whips and chains will make a meaningful encounter!?

As a GM, do you want to look a male player in the face and say:

GM (Female NPC):  I put on my leather mask and spank him.
Player (looking at male GM): Oh heck no....

Dave


----------



## Piratecat (Apr 30, 2003)

This has degenerated to a few people bickering. Consider it closed.

Wait - you don't have to consider it anything. It IS closed.


----------

