(Firearms is another category entirely, and lumping them together is specious.)
+1
Just curious: For whom are you speaking when you employ the word "we"? Is that the royal "we," the "I am Legion, for we are many" "we," or the "someone's got their hand in my back as I write this" "we"?
Judging by discussions I've had with him in the past, it's "we" as in "people in my country", in his case Brazil. I'm pretty sure it's not as unified an opinion as that though, so it's a bit of an exaggeration.
|
This is exactly how we feel about violence, firearms and wars. (Edit: Except not in the bedroom, in actual battlefields)I think this thread has provided ample evidence that sexual content is usually best left to the bedroom ... the back seat ... the elevator ... the bathroom a mile high ... and every place other than the gaming table.
From "sex is just physical exercise" through "love the one you're with" to "it's sacred and to be shared only with loved/married ones," the takes are so diverse you're likely to offend, squick or even frighten someone unless there's been plenty of preparation, or you're all longtime friends and tight enough to handle such stuff with nary a blink.
I don't really see this as a US v European thing. The comment above is pretty dumb, actually. There has been a war in mainland Europe, in the Balkans, Europeans killing Europeans over a scrap of land and some dubious notions of national identity - much more recently than war has actually touched the American mainland. So drawing the comparison is both distasteful and somewhat inaccurate.
Attitudes to sex vary quite a lot too, between individuals and countries. Seeing a picture of a beautiful girl lying naked on a bed might be beautiful, and then again it might also be exploitative, pornographic and degrading, depending on lots of things about the viewer - age, sex, political views, religious views, and so on - the image and the intentions of the image-makers. I'd say, based on my experience, that Europe is actually getting a bit more puritanical, or at last more attuned to feminist notions of feminine objectification. I remember as a teenager holidaying in France that adverts for "feminine products", perfumes and the like routinely had pictures or bare bottoms, bare breasts and so on. Now, in France at least, you don't see it much at all.
Frankly, it's well and good for a bunch of guys (gamer guys, to boot, who are not exactly renowned for their skills with the opposite sex) to preach how perfectly "mature" and "normal" it is for sex to be depicted in an RPG. Some people might actually find it icky and creepy, especially in a mixed group where it could even be seen as a form of harrassment. This really is a case of personal taste. I certainly don't think people should be labelled as somehow puritanical for being made uncomfortable by this stuff. At the very least, sex has quite major emotional repercussions that really are not going to be tackled well by most groups, so it'll probably either be tacky and puerile or emo territory. Neither of which I really want to get into round the table.
|
(Firearms is another category entirely, and lumping them together is specious.)+1
Just curious: For whom are you speaking when you employ the word "we"? Is that the royal "we," the "I am Legion, for we are many" "we," or the "someone's got their hand in my back as I write this" "we"?Judging by discussions I've had with him in the past, it's "we" as in "people in my country", in his case Brazil. I'm pretty sure it's not as unified an opinion as that though, so it's a bit of an exaggeration.
Yeah, Brazil. We even had a "referendo" (i dont know the english word, its like a election, but we vote for a question) if we allow people to have firearms and people voted no. I really wanted to say that brazilian like to fight with the fists, but our war against drugs and gang violance are a lot worse than US. Anyway, regular people here would prefer to live in a world without firearms.
Well, too bad, I have found it to be something beautiful, exciting and immeasurably fun.That's my opinion on the subject, yes.sex: eww fade to black
Sex is eww?
Really?
I agree with you, but not on the gaming table. You have no idea how painful those dice and little figures can get when you forget they are there in the throws of ecstasy. Like sand on the beach, but worse.
Violence(blood, gore, viscera, terrible things done to people) The descriptive level of violence varies, depending on events, situation, and the general mood of the group. However, I have found that if my description makes my wife say, "Oh my..." I feel I have conveyed the proper level of messiness.
Sex This is glossed over or happens off screen. In all the years I have been playing, its never been a vital component to the game.
Suffering Again, its situational. If I am trying to convey the level of depravity and harshness of those who dwell in wherever my players are, then I will hold nothing back, but I don't throw it in for the sake of it. There's always a point.
Evil The villains of the piece are will always do what is necessary. That's how I define it. It's in their very nature. The means meet the end, and collateral damage is expected, and in some cases, relished by the villain.
Rape, slavery, injustice etc...
I've never used rape on the PC's and I don't plan to start anytime soon. Signs that's its happened to others will be used as part of a story, they may even walk in on it (I'd expect them to intervene, and I know that they would). Nothing beyond that.
Slavery is, unfortunately, still exists in many parts of the real world. It wouldn't be right to eliminate that from the game. It's a wrong that must be set to rights.
