After lurking about on the "torture porn" thread in relation to Pathfinder #3, I began to think about the sister issue to the violence innate to a game of D&D (let's face it, you're killing a lot of stuff no matter the DM), and that issue is sex.
I am a storyteller by trade and the first thing that I had to come to accept (through a glaze of religious, conservative upbringing) is that human life encompasses all spectrums and shades of morality and substance. And in order to write believable characters I had to understand that sex and the darkest parts of human nature are an integral part of being human. Lusting, wanting, having, and losing are what make deep characters. I am in love with the direction of the Pathfinder story driven campaign and appreciate the detail and direction that the creators have been giving as motivation for the characters - I would actually like to see much more of this. But that does mean we may start seeing some real human issues appear that maybe some who want to play a light hearted game aren't ready to deal with. A kind of "you got your peanut butter in my chocolate" situation, right?
In light of the fact that James Jacobs has openly stated that Pathfinder #5 will deal with all seven deadly sins (including lust) and may have some sexual content I'm curious how the community feels about sex in their adventures as well as how you deal with it at the table.
What's your thoughts?
After lurking about on the "torture porn" thread in relation to Pathfinder #3, I began to think about the sister issue to the violence innate to a game of D&D (let's face it, you're killing a lot of stuff no matter the DM), and that issue is sex.
I find that for the most part, sex is a sister issue to violence only in that they are both generally forbidden topics. You can't go out and beat on random people. You can't go out and mount random people. You can pile on a lot of symbolism and questionable interpretations, but violence is generally violence and sex is generally sex. I don't really understand people who say 'you can have all that killing but you can't show a bare breast' as if since you can have something violent you should be able to have something sexual* in that work. The two are not indelibly intertwined. There are intersections where they may both exist, but whole vast regions where neither has anything to do with the other.
* yes, I understand a bare breast in not necessarily sexual, blah, blah, blah.
After lurking about on the "torture porn" thread in relation to Pathfinder #3, I began to think about the sister issue to the violence innate to a game of D&D (let's face it, you're killing a lot of stuff no matter the DM), and that issue is sex.
I find that for the most part, sex is a sister issue to violence only in that they are both generally forbidden topics. You can't go out and beat on random people. You can't go out and mount random people. You can pile on a lot of symbolism and questionable interpretations, but violence is generally violence and sex is generally sex. I don't really understand people who say 'you can have all that killing but you can't show a bare breast' as if since you can have something violent you should be able to have something sexual* in that work. The two are not indelibly intertwined. There are intersections where they may both exist, but whole vast regions where neither has anything to do with the other.
* yes, I understand a bare breast in not necessarily sexual, blah, blah, blah.
I agree and that is indeed what I'm referring to when I say "sister issue" - it is the "other" point of contention for many people dealing with censorship or content questions.
<snip>In light of the fact that James Jacobs has openly stated that Pathfinder #5 will deal with all seven deadly sins (including lust) and may have some sexual content I'm curious how the community feels about sex in their adventures as well as how you deal with it at the table.
What's your thoughts?
I LOVE sex on my table. I just need to be sure not to use too much lube or it gets tricky to stay ON the table, hee hee.
I LOVE sex on my table. I just need to be sure not to use too much lube or it gets tricky to stay ON the table, hee hee.
Aaaaaaaaand scene...;D
I LOVE sex on my table. I just need to be sure not to use too much lube or it gets tricky to stay ON the table, hee hee.<snip>In light of the fact that James Jacobs has openly stated that Pathfinder #5 will deal with all seven deadly sins (including lust) and may have some sexual content I'm curious how the community feels about sex in their adventures as well as how you deal with it at the table.
What's your thoughts?
