tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post4509410357827944418..comments2024-03-18T20:22:06.331-04:00Comments on GROGNARDIA: Blast from the PastJames Maliszewskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comBlogger108125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-53249353447420031652010-06-02T16:08:07.356-04:002010-06-02T16:08:07.356-04:00Jumping in late to note that, without the code, it...Jumping in late to note that, without the code, it would be inevitable that TSR would encounter uploads to its official fora that would cause a scandal of greater or lesser degree, with possible real-world effects such as being dropped by retailers.<br /><br />Being the big name in the industry, and having the past history of being targeted by unethical zealots and sensationalist headlines, I'd argue that TSR had considerably less margin for error in this area.<br /><br />So without such a code it would be inevitable that TSR would end up doing ad hoc censorship, for reasons not stated up-front. Writers would end up not knowing what would be rejected, or why. Enforcement would likely be spotty at best, and thus would appear capricious, and some writers might well start to take it personally.<br /><br />Nowadays, you're seeing that same response among iPhone app developers. Apple's guidelines for acceptable apps are seen as vague, irregularly and inaccurately applied, and constantly shifting. Apps that are accepted for sale in the App Store for three versions get thrown out on the fourth version, for something that it did all along.<br /><br />It's certainly an unpleasant area to get into, but that's business. There was no upside to TSR in paying the legal expenses to defend some third party's S&M paedo-torture dungeon on 1st amendment grounds. Today there's no upside for Apple if an Apple Store in Texas were busted because some kid bought a porn app on an iPad.<br /><br />It's just a price of success in the USA.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-32892073004956461032010-03-17T08:48:21.787-04:002010-03-17T08:48:21.787-04:00this code seems to be built around the idea that y...<i>this code seems to be built around the idea that you can create interesting games around the difference between good and evil. Something that TSR never bothered to do.</i><br /><br />That's very elegantly put. Thank you.richardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13517340075234811323noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-2296993469226712332010-03-16T17:51:19.273-04:002010-03-16T17:51:19.273-04:00@JimLotFP
"Seriously though, how awful that t...@JimLotFP<br />"Seriously though, how awful that these standards applied to a game inspired in major ways by Howard, Leiber, and Vance."<br /><br />Agreed.<br /><br />They're not entirely horrible standards to have, I don't think, but they fit poorly with the source materials. Also with getting teenagers to buy things.<br /><br />It's interesting that this code seems to be built around the idea that you can create interesting games around the difference between good and evil. Something that TSR never bothered to do.Rose Baileyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16201318275929153053noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-83707265144107131502010-03-16T10:03:30.284-04:002010-03-16T10:03:30.284-04:00> @irbyz, I'm a little skeptical. I'm n...> @irbyz, I'm a little skeptical. I'm not sure that the "game writers" had much of an influence on the game itself. (It would be easy to identify who they are, right?) <br /><br />Erm... I'm quoting Jack Chick's website and observing that such an "Ethics Code" clause might be in reaction to the likes of those stories. Those don't need to be any more "factual" or "representative" than those "angry moms" (one, maybe two per week) that Jim Ward was reacting to in his sanitisation of 2e, as admitted to in TD154.irbyzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10193584357850337816noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-74901831503793055322010-03-16T08:16:37.024-04:002010-03-16T08:16:37.024-04:00@Rick, sorry, but I think you're taking this a...@Rick, sorry, but I think you're taking this a little too far, pushing the code to find any little edge cases. For a lot of us, clause six meant things like filling the modules with swear words, and there's no need to get into details about things like orgy's with #9. (And I get sick of the old argument that sex is less offensive than violence--it's a very simplistic argument).<br /><br />As for #8, you probably should not spend a lot of time on the details of rape in a module of escapist fantasy.<br /><br />Admittedly, the wording may be over the top and this is definitely a blunt instrument. I wish these could have just been internal policies, but at the same time they had a right to protect the brand and the problem with something like D&D is that you get a lot of submissions and later they were concerned about people on the Internet tarnishing their brand name.<br /><br />@irbyz, I'm a little skeptical. I'm not sure that the "game writers" had much of an influence on the game itself. (It would be easy to identify who they are, right?) <br /><br />From what I've seen in the PHB, most of the magic was fantasy, and there are even a lot of hints of whimsy (such as Gygax's pun-based material components). There's not a lot in there that emulates what we'd consider real-world magic. I also know Gygax has gone on record saying that spells were not occultism in Best of the Dragon #2 (and although he believed in ghosts and religion, he said he never saw any magic ritual remotely approaching the power of even a 1st level spell).