RPG.net thread on games like ours...

[Vekseid]

sex games

Discussion about the Book of Erotic Fantasy (I somehow think we can do better) and pandering to puritan tastes.

And, of course, no one interested in games like ours has a sex life, much less a spouse or, heaven forbid, children.

But it's gotten me thinking about putting something together and selling it through Lulu or something : )

[Elvi]

Quote of the thread....

"Dude, it's a catch 22. The normal people who game don't need to play a game to explore sex, they can...you know...just get it for real. Sex is one of those things where any lame gaming approximation is simply going to be a waste of time for any well adjusted person."

Not normal and not well adjusted....I'm really proud of us all....*grins*

[Jefepato]

That's our RPG.net, all right!

[Sabby]

So he says that anyone who needs to express and explore something in a game aren't getting a healthy dose of it in real life... so say he has a game where there is a strong political plot within the chosen setting. Going by his logic, he's not a very good polotician in real life.

Douchebag.

[Elvi]

The only reasons I can think of for prohibiting describing sexual experiences are if the people have to deal with each other socially and it would make them uncomfortable in and/or outside of the game, and if focus the game on one character's intimate experiences would leave everyone else just having to sit there waiting for it to be over so they could get on with the game.

I would be very loathed to actually have an 'intimate' table top game with everyone sat around the table choking on their coffee as I described my sexual encounter in detail.
HOWEVER, surely that is not what they are talking about is it?

We are talking online role play aren't we?....*shrugs*

[Jefepato]

HOWEVER, surely that is not what they are talking about is it?

We are talking online role play aren't we?....*shrugs*

On RPG.net?  No, they're not talking about online specifically (and most of the posters seem to have their offline groups in mind).

[kongming]

rpg.net is right up there with the majority of sites that primarily discuss gaming: boneheads, the lot of them. The Wizards of the Coast message boards are actually so saturated in stupidity that it makes you want to reach through the monitor and stab some sense into people. (Interestingly enough, they have a "mature" section that you have to be 18+ (or lie about your age) to access. This is the least mature part of the board, but they decided to, in a bid to be "family friendly" or something, make the linking to pictures with nudity a bannable offence. This includes pictures with nipples - such as those from actual WotC books, hosted on their own site. Yeah, you can get banned for it.)

Sadly, 4chan's /tg/ is a little bit smarter than those, but that isn't saying much. That's like saying the lighting in an abandoned warehouse is better than the lighting in "Doom 3" (Zing!) They are devoid of morals there, on the other hand (one DM was so proud of his group for not murdering/raping/abandoning a little girl that was in the middle of a dungeon guarding items. They carried her out to safety, protecting her with their lives. Everyone was so touched, even though you shouldn't get a medal for not being a horrific, soulless monster). However they can give some ideas for games and characters that are just fun.

I usually go to the Gaming Den for my discussion of roleplaying stuff. They seriously don't have an issue with adult roleplaying while having relationships (or while not. Whatever), there's intellectual discussion of things, and there's also good old fashioned humour. Usually bitter, acerbic humour, but still funny.

Vek:
The Book of Erotic Fantasy really is tame, and the addition of the "have sex" skill is dumb. Not to mention adding another stat, Appearance (ignoring the subjectivity, and the fact that apparently, a dwarf would rather have sex with an elf than another dwarf, there are balance issues: It steals Charisma skills, when it was a fairly useless stat to begin with. It also means that if you *want* to be pretty, you have to put points into Appearance, thus making you weaker at actually doing your job. Yeah, because you don't get beautiful heroes on fantasy novel covers...)

But Elliquiy could easily put together something better, especially if it's not a system-specific thing, but covers things like "how to cover sexual stuff in games", different levels of description, ways of making sure no-one is left bored and going to play the Wii while others sit there describing their sex scene, historical stuff...

Heck, I actually made a D&D supplement (not published, just in .pdf format) that covers spanking (did that surprise anyone at all?), complete with rules and an explanation for why it shouldn't do damage (hint: when was the last time a healthy adult passed out after less than 20 seconds of spanking by hand?) It can totally be done with less specific things, and done well.

[schnookums]

Ah, the wonders of the interweb (It's a series of Tubes!^TM) So many people think "Hey, I've done "x" before sometime in my life, plus I have strong opinions. That makes me an expert!" It's like one gigantanourmous logical fallacy in slow motion.