~laughter~ Um, can we get a video of that? j/k
As for the sexuallity in games, I am a grown adult (maturity is not a requirement) and I can handle it. The question then becomes, who will be reading it. (I also have the d20 Book of Erotic Fatasy at my house, even though I have yet to use it. That should tell you a few things about how lenient I am.) If I were running something with blatant sexuality or wanton violence, I would have to put into mind the group that is running through it. If they can handle it, then it stays. If they can't, then I alter it. Either way, it is not too difficult to do some changes. But then again, I know how to think and plan ahead. ~shrugs~
To be serious though, to use Doppleganger's pre-emptive counter-argument: I wouldn't be in line with the *if X is okay, then so must be Y* except that both can be hot topics to sensitive tastes.
I think that although sex and violence can be taken separately on one level, that you'll still get the exact same kinds of responces with each one as far as implementation in the Pathfinders: most will be fine, some will say it's barely decent, and few on both sides will either say *shame on Paizo* or *bring it on*.
As far as sex goes, as Nick Logue and James Jacobs have mentioned, I doubt you'll read or see any actual coitus in the Pathfinders. Gauzy dresses, an exposed nipple, suggestive armor . . . yes. Those things make the world go around. As far as *loose text* and *easy images* go, I don't need it, but neither will I be offended by it. In a seven deadly sins campaign for a mature audience, I will not stand to see lust reduced to the cutscene from 10 Commandments, relegating lust to something innocent and uninspired. Otherwise, if Lust is just playful kissing, why would that be *evil*? It's a theme that has to be daring and provocative.
Sexual issues do come up in our games, though they tend to happen a bit off stage. I don't think there's lots of people who want to roleplay sex with the kinds of folks they roleplay with among other things (I mean gender is one huge obstacle here--just doing romance scenes when you're looking into the mug of another stubbly faced guy is kind of a stomach-churner. Sex--totally not happening.)
On the other hand, we had this great scene where the Paladin and his now-redeemed Loviatan wife had returned for a bit of a rest up at the Archmage's home. Well they've been apart a long time, and have spent many years hating each other, and now they're together again. She kind of looks at him and says "You're a paladin right? That means you have to do whatever people tell you to, right?
Yeah, meanwhile some of the other players were pretty strange folk, and the wife pulls the Archmage husband into the other room to have a serious talk about his new friends. Wistful and angry she looks out the window, and what does she see going on out there?
"Rondel...you need to come take a look at this!"
"What? What is it?"
"You're friends...are rutting...in our field"
"What? What makes you think I would want to see that!"
"I didn't say you wanted to. It's your fault! Now you come and you look at this!"
About one of the funniest high parts of any of our campaigns. It was just very human. Nobody found it in bad taste. It was the culmination of a lot of dramatic tensions.
Most of the best modern fantasy fiction (i.e. George RR Martin) includes definite allusions to sex, and quite graphically at times, includiing topics of incest, homosexuality, fetishes etc).
I think that this does not detract, in moderation it provides a "gritty" texture to the fanasty story that makes it seem more real. I know that might be a classic oxymoron, but aside from Tolkien, I prefer my fantasy fiction to show both the high and low side of life.
Of course, you can go way too far the other way (i.e. Norman-Gor novels), but puritanical fantasy is nauseous (aside from CS Lweis, which I have a soft spot for).
In any case, I prefer a fantasy setting in which sex is part of life, and I have run camapigns where the PC's have carrosed brothels, commited adultry, in one memorable case a ranger PC was quite irate when the druid he thought he was being seduced by turned out to be a Rakasha.
I'll allude to it, maybe set up interests in NPCs and things. But I don't roleplay it for exactly the reasons Grimcleaver says: it's uncomfortable to talk about it in those terms to your friends. I'll allude to it if it involves the characters or if it's part of the background/something NPCs are discussing but I'm not lining up for the Book of Erotic Fantasy. I don't have a problem with sexual content and even though I realize they are different issues, I do find it hard to believe that violence is perfectly fine yet sexual content or the mention of homosexual characters is cause to be up in arms. But that's me.
Fa-nasty sex sounds good about now.