<br /><br />@Referee, while I understand thinking the game is "for adults", when it turns out you are gaining a young adult and adolescent audience, for better or for worse things change. While I don't agree with everything in this CoE, I see nothing wrong with, for instance, removing the few naked pictures of monsters, or toning down a few things. Its similar to what the creators of the Sopranos did for the planned syndication--during the actual filming they filmed alternate scenes where the profanity was removed and strippers wore minimal clothes. I think this only increased the audience, and it didn't get in the way of other things--Gygax-written stuff still had a high vocabulary, for instance.JRThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06028363896728357260noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-43834737472535848062010-03-16T01:08:10.104-04:002010-03-16T01:08:10.104-04:0011-14 are fine with me, more or less. They are bas...11-14 are fine with me, more or less. They are basically about treating sensitive real-world issues with respect. Number 12 specifically refers to real-world human nationalities and ethnic backgrounds. Evil orcs and drow are OK by them, as are 'racially inferior' goblins and kobolds. I guess it hinges on your definition of "fairly portrayed" <br /><br />17 is just about separating fantasy from reality, which isn't a problem for any of my current gaming group. <br /><br />I got a chuckle out of 18: I think LARP is pretty lame, but to each their own.<br /><br />The comments about "literary theft" are quite ironic, considering TSR's own problems with Deities & Demigods. "Do as we say, not as we do?"Dirkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12346707555093906723noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-15592922467176451972010-03-15T23:53:33.310-04:002010-03-15T23:53:33.310-04:00> how "presenting explicit details and met...> how "presenting explicit details and methods of magic that could be reasonably duplicated and misued in real life" is unacceptable and goes against the product's intent as fictional entertainment. What? No REAL MAGIC is allowed? Damn them!<br /><br />That particular clause almost sounded like a direct reaction to the ol' chestnuts such as http://www.chick.com/articles/dnd.asp ;<br /><<<br />On top of that, the second issue is that the materials themselves, in many cases, contain authentic magical rituals. I can tell you this from my own experience. I was a witch high priest (Alexandrian tradition) during the period 1973-84. During some of that period (1976-80) I was also involved in hardcore Satanism. We studied and practiced and trained more than 175 people in the Craft. Our "covendom" was in Milwaukee, Wisconsin; just a short drive away from the world headquarters of TSR, the company which makes Dungeons and Dragons in Lake Geneva, WI. In the late 1970's, a couple of the game writers actually came to my wife and I as prominent "sorcerers" in the community. They wanted to make certain the rituals were authentic. For the most part, they are.<br /><br />These two guys sat in our living room and took copious notes from us on how to make sure the rituals were truly right "from the book," (this meaning that they actually came from magic grimoires or workbooks). They seemed satisfied with what they got and left us thankfully.<br /><br />Back in 1986, a fellow appeared on The 700 Club who was a former employee and game writer for TSR. He testified right on the show that he got into a wrangle with the management there because he saw that the rituals were too authentic and could be dangerous. He protested to his boss and was basically told that this was the intent—to make the games as real as possible. He felt conscience-stricken (even though he was not a Christian at the time), and felt he had to resign from the company. <br />>><br /><br />No need to buy a copy of Authentic Thaumaturgy, eh? :)irbyzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10193584357850337816noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-27096507293901486122010-03-15T23:42:20.367-04:002010-03-15T23:42:20.367-04:00I didn't read all of the comments above so it ...I didn't read all of the comments above so it may have already been mentioned, but I love how in #2: NOT FOR DUPLICATION it states how "presenting explicit details and methods of magic that could be reasonably duplicated and misued in real life" is unacceptable and goes against the product's intent as fictional entertainment. What? No REAL MAGIC is allowed? Damn them!Wheggihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08514479185531072412noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-57712830381210712592010-03-15T22:56:31.511-04:002010-03-15T22:56:31.511-04:00@JRT: "While I agree with the examples you pr...@JRT: "While I agree with the examples you presented, to say "all 19" are bad seems a little ridiculous. 6, 8, and 9 I would probably say would be at least a minimum standard I would set for a gaming product."