Injustice is a part of life. It exists on so many levels day-to-day. You encounter it everywhere in some form.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not interested in sex in my games in the least, and try to discourage any graphic descriptions thereof. Someone once asked me why and I told them, "I've had sex. I've never killed a dragon. I'd rather roll dice and pretend to do that than to roll dice to have sex with someone in my DM's head."
|
|
Frankly, it's well and good for a bunch of guys (gamer guys, to boot, who are not exactly renowned for their skills with the opposite sex) to preach how perfectly "mature" and "normal" it is for sex to be depicted in an RPG. Some people might actually find it icky and creepy, especially in a mixed group where it could even be seen as a form of harrassment. This really is a case of personal taste. I certainly don't think people should be labelled as somehow puritanical for being made uncomfortable by this stuff. At the very least, sex has quite major emotional repercussions that really are not going to be tackled well by most groups, so it'll probably either be tacky and puerile or emo territory. Neither of which I really want to get into round the table.
This is also a thing quite different around Brazil. The "nerd" stereotype has a very health sex life, we have the shy geek, but they are a bit rare and new. Communism was never hunted in Brazil, so most "nerd" types became quite pollitical into student unions and never gained shy label. So we discuss the matter a lot.
|
|
Yeah, Brazil. We even had a "referendo" (i dont know the english word, its like a election, but we vote for a question) if we allow people to have firearms and people voted no ... Anyway, regular people here would prefer to live in a world without firearms.Here it's "referendum." Same meaning.
Thanks for the clarification.
Firearms are simply a particularly efficient vehicle for the commission of uncalled for violence. Banning them is to blame a tool for being used inappropriately, which would lead to banning hammers, knives and a host of implements simply because they can be misused. Utterly illogical, and a decision based on fear, in my opinion ... and I don't even enjoy firearms.
Without wanting to go on a guns tangent...
Some tools are much more efficient than others. Sure, you can kill someone with a knife or you can kill someone with a gun. But a gun is much more efficient at killing, so while it is the perp, not the weapon, which does the killing, the perp will be much more effective with a gun. Especially an automatic one. Guns are designed to kill, whereas knives and hammers have other practical applications.
Which is why banning or restricting gun ownership is actually quite an effective way of saving lives. Not because Americans are any more or less psychopathic than other nations, but because you can kill a lot more people in a short time with a gun than with other more primitive methods. It's not the only factor influencing the murder rate, of course, but it's a factor.
In the UK we had the Dunblane massacre, where a disgruntled teacher shot dead a load of young kids (10+, plus their teacher) in a gym class at their school with a couple of semi-automatic handguns (or maybe just one - I'm sure it's there on Wikipedia). Shortly after, a maniac attacked young school kids and a teacher in the playground of their school with a machete. Deaths - none.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Let's not have this discussion here.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Guns have nothing to do with game maturity.
|
|
Firearms are simply a particularly efficient vehicle for the commission of uncalled for violence. Banning them is to blame a tool for being used inappropriately, which would lead to banning hammers, knives and a host of implements simply because they can be misused. Utterly illogical, and a decision based on fear, in my opinion ... and I don't even enjoy firearms.
Thank you too for the good dialogue.
The problem we see with firearms is that they are too efficient. We don't even like to hunt with firearms (and we live beside a major world jungle). I cant explain it, is not fun to us.
Guns are designed to kill, whereas knives and hammers have other practical applications.
Nope. On these forums they're designed to reduce HP, open locks, and move things 15 ft. without damaging them.
Let's not have this discussion here.
Seconded.
...You have no idea how painful those dice and little figures can get when you forget they are there in the throws of ecstasy...Unless you're taking us on a tangent of "sex fu," that's "throes of ecstasy," DrDeth.
Not very good Pun on "dice throws". Sorry.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Wait, what about all those saving throws you failed?" Dave the Palladin
"I was faking it," Julia the Succubus.
Maybe this marks me as culturally foreign, but I'm enjoying Bahamut's input and would hate to see him go.
EDIT: That ooc was a reply to something that's now gone... crazy messageboards!
Ah, that explains it!
Over in the has there ever been a not-bad sex rulebook thread I said "I've got no problem with a more robust social interaction system than Bluff/Diplomacy/Sense Motive rolls, but rolling for blow by blow descriptions of sexual performance has ick-factor red flags all over it." (Sure, I could have linked it, but I'm obstinate.)
That's sort of my benchmark for all "mature" content. I've got no problem with it happening in the game world, but don't want to play at a table where people spend more time describing sex/violence/whatever-their-personal-fetish-may-be than the actual in-game effects of characters actions.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The same thing i wrote on the other thread, the problem with "mature" content is not that sex scenes are missed, the problem is the consequences os a PG world.
