Quote from: Sacrosanct;635698Seriously, if gamers want to try to get out of this stereotype that they're a bunch of creepy neckbeards who masturbate over cover art, stop playing/putting out material that just reinforces that.  You might have the right to do so, but don't pretend like your actions aren't hurting everyone else

I'd think carefully about the incentive structures and messages you're creating when you do that.  The urge to drain the swamp is very well-meant, but there have been quite a large number of attempts to do so that only make bad things more popular or more visible.

Quote from: TristramEvans;635906Anyways, yeah, I'm totally anti-rape and totally pro-rape fantasies. and no this isn't a dichotomy if you're sane.

Yeah, it's quite possible to have perfectly healthy fantasies, on matters that you'd never want to happen to anyone in real life.  Depending on study, something like a third to a half of each gender have rape victimization fantasies, and another third have rape aggressor fantasies, and the vast majority of both groups go on to be perfectly normal and reasonable people.  Even as media involving rape fantasy has become dramatically more available over the last thirty years, we've seen a decrease in per capita rape.

That's a vastly different thing from whether it's a good idea to bring up in public, and especially in groups where the matter hasn't been carefully discussed first.

Quote from: jeff37923;635934So, which is it? Because I cannot see treating someone who is being a creeper as being a creeper if you are unwilling to hedge them out of the hobby. Face it, we are talking about publicly shunning someone who has open public games about paedophilia or something else equally revolting. It is not a subject you can be on the fence about.

And I am doing it to protect the public image of the hobby, which has been tarnished enough by lawncrappers.

There's no "which", both posts said the same thing.  Your quest is futile and stupid, you're trying to filter the members of a hobby, something that anyone can participate in.  It'd be like going after people who watch Saw movies and trying to convince the world that A: they aren't movie fans, and B: they should somehow not be able to watch their fucked up movies anymore.

And I might add, my first post was responding to a hysterical complaint about fantasies, not even actual conduct.

Quote from: This Guy;635198Comes up more often in freeform or online tabletop games where everyone has a stronger freeform background and are generally more comfortable with raunchy shit.  Around the table, it happens on occasion but is largely glossed over.

Anyway, more broadly on the topic, this is how I prefer to handle sex in roleplay, as well. Face to face, anything explicit generally takes place "off-screen". However, the same's not necessarily true online, especially on the more "adult-oriented" venues.

Quote from: Alathon;635939There's no "which", both posts said the same thing.  Your quest is futile and stupid, you're trying to filter the members of a hobby, something that anyone can participate in.

It may be futile, but I do not want a hobby I participate in to be associated with lawncrappers. I do not find paedophilia acceptable for actual play, especially in public.

Quote from: Alathon;635939It'd be like going after people who watch Saw movies and trying to convince the world that A: they aren't movie fans, and B: they should somehow not be able to watch their fucked up movies anymore.

Here is where you are putting words in my mouth and miss my point.

Privately, they can play whatever the fuck they want. I have no business in their private affairs. Publicly or when they are claiming to be representative of my hobby, no fucking way in Hell will I allow that to go unoppossed.

If some gore porn addict wants to masturbate to SAW in the privacy of his own home, that is his business. If he tries to do so at a convention or CD store, claiming that he is only doing what every other moviegoer does - then that is mightily fucked up.

Quote from: jeff37923;635929So is this dissembling sidestep a "yes" or a "no" answer?

To what question?

Quote from: gattsuru;635935That's a vastly different thing from whether it's a good idea to bring up in public, and especially in groups where the matter hasn't been carefully discussed first.

True, I'd never bring it into my games. and seriously consider ousting any player who did.

Quote from: The Yann Waters;635917You did notice, didn't you, that for a game which according to you "focuses on playing 9-15 year old girls", the majority of the player characters in those three session reports don't even look underage, and out of the three that do, only one is an actual human child? And that one is in the specific example which you cited, which was cleaned up afterwards, while none of the others are mistreated in any way? And even in the original version she is only humiliated, not "raped with a broomstick" as some posters around here like to claim, by one evil PC whose actions aren't exactly viewed favourably by the others?