<br /><br />6: These cannot even be used by bad characters—pirates, assassins, and slavers who never ever swear, really? Consider how many things are considered vulgar, none of that either?—not even to teach or tell a plausible story. These are things that should be used with taste, not tastelessly avoided.<br /><br />8: How can lust conceivably be called a form of violence or gore? Lust is another word for attraction; it is the word people use when attraction disgusts them, when they consider attraction excessive or otherwise inappropriate. There's something perverted and filthy and morally bankrupt about a culture that thinks hacking your enemies to pieces is heroic but feeling attraction to another human being is disgusting and repulsive.<br /><br />9: Two main problems with this one.<br /><br />First, not "INAPPROPRIATE sexual themes should be avoided" but "Sexual themes of ALL types" [my emphasis]—really? So . . . no pregnancy, no childbirth, no attraction, no flirting, no double entendre, no affairs, no coveting, no infidelity, no elopements . . . This clause is very badly written and does not even reflect the author's intentions, let alone well-crafted ethical guidance.<br /><br />Second, in the first half of the twentieth century rape was considered a primarily sexual activity, which is why so many localities would not even prosecute rape as a crime, treating the victim as a dirty sex fiend who was doubtless asking for it. To combat that grotesque and immoral treatment of rape victims, rape is now widely recognized as primarily an act of violence, of domination and control. This gives rape victims at least a fighting chance to rebuild their self-esteem and a chance at a healthy sex life. That moral and cultural victory was won at least ten years before this "ethical code" was written. No one with any moral sense still lumps in rape in with sex.<br /><br />So, no, it may seem silly, but it's not. I studied the entire document, I thought about each clause long and hard, and in the end realized there isn't a single one free of serious moral flaws. I considered listing the problems with each clause, but I really didn't want to sidetrack the discussion, so I just picked two of the worst to use as examples. Now we're up to five. If you need me to prove my case on the remaining fifteen, let me know so I can take it offline to my blog so I don't consume this thread any more than I already have.<br /><br />It would be interesting to see what the ethical code should have looked like, to rewrite it in a way that does its job better but without stifling the creativity and judgment of potential authors. That could have been done, those goals don't have to collide, but they do when someone tries to respond to the mess TSR faced at the time by handing down rules like the ten commandments.Rick Marshallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01707062453047354335noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-48737829032520036072010-03-15T22:01:34.663-04:002010-03-15T22:01:34.663-04:00@Rick Marshall:
You *PRECISELY* captured my senti...@Rick Marshall:<br /><br />You *PRECISELY* captured my sentiments on this subject. I had especially found the two you highlighted to be far and away the most troubling. Thanks for that well reasoned and written post.Angantyrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07583089145943203408noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-83555636051432444932010-03-15T21:08:48.349-04:002010-03-15T21:08:48.349-04:00Paizo has a similar code of ethics, though a bit d...Paizo has a similar code of ethics, though a bit different. For example, all of their adventure paths require the characters to make unsavory "deals with the devil," in order to complete the storyline. Presumably, the rest of their guidelines follow the same values.jdh417https://www.blogger.com/profile/14541882649762424101noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-53495097640580775942010-03-15T21:07:55.008-04:002010-03-15T21:07:55.008-04:00>> TSR recognizes the physical dangers of li...>> TSR recognizes the physical dangers of live action role-playing that promotes its participants to do more than simply imagine in their minds what their characters are doing, and does not wish any game to be harmful.<br />> Clearly, nobody bothered to tell the Scandivians - thank god.<br /><br />Yeah, and then look what happened; http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/dorset/8563377.stm : can just imagine that conversation, now; "I told you that sword was sharp, Tyrfingr"..."yes, but Sveinaldi said it wouldn't be any fun if we just /imagined/ it..." (trans. fr. OE.Norse).<br />TSR were right, I guess; and that's why Viking LARPing died out and the Danelaw fell to the Anglo-Saxons.irbyzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10193584357850337816noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-47824673131915486672010-03-15T19:59:20.109-04:002010-03-15T19:59:20.109-04:00[quote]18: LIVE ACTION ROLE-PLAYING
