Quote from: The Exploited.;1045780Don't know too many people that publicly state that they are for something and then they are pissed off by someone else agreeing with them. But if you're referring to Hasbro's motives I doubt they give a toss at a corporate level.

You are saying something vaguely like what I'm pointing at and calling bullshit. Why would it matter one way or the other what we imagine corporate leadership at Hasbro think? Either you concur with something they are presenting or you don't.

Quote from: Larsdangly;1045787I can't tell that much about these games, but Hentacle's cover looks like a riff on tentacle porn and the review of Alpha Blue sounds like it is an extended play on sexual innuendo and jokes. I don't think anyone should be prevented by the law from publishing either of these things, but no one can assume a right to have any private company accept your product as part of the things they put up on their shelf (physically or digitally speaking). I don't really know drivethru's policies about sexual material, but there is a reasonable case to be made that these are simply products that this company doesn't want associated with its brand. How is that any different from the fact that if I want to publish a collection of pornographic images or erotica I need to either put it out there myself or find a publisher who focuses on that kind of material?

I've not played either... I'm not really into tentacle stuff unless it's Lovecraftian and I don't really care for sexual content in RPGs (but that's just me). But I respect their creative rights, so they can make whatever they want as far as I'm concerned.

Drive-thru has a right to make their own policy as well. But I think they are hypocritical fucks for taking the cash for 12 years (or however long it was) then banning Henticle on a whim because of a few oxygen thieves. Also, you are depriving customers of 'choice' to buy what they want. But you can't really do much about it as they are the big kahuna.

As you say, then the publishers can release it themselves (which is a shit option if youre not established or very well known). Incidentally, that's what Grimjim has done - except he's now giving it away for free as far as I know. As for finding a publisher who specializes in erotic RPGs 'ain't never going to happen. So an indie publisher, has little choice but to use somthing like drive-thu.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1045774The 80's Satanic Panic was mostly made up, too.

Mm, yeah, no it wasn't.  People were up in arms about D&D.  BADD was a real thing.  Pat Pulling tried hard to "do something" about TSR and D&D.  Other hucksters wrote whole books about D&D's "satanic" themes and influences.  I've held the actual tracts in my hands (one with the prominent title of "JUST A GAME?" and, if I may say so, some damn fine art mimicking the idol from the cover of the Player's Handbook) decrying D&D.  Even if we swap out "Satanic" for "Moral" D&D still took broadsides.  Tom Hanks' career was launched by starring in a fucking film about it, based on a best-selling turgid retelling of Bink Pulling's descent into depression (which had nothing to do with D&D but selling books did...)

TSR Bowdlerized AD&D in the name of appeasing the Moral Busybodies, so demons, devils, assassins, half-orcs (I never, ever understood that one - and even today discussing it among the new Pearl-Clutching SJW types causes stress), prostitutes, drugs and alcohol were all purged from D&D.

Go listen to Jean Wells talking about what a mess the art for B3 caused; the Blumes and other powers that be at TSR were incensed (even though Gary felt there was no problem with the art), going so far as to saying the decapus' illusion was "BDSM art".

No, I assure you the "Satanic Panic" over D&D was a very very real phenomenon.

Quote from: Larsdangly;1045788You are saying something vaguely like what I'm pointing at and calling bullshit. Why would it matter one way or the other what we imagine corporate leadership at Hasbro think? Either you concur with something they are presenting or you don't.

Call bullshit all day long mate... knock yourself out!:D

If you're suggesting that a companies motives are not important then you off your fraggin' rocker or have highly dubious morals as far as I'm concerned (especially regarding any huge megacorp).

On the other hand, if you're actually asking me, instead of all this flanneling about, do I agree with inclusivity in game books and in games of course I do.

But for me, RPGing at my table has always been inclusive. Everyone is welcome as long as you're not a dick, that's my only rule.

Quote from: The Exploited.;1045794Call bullshit all day long mate... knock yourself out!:D

If you're suggesting that a companies motives are not important then you off your fraggin' rocker or have highly dubious morals as far as I'm concerned (especially regarding any huge megacorp).

On the other hand, if you're actually asking me, instead of all this flanneling about, do I agree with inclusivity in game books and in games of course I do.

But for me, RPGing at my table has always been inclusive. Everyone is welcome as long as you're not a dick, that's my only rule.

But you are upset about Hasbro saying this thing you believe in because you imagine they are saying it for the wrong reason? Says who? I hardly know why I say and do things, leave alone why other people say and do things. It is hard enough debating the content of people's statements; how are you supposed to debate speculations about their motives?

Quote from: Larsdangly;1045796But you are upset about Hasbro saying this thing you believe in because you imagine they are saying it for the wrong reason? Says who? I hardly know why I say and do things

Well, you're not going to convince me, a leftie, that Hasbro, Google, Apple or anyone of those corporate gimps are the good guys behind closed doors.

But I agree with your Paladin armor and Inclusivity in gaming.

Buuuuuut I don't like tokenism or pandering just for the sake of it at the same time. If it's done with good intentions behind it then I'm all for it. That's why background motives are so important.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1045578Unfortunately, charity giving has become political statements, and corporations such as WotC are using charity as virtue signalling. That's the problem, not the LGBT gamers who have been welcome gamers at many tables since the earliest days. Its a shame WotC wouldn't donate to a non-political cause everyone could have cheered on, like donating 10,000 D&D starter boxes to Christmas toy drives.