The art direction, as well as how the rules are structured, places a large emphasis on children.  This is fact.  And if there was any question left as to just how fucked up in the head you are, you have just described that act of placing a 10 year old girl in transparant clothing, and then stripped of her underwear and tights, and forced to ride a broom by a character described as "liking them young" simply as humiliation.  That's not humiliation.  That's child sexual assault you stupid fucker!

As the father of children, I cannot tell you how much loathing I have for you right now.  You are a sick fuck.

QuoteThe examples in the game include a single character, this same Rie, whose tastes seem to run that way. However, what the description for the Quality itself clearly states is that the player decides which age range "younger" means in this context. So yes, "a 40 year old liking a 20 year old" would fit every bit as well.

But the context of the game clearly positions it as adults liking children.  Again you show just how much of a sick fuck you are.

"You can totally choose the age limit, wink wink.  But in our example, it's an adult with a 10 year old.  Because that's how you're supposed to play

QuoteNot to mention that like the rest of the Perversion subchart, it's an option for players who agree to have a "darker" game. Otherwise, the same roll results in a regular Relationship instead.

Holy....

If you have to ignore or change the rules of a game to not make it about child sexploitation, than it's a fucked up game.  How can this not be obvious?

Oh wait, you've shown yourself to be a clear apologist for child sexploitation.  I can only hope that it's an internal fuckery in your head, and I hope to God that you haven't taken similar attitudes with children in real life.

Sex makes people stupid.

Sexual discussions are always the third rail.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;635958The art direction, as well as how the rules are structured, places a large emphasis on children.  This is fact.  And if there was any question left as to just how fucked up in the head you are, you have just described that act of placing a 10 year old girl in transparant clothing, and then stripped of her underwear and tights, and forced to ride a broom by a character described as "liking them young" simply as humiliation.  That's not humiliation.  That's child sexual assault you stupid fucker!

...Except that's not what actually happens: sorry to say, you're listing the events in the wrong order to match your own misinterpretation. Kana's wearing the full uniform when Rie tricks her into sweeping the floor in the wrong way, teaching her that a true maid would ride the broom around the room like a witch. Yes, the uniform is transparent, but the clothes underneath aren't. And yes, that's uncomfortably suggestive, but far from a sexual assault.

Granted, tampering with Kana's clothes later so that she has to serve breakfast without being properly dressed is a more grievous offence. But again, that is all about Rie wanting to humiliate her. The older maid's bullying ways are supposedly the reason for the questionable uniform in the first place (which means that Kana's player must have come up with that piece of background).

As for younger-looking maids in the (sparse) artwork? Some of those are underage characters from the text, but the rest are chibi versions of the older ones. The demon maid Hizumi is an edge case: she at least looks seventeen, and shows up all over the place.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;635958"You can totally choose the age limit, wink wink.  But in our example, it's an adult with a 10 year old.  Because that's how you're supposed to play

As said, replays are descriptions of how a game has been played, not how it's supposed to be played. And even then, the most logical reason for Rie going after Kana instead of the others is that the youngest maid makes for an easy target, especially after the "Teasing" Stress Explosion kicks in. Tomoe has demonstrated by then that she'll happily beat up Rie if they clash, and mistreating the master Lilith would go... badly.

It is plausible that Rie's player made the character the oldest because of that Quality, though. There's technically no reason why she couldn't have been, for instance, the same age as Kana.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;635958If you have to ignore or change the rules of a game to not make it about child sexploitation, than it's a fucked up game.  How can this not be obvious?

That has nothing to do with changing or ignoring the rules. The chargen includes two subcharts for the roll result of 51: the Relationship chart for a "lighter" game, and the Perversion chart for "darker". You literally can never get the "Likes Them Young" Quality from those charts without the players deliberately choosing it over an "Ex-Lover/Love Rival" relationship with someone else. And of course, even if you do, none of the Relationship/Perversion Qualities really have a mechanical effect: they are more of a suggestion for roleplaying.

Quote from: GrumpyReviews;635971Sex makes people stupid.