It is TSR pol...[quote]18: LIVE ACTION ROLE-PLAYING<br /><br />It is TSR policy to not support any live action role-playing game system, no matter how nonviolent the style of gaming is said to be. TSR recognizes the physical dangers of live action role-playing that promotes its participants to do more than simply imagine in their minds what their characters are doing, and does not wish any game to be harmful.<br />[/quote]<br /><br />Clearly, nobody bothered to tell the Scandivians - thank god.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-79057301689719818732010-03-15T19:57:18.940-04:002010-03-15T19:57:18.940-04:00OK, I can be a harpy and complain about TSR and th...OK, I can be a harpy and complain about TSR and the slide into the mundane. But, I would say that it also reflects a certain generational ethos. <br /><br />At the time, 2e the prime growth market for AD&D 2e was 10-14 yr old boys. TSR did not want to alienate the parents of aid market. For if the parents would come down on TSR for producing risque or things were otherwise for a mature audience (and as parents controlled the purse strings - they excerted somewhat control over the market). <br /><br />This is not say that TSR should not have tried to push the envelope...afterall, what are the prime interest of teenage boys - almost everything the code is protecting them from...<br /><br />Whereas, 1e and Old School, prime market was already an older gamer, as countless 20 to 30 somethings were joining the D&D craze of the 1970s and it was maybe not explicitly marketed as an adult game. It was written by adults with people who could hold adult conversations or not get shamefaced when they saw a naked body. And, anything in infancy is bound to be more revolutionary or risque than an established product. Plus, OD&D and 1e were very much still products of the counterculture rather than the establishment.<br /><br />So, IMHO, real the sad thing, is that TSR never really believed that their demographic changed...that is say aged and matured. One only needs to see that most of the AD&D/D&D supplements that deal with sex or adult themes are very bland.<br /><br />So, OK, TSR could not do this as a leading edge of the hobby...where I find fault is with smaller companies like GDW (and whatever subsquent incarnation these games go by) now they do not celebrate the eros or even titilation of their audience drapping themselves in a dated moral stance that make their games look and feel boring. Which is interesting because Traveller could have gained so much from films like Outland or Alien but it chose to go back to a santized "Golden Age".<br /><br />But this rant is about AD&D and the code. Well, TSR lost many opportunities to take their audience or spilt their audience into different age categories - instead they sought to be all things to all people and the code merely codifies that. So, while we must lament for lost opportunities, the old school is bringing back some of this goodness and changing the margins of gaming. For it is bringing back the old timers and introducing new players to an adult discussion.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-67652339817557307682010-03-15T18:56:37.835-04:002010-03-15T18:56:37.835-04:00irbyz: it is possible, especially since I have nev...irbyz: it is possible, especially since I have never posted on the WotC/Paizo forums, and have largely given up on following ENWorld. But I am trying! :)Melanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07165894144553629675noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-57978360044175887522010-03-15T18:27:18.206-04:002010-03-15T18:27:18.206-04:00Rick,
While I agree with the examples you present...Rick,<br /><br />While I agree with the examples you presented, to say "all 19" are bad seems a little ridiculous. 6, 8, and 9 I would probably say would be at least a minimum standard I would set for a gaming product.JRThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06028363896728357260noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-17534162595795207732010-03-15T18:04:38.919-04:002010-03-15T18:04:38.919-04:00> To put this document into proper historical c...> To put this document into proper historical context, it was released right after TSR went after fan sites in an effort to protect its IP.<br /><br />Then it got better, now we're back on http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=466679 , eh? (Is there any such discussion that you /haven't/ posted on, Melan? Kudos. :)<br /><br />aside: Did you find any "ethics guide" explicitly mentioned in detail prior to Jim Ward's (B.A.D.D.) note in "Angry Mothers from Heck" in TD154 (Feb 1990)?irbyzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10193584357850337816noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-27890261117296088202010-03-15T17:35:52.700-04:002010-03-15T17:35:52.700-04:00I like the idea of companies having ethical codes,...I like the idea of companies having ethical codes, and embattled TSR might well want to use such a code to choose their legal battles by screening out things they weren't prepared to fight over in court, but this one is seriously defective. Here are two examples of serious problems with the moral quality of this code:<br /><br />3: Agents of Law Enforcement<br /><br />Post-Kent State, post-Vietnam, post-Watergate, was it even remotely morally defensible to ban stories about widespread corruption on the part of government and law enforcement? The biggest moral issue of the modern age is not what all the other monkeys might be doing with their private parts, but widespread abuse of power. To pretend such abuse is always an exception is profoundly immoral.<br /><br />4: Crime and Criminals<br /><br />Law enforcement agents/agencies are