I'm curious how the community feels about sex in their adventures as well as how you deal with it at the table. What's your thoughts?
I once had a group were i (as DM) played out a scene of a character visiting a brother in full detail and group enjoyed it (and yes there were three women in this group not complaining) but you must know your group well and have to know how far you can go. You should also describe the "action" not in a pornographic but in a more sensible way by describing "around" the action and letting the players imagine the exact details for themselves.
In our current group we have "sexual encounters", but these are usually not played out. Our barbarian goes to brothels and last week out dwarf paladin had an affair with a dwarf-woman. If the situation will arise, i will try a more detailed "sexual encounter" and see how it will run with this group, but i guess that it will not work out as nicely as in my previous group because of the lack of women with their invisible ability to make men "behave". I guess the player#s in my current group will only throw in "dirty comments" and ruin the whole situation and destroy the mood...
This reminds me of one of the DM of the Rings webcomics...
I tend to avoid details of sexuality, other than glossing over the idea that some of the characters have sexual liaisons or visit brothels. It's not something that the folks I game with want to play out; we prefer to "fade to black" when a scene of that sort presents itself.
The whole topic can cause a great deal of discomfort: It's awkward to play a character (that you identify with) romantically involved with another character (played by someone that you have no interest in sexually). Mixed groups of men, women, and children gaming can make things even more awkward.
I tried to stay (mostly) out of the "torture porn" thread, because that kind of topic is really on a per individual basis...
But my personal belief is that the authors should put in as much, or little, of any controversial topic as they see fit.
It is then up to the editor to trim it as s/he sees fit.
It is then up to the DM to trim it as s/he sees fit.
And finally, it is up to the players to voice any objection.
But then, I view roleplaying in a vastly different light then some. I look to it to explore my darker, baser, side in a (relatively) safe environment. It allows me to acknowledge my "evil" side, converse with it, get to know it, and ultimately embrace it as part of myself. (Please note, that I do not claim that what happens in a game is welcome, appropriate, or even legal outside of the game.)
So that makes me up for having any amount of any topic available.
Now, that doesn't mean I welcome every level of detail in the game I am in... While I might go so far as to state my character cuts out his enemy's heart, I really don't need the full description of the action.
Likewise, I tend to agree with Grimcleaver on the sex topic. Feel free to have it in the game. Just don't expect me to be comfortable playing out a romantic scene.
My brothers Dwarf 8th/fighter Lugi in 1e, tried to get it on with this chick whom was a weretiger.
So called "Mature" themes are extremely common and are essentially the norm in my campaigns. Seductions and such, especially with important characters/Npcs are handled through both rolling and roleplaying (not play-acting). FTB is used for the actual act and such. I do agree that I am not going to get into a 'Taking of Sleeping Beauty' style dialogue to 'narrate' whats happening at that point. That would be too much for nearly all parties. Unless they are a party and they party together as well.
I don't shy away from this stuff and my group is happy with how I do things.
It really is a matter of knowing your group's tastes and acceptance levels. I'm in favor of the "Boot Scene" model myself, unless the adventure in question has sexual themes in it (Loviatar, Sune, etc.).
We have sex all the time.
Oh wait, that came out wrong. Our CHARACTERS have various liasons of a roamntic nature (or not).
Depends on the party, the players, and the characters.
It really is a matter of knowing your group's tastes and acceptance levels. I'm in favor of the "Boot Scene" model myself, unless the adventure in question has sexual themes in it (Loviatar, Sune, etc.).
Forgive my ignorance but...The Boot Scene?
{snip}In a seven deadly sins campaign for a mature audience, I will not stand to see lust reduced to the cutscene from 10 Commandments, relegating lust to something innocent and uninspired. Otherwise, if Lust is just playful kissing, why would that be *evil*? It's a theme that has to be daring and provocative.