Ulterior motive or not. Helping people is still helping people. It's still more than doing nothing at all.

It is insane to sneer at something you want to have happen because you have a fantasy in your head that it is all part of Mr. Burns' evil plot to take over the world. To engage in my own little bit of ad hominem projection of motives, I think this attitude is either a self destructive by product of nihilistic nerd culture, or a sign that someone wants to tear something down but wants to avoid the repercussions of saying so openly, so they take a few swings at the messenger rather than the message. Anyway, it is always stupid.

Quote from: Larsdangly;1045806It is insane to sneer at something you want to have happen because you have a fantasy in your head that it is all part of Mr. Burns' evil plot to take over the world. To engage in my own little bit of ad hominem projection of motives, I think this attitude is either a self destructive by product of nihilistic nerd culture, or a sign that someone wants to tear something down but wants to avoid the repercussions of saying so openly, so they take a few swings at the messenger rather than the message. Anyway, it is always stupid.

I also don't understand that line of logic. If the most of the people being "pandered" to don't mind, why should anyone else mind? What is the harm?

Quote from: Larsdangly;1045759When someone jumps out of the bushes and attacks you for no immediate reason you have a reason to react. When you feel fussy because WoC presents a female paladin in plate armor, you are being a dick.

It's usually in between, some SJW says something like Aleena's tabard being a symbol of misogyny (actually happened*). Certainly anyone who likes bikiniplate paladin pics is called a sexist, but now they get called harrasers/enablers of harassment too.

"To me, the purpose of the tabard is to soften her and to play cat and mouse with the viewer. The pose is opened up to give greater access to her inner thighs but the "money shot" is hidden behind the soft, flowing tabard." :rolleyes:



Edit: I guess if it was a 2018 post, Hurley would have said that Aleena and her pornographic tabard was Gatekeeping women and other vulnerable minorities out of the hobby...

Oh...I only just now made the connection between Gatekeeping and DnDGate.

Quote from: Larsdangly;1045806It is insane to sneer at something you want to have happened because you have a fantasy in your head that it is all part of Mr. Burns' evil plot to take over the world.

Hyperbole... But regardless, the fact that I hate unrestrained corporations has nothing to do with my attitude toward actual gaming. Pundit made a point in his vid about Hasbro's motives and I happen to agree with him.

As for wanting to tear something down without the repercussions is a fantasy on your part. Pigeon chess...

Quote from: S'mon;1045816Certainly anyone who likes bikiniplate paladin pics is called a sexist, but now they get called harrasers/enablers of harassment too.

Absolutely! One of my biggest beefs with the SJW crowd is that they often accuse others of being sexist or enablers (as you said) because they like/promote a certain art style or particular product line (that they don't not like).

But surely, it's all about consumer choice? If one writes a game and wants female bikini plate stuff in it, then surely that's their right as a designer/creator. No one is forcing anyone one to play it or like the art.

On the other side too, no one is stopping SJWs or anyone else from making games that they want to see themselves. I certainly don't care if men are sexualized through art. Feel free to put men in string thongs and in the Hawkeye position as I couldn't care less.

That said, I may not want to play in such a game! But it's a free world and I support their right to create such a game.

Quote from: S'mon;1045816It's usually in between, some SJW says something like Aleena's tabard being a symbol of misogyny (actually happened*). Certainly anyone who likes bikiniplate paladin pics is called a sexist, but now they get called harrasers/enablers of harassment too.

"To me, the purpose of the tabard is to soften her and to play cat and mouse with the viewer. The pose is opened up to give greater access to her inner thighs but the "money shot" is hidden behind the soft, flowing tabard." :rolleyes:



Edit: I guess if it was a 2018 post, Hurley would have said that Aleena and her pornographic tabard was Gatekeeping women and other vulnerable minorities out of the hobby...

Oh...I only just now made the connection between Gatekeeping and DnDGate.

Oof; I hadn't heard that one. Yes, that is completely absurd; even Orwellian in its insistence to project a belief onto an noncompliant fact. But over reacting to this sort of nonsense is childish. It is the exact equivalent of people who post outraged responses to Alex Jones on their facebook feeds.

Quote from: Larsdangly;1045839Oof; I hadn't heard that one. Yes, that is completely absurd; even Orwellian in its insistence to project a belief onto an noncompliant fact. But over reacting to this sort of nonsense is childish. It is the exact equivalent of people who post outraged responses to Alex Jones on their facebook feeds.

I wouldn't disagree with you. People getting het up about the lack of boobplate in the 5e D&D books seems as silly to me as people getting het up about the boobplate in the 4e D&D books.

When people are actually getting harrassed, it's a bad thing. SJW art criticism like the above can lead to harassment and de-platforming of artists, so it may be worth taking seriously if it comes from an influential source.

The only examples I've heard of so far of authors whose work has been forced out of major platforms were folks with tentacle porn covers and highly sexualized, prostitution-themed games. No one should be surprised they would end up self publishing. If you wouldn't want to hand out copies of a game to your children, parents and neighbors then probably the larger companies are not interested in stocking it. Can you point toward examples of people who are making a good faith effort to check their major porn elements but are being black balled by publishers?