Remember the whole Calistrian sacred prostitute affair. Imagine if Paizo done an AP about The Tudors ? How to explain Anna Bolena affair ? Everyone is too judgamental of who is and who isn't lawful good. So i keep feeling limited by what plotlines can came from Paizo. It started very well in Rise of the Runelords and the mature content is slowly degrading into D&D norms again (the exception is violence).
I don't think even if Paizo want, she could change it. Pathfinder RPG gone too mainstream, too much too risk.
We get into kinky times all the time in my game. Sometimes, we have a ten year old child in attendance and it doesn't get stressed much (but it still happens), other times we'll play chicken and keep getting more and more detailed until someone blinks.
I often call for Dexterity checks and Fortitude saves, though.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This from the guy who ran a Galtian Concentration Camp campaign where his players decide to take over the camp's black market network rather than escape? Oh, buh-rother! Isla the She-wolf will rue the day . . .
(No insult, Doodles, I'm sure it was very tastefully done.)
I would totally play in DJdD's campaigns. And love every minute of it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Calistrian Cleric:
"I realize you probably haven't had the sort of life and experiences that would allow you to understand me, even, let alone Calistria. I want you to know that I don't fault you for that."
Paladin:
*Raises an eyebrow* "Keep it up, and I'll smite that evil bottom of yours, you little minx."
Calistrian Cleric:
*giggle, wink* "Oooh, maybe you understand Calistria better than I thought..."
Paladin:
"In your dreams, wench. I only assumed your bottom was evil because it most certainly does not look GOOD!"
OMG FACED BY A PALADIN!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Mature? Our hobby isn't much different from Mr. Rogers' Land of Make-Believe. Most of us even use dolls! Congratulating ourselves on supposedly being "mature" -- regardless of whether a particular game is rated G or NC-17 -- strains credibility for me.
No insult, Doodles, I'm sure it was very tastefully done.)
Your confidence is flattering, although probably unfounded.
I would totally play in DJdD's campaigns. And love every minute of it.
[Blushes]
Most of us even use dolls!
One of my players is putting the finishing touches on a cleric of Rovagug who specializes in voodoo dolls.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They aren't dolls, they're figures! It's artistic!
it's not that we're immature just for playing RPGs, it's that the heroism I display at the table is a very low-grade sort of heroism, where the worst thing that will happen is losing a few hit points. I like to keep in mind that worse things happen to people in the real world every day, you know?
Most heroes are dead. Because they are heroes.
I tend towards a game environment where nothing is going to be censored, but with people that are responsible enough not to go throwing in gratuitous amounts of sex and violence just for the sake of it.
If it makes sense for something to happen, it should be allowed to happen. Most things should occur because it makes sense to the plot at the time, not because someone wanted to make a graphic scene for shock value - unless of course the shock value was in order to make a point about a certain character.
Sexual scenes tend to be "fade to black with just enough to imply they actually occured", as we're creating a story here and not a porn movie. It's also not exactly the most comfortable thing to discuss with anyone other than our partner for many of us :) If there's any graphic detail it's been written by one person in a diary entry-style thing or something between their PC and an NPC under their control, never between two actual players (because that can just get too weird).
Scenes of torture, extreme violence and gore are things that are brought in occasionally enough that they get a point across when they do, rather than as a routine everyday thing. When they stop having an impact because you're using them every few minutes they become kinda pointless.
|
Most heroes are dead. Because they are heroes.Whatever happened to Leon Trotsky?
This video is not available in your country... -.- i sometimes hate youtube
:(
"No More Heroes" by UK punk/new wave act, The Stranglers.
|
|
The same thing i wrote on the other thread, the problem with "mature" content is not that sex scenes are missed, the problem is the consequences os a PG world.
Remember the whole Calistrian sacred prostitute affair. Imagine if Paizo done an AP about The Tudors ? How to explain Anna Bolena affair ? Everyone is too judgamental of who is and who isn't lawful good. So i keep feeling limited by what plotlines can came from Paizo. It started very well in Rise of the Runelords and the mature content is slowly degrading into D&D norms again (the exception is violence).
I don't think even if Paizo want, she could change it. Pathfinder RPG gone too mainstream, too much too risk.
I don't have any problem with sex as a motivator for plot purposes. You could argue (selfish gene-wise) that every motivator has sex at its base. (Though the Tudor thing was also dynastic politics as well as Henry VIII slobbering over Anne Boleyn.) So-and-so fancies X and kills his/her love-rival Y - basic plot motivation. That's perfectly "mature", as far as the notion goes. It's more the description of the act which bothers some people.
But there's nothing inherently mature about including sex in your game either.
Or omitting it, for that matter...
It depends how it is done.
Agree.
Btw, I was being selfish and self-centered yesterday and forgot my manners:
Kirth Gersen's games are also awesome, and if you ever get the chance, play with him!