You just said exactly what I addressed in the sidebar at the beginning of the Lust section of the dungeon in Pathfinder #5. Basically, my feeling was this: Reducing the sinfulness of a section of a dungeon dedicated to Lust to hints and innuendos instead of actually exploring it in the context of the campaign would be cheating you all as readers and leave me feeling like I had done a half assed job of writing it. I think we could probably have even taken it up a half notch, but better to err on the side of not enough than too much, IMO.
Of course, my printed advice for people who don't care for it right there as a disclaimer in that section is basically "burn it... burn it to the ground".
It really is a matter of knowing your group's tastes and acceptance levels. I'm in favor of the "Boot Scene" model myself, unless the adventure in question has sexual themes in it (Loviatar, Sune, etc.).Forgive my ignorance but...The Boot Scene?
I can't speak for Lilith, but I believe she's referring to a scene in the Dragonlance novels where Kitiara invites Tanis to pull off her boots, which is the usual way they would start knocking said boots.
You can't go out and mount random people.
We obviously didn't go to the same university.
As a gross generalization, I find the people who have to push romantic encounters past the table comfort point, or who are constantly alluding to sexual situations, are starved for meaningful attention in real life (which doesn’t necessarily mean they aren’t sexually active). All it really does it make me internally say, “Oh look, it’s a quarter to sad…”
Seriously; watch some porn, do your thing, wash up nice, then come game. Don't bring your frustrations to my table.
As a gross generalization....Seriously; watch some porn, do your thing, wash up nice, then come game.
Yep. That's gross.
This is starting to remind me of one of the best quotes I've heard in a while, from a History Channel special about comic books (watched it twice now and it is quite good).
To Neil Gaiman from the Comic's Code: "People do not masturbate in the DC universe."
|
In dnd I treat sex the same way I treat meals.
Mostly eating and shagging happen off camera, i'm not going to describe every bite of your steak or every bite of...
If the meal was excellent, or awful, or in some other way striking then that will get a mention. And if you picked a lousy meal and got poisoned or diseased that will definitely come up after the event :D
Romance and pregnancy are both great ways to add complexity to an rpg and make it more character-driven (rather than plot-driven), which is why i welcome a bit of sex in any campaign.
|
I think this issue will get some treatment with the "Lust Dungeon" in Pathfinder #5...
Anyway, I quite enjoy the way Paizo has handled Pathfinder's more mature content thus far. I'm old enough that I can handle these kinds of scenes maturely, and not so old that they bother me. The same goes for my players, we're all adults at my game table.
Besides, I'm european and as my mother told my many times while growing up "americans love violence, but refuse to accept sexual content; while europeans are the opposite" (in other words she was trying to indoctrinate me with the common illusion that europeans are morally superior to americans). However neither violence nor sex really bothers or fascinates me so I guess I don't fit either stereotype...
I once played a game where the DM rolled to see if you had to go to the bathroom...
"Bors was in mid wipe when the owlbear got him"
Forgive my ignorance but...The Boot Scene?I can't speak for Lilith, but I believe she's referring to a scene in the Dragonlance novels where Kitiara invites Tanis to pull off her boots, which is the usual way they would start knocking said boots.
It's also a common phrase in the movie/TV business. First time I remember it being used was in reference to the original Star Trek TV series, where we would cut to everybody's favorite amorous Captain putting his boots back on. Hence, implied sexual encounter being a "Boot Scene."
I posted my thoughts on it in the other thread (since it was slightly touched upon in regards to the "wardrobe malfunction" of Mammy Graul).
To concur with some of my fellow Europeans who have chimed in in this thread, I seriously don't see the problem with any of the graphics (i.e. the art) presented in the adventure (apart from the style, but that's an old mare long dead, now molding and not worth kicking chunks of).
With my progressive (*wink wink*) European view I find nothing wrong with portraying nudity in any shape or form and I am constantly amazed how much the naked human body seems to offend some people (if it's because of religious reasons... well, didn't the guy upstairs create the human body in his image?).