Sexual discussions are always the third rail.

sex, politics and religion: the three worse topics to discuss with anyone that doesn't already agree with you.

especially online.

Quote from: The Yann Waters;635974...Except that's not what actually happens: sorry to say, you're listing the events in the wrong order to match your own misinterpretation.

Misinterpretation?  Dude, the BOOK says this:

Quote(As for what's going on here, we'll leave it to the reader's imagination).

With all the other sexual innuendos and wink wink shit going on, it's clear what the intent is.  Especially when the whole gist of the book comes down to: Teen girls + sexual references + doing favors for your master.  Jesus H Christ you are a piece of work.  And by piece of work, I mean piece of shit.

QuoteThat has nothing to do with changing or ignoring the rules. The chargen includes two subcharts for the roll result of 51: the Relationship chart for a "lighter" game, and the Perversion chart for "darker". You literally can never get the "Likes Them Young" Quality from those charts without the players deliberately choosing it over an "Ex-Lover/Love Rival" relationship with someone else. And of course, even if you do, none of the Relationship/Perversion Qualities really have a mechanical effect: they are more of a suggestion for roleplaying.

Again, if you have to ignore, or change the rules to avoid the possibility that you're paying a pedophile, then that speaks volumes.  

So far you've made excuses like "It's just one kid.."  Guess what?  One child being sexploited is one fucking kid too much!

You've said, "These are just suggestions, not hard fast rules and you can ignore them."  Guess what?  If a game suggests that you can roleplay sexual assault on 10 year olds, then it's a fucking sick game.

This isn't rocket science.  You're a sick fucking individual who I hope isn't ever around kids.  You can hide behind the anonymity of the internet, but I'm pretty sure people with kids would sure as hell like to know if you're living in their neighborhood with some of the crap you've said here.

Quote from: The Yann Waters;635974As said, replays are descriptions of how a game has been played, not how it's supposed to be played.

Why would an author imagine that a "replay" -- an example of play -- in a rule book be anything other than an indication of how play is expected to flow? What other purpose in the text could it possibly serve? It seems disingenuous to claim it's anything but a tool to teach the game.

Quote from: gattsuru;635935Depending on study, something like a third to a half of each gender have rape victimization fantasies, and another third have rape aggressor fantasies, and the vast majority of both groups go on to be perfectly normal and reasonable people.  Even as media involving rape fantasy has become dramatically more available over the last thirty years, we've seen a decrease in per capita rape.

Just as in Japan itself, where this admittedly skeevy subject matter is apparently more acceptable, there's also a lot less per capita rape than here.  

JG

Quote from: James Gillen;635995Just as in Japan itself, where this admittedly skeevy subject matter is apparently more acceptable, there's also a lot less per capita rape than here.  

JG

I'll point out that the mayor of Tokyo was pilloried by geeks the world over for instituting a package of restrictions on a lot of the child-porn-esque anime and manga.

In the nerd world this was an attack on free speech and Japanese culture.

In the real world it was massively popular in Japan and the mayor was returned to office easily.

Japan doesn't have a more permissive attitude towards child sexploitation, Japan has a problem with pedophiles.

It's really NOT more acceptable with normal people in Japan. It's just that Japan's fandom has been saturated with creeps and perverts.

"Otaku" is not a good thing in Japan. Most Japanese people recognize these pathetic perverts for what they are.

Quote from: Piestrio;635998Japan doesn't have a more permissive attitude towards child sexploitation, Japan has a problem with pedophiles.

It's really NOT more acceptable with normal people in Japan. It's just that Japan's fandom has been saturated with creeps and perverts.

"Otaku" is not a good thing in Japan. Most Japanese people recognize these pathetic perverts for what they are.

It is hard to get closer to facts in Japan when it comes to disgraceful things. There is a saying there " if something stinks in the pot, put a lid on it".

There are different kinds of fandom in Japan. "Otaku" isn't a positive image, but Japanese people don't automatically jump to the conclusion that all otaku are criminally perverted. An otaku could be assumed to be a 20 year old virgin or girly magazine wanker quite easily, but not assumed to much worse than that unless there are other reasons to assume that.