In my opinion it would be perfectly okay to have art in the upcoming Lust "department" of the dungeon [in Pathfinder #5] depict tangles of naked bodies and similar escapades. I can appreciate why some people would seriously oppose any kind of direct sexual imagery (me, I wouldn't be bothered, some people take sex WAY too seriously ;-)), but depiction of nudity? What is it exactly people are so afraid of? We're all naked underneath our clothes and we pretty much all "look" the same naked anyway. No big mysteries there.[snip stuff about other parts of the adventure]
I can, though, appreciate that some people might find it offensive, but still my immediate gut reaction to those protests are probably along the lines of "huh, you don't get out much, do you?" - which I know can seem offensive, but it's really not meant as such. It's just an expression of the different places we all are coming from.
|
Well, me...if there's women folk around, I'll be nice and not offend them off or nothing. It's always good to be respectful to women folk.
But when it's a bunch of guys, and I have something funny or entertaining to add to something, I'll do whatever. If everybody's laughing it's all good, and if everybody's all offended I wonder where I am, and why. I don't really need it as a psychological release or anything, I can score some action in real life. But good humor is good humor, man.
It doesn't have to be sex either, necessarily, but WTF--sex makes people uncomfortable, and in uncomfortable there's funny.
|
|
Most of the best modern fantasy fiction (i.e. George RR Martin) includes definite allusions to sex, and quite graphically at times, includiing topics of incest, homosexuality, fetishes etc).
George RR Martin may be popular, and I am still with his series through four books, but if Pathfinder goes A Song of Ice and Fire route, I will not be interested.
The incest, homosexuality, and sadism I could probably overlook, but the obsession with barely nubile females I can not. If I want to read about lusting after 12-14 year old girls, I will find an internet chatroom.I do not care how popular the series is, but when the first serious scene with someone getting hot for a full-grown, full-breasted, woman involves another woman, then we are past even Bob "Bad Mama Jammer" Heinlein territory, or even Piers "Everybody Bangs Everything/Bio of Space Stud" Anthony territory, and further off the edge of the map than Captain Barbarossa.
As for the best of modern fantasy fiction, the best of Gold and Silver Age Pulp managed quite well enough with scanty costumes, the rare bit of nudity, and a lot of gratuitous crushing to the breast and lips pressed. Pathfinder does not need to be as tame as Tarzan, but do please stop WELL short of Westeros.
|
I'm curious how the community feels about sex in their adventures as well as how you deal with it at the table.
What's your thoughts?
Basically, I have no problem talking sex with my friends. I'm a very open person and have no problem with sex. In all honesty though, I don't really want to role play sex with my players. It goes beyond being sex though.
In all honestly, role playing is a good thing. But it's annoying when two players start quieting everyone for 20+ minutes for any reason. I have no problem with someone wanting to have sex off stage, because then they get to be that player, and the game keeps moving without having 4 guys watch another talk about sex by his character. I'd also be against the same situation with one guy talking about juggling for 20+ minutes.
I'm surprised no-one has mentioned the major difference between sex and violence in DnD: violence has rules adn mechanics, and sex is purely fluff.
Sure, there are the omnipresent "house rules" of rolling dice for penis length, or making a Con check to see how long one can last, and all the myriad puerile humor stemming from the participants own views on sex. Soem may counter there are rules, and supplements like the Book of Erotic Fantasy are evidence, but again, while they may describe erotic encounters, or add new spells and magic items, they still lack mechanics for "good" sex and how sex works, mechanically speaking, in DnD.
Strictly speaking, sex is a role-playing component of the game, and as such is up to individuals to include or not as they see fit. Several games in which I have participated have featured romantic encounters, and purely sexual encounters, and the descriptions have ranged from minimalist to detailed. But in all cases, there were almost never dice rolls (maybe a Bluff check here, or a Diplomacy check there). Again, the scenes are RP and not encounter.
It has been mentioned that lust will make an appearance, but I suspect, like others, that those encounters will be more "combat" encounters, through manipulation and enchantment and threat present.
Sure, there are the omnipresent "house rules" of rolling dice for penis length, or making a Con check to see how long one can last, and all the myriad puerile humor stemming from the participants own views on sex. Soem may counter there are rules, and supplements like the Book of Erotic Fantasy are evidence, but again, while they may describe erotic encounters, or add new spells and magic items, they still lack mechanics for "good" sex and how sex works, mechanically speaking, in DnD.
I find it reassuring that me and my players back in junior high were not the only ones who rolled D20 for penis length and breast size. My former players still remind me of the time when I rolled a natural 20 for King Azoun IV...
Sure, there are the omnipresent "house rules" of rolling dice for penis length, or making a Con check to see how long one can last, and all the myriad puerile humor stemming from the participants own views on sex. Soem may counter there are rules, and supplements like the Book of Erotic Fantasy are evidence, but again, while they may describe erotic encounters, or add new spells and magic items, they still lack mechanics for "good" sex and how sex works, mechanically speaking, in DnD.I find it reassuring that me and my players back in junior high were not the only ones who rolled D20 for penis length and breast size. My former players still remind me of the time when I rolled a natural 20 for King Azoun IV...
"It's good to be the King."
Seriously, mechanics for the sex act are not needed in D&D. Mechanics for the consequences (disease, pregnancy, etc.) can be fudged or house-ruled to the taste (or lack thereof) of the DM and the players. Ultimately, the effect on the game is minor or primarily plot/story oriented.
|
|
It has been mentioned that lust will make an appearance, but I suspect, like others, that those encounters will be more "combat" encounters, through manipulation and enchantment and threat present.
The Seven Mortal Sins in Galorian are all the evil flipside of a virtue. So lust (the least convincing of the sins outside of a christian-style "original sin" conceit) will be the wicked flipside to fertility, love and romance. I think the words I'm expecting to come out here are rape, bestiality, paedophilia, necrophilia; disturbing and evil stuff like that, possibly with a succubus thrown in for good measure.
That's where the reasons to start waving your sword about will probably come from.
I'm curious to know whose brother and how he felt about all this...I once had a group were i (as DM) played out a scene of a character visiting a brother in full detail and group enjoyed it ...
LOL - should be brothel...
I find it reassuring that me and my players back in junior high were not the only ones who rolled D20 for penis length and breast size. My former players still remind me of the time when I rolled a natural 20 for King Azoun IV...
L.O. F'ing L....at work even.
Sure, there are the omnipresent "house rules" of rolling dice for penis length, or making a Con check to see how long one can last, and all the myriad puerile humor stemming from the participants own views on sex. Soem may counter there are rules, and supplements like the Book of Erotic Fantasy are evidence, but again, while they may describe erotic encounters, or add new spells and magic items, they still lack mechanics for "good" sex and how sex works, mechanically speaking, in DnD.
There's always...
...
...
...
...the Perform skill.
There's always...the Perform skill.
Which, of course, you can make untrained. ;)
I can't really speak for Varisia, but in our world, the seven deadly sins predated the seven virtues. And of course, much has been lost in translation. The seven deadly sins were deadly sins because when you committed one, you let something else become more important in your life than God. And lust, always so maligned, originally meant to follow your desire in the sense that you did not act in a planned, orderly way. Taken in a modern setting, a typical lustful act would be shopping, eating and drinking exquisite and expensive stuff, excessive attention to your own body, and so on. The focus is much more on your lifestyle, not on being unfaithful or the like.
Even so, lust is more or less equated with sex, porn and other such concepts today.
I don't have a lot to say concerning this, except to relate an amusing story about the party's human paladin sleeping with a chaotic evil halfling leading to him losing his paladin status.
Him: I lost my status?
Me: You consorted with a clearly evil halfling!
Him: Wait, she was a halfling? Gross! I thought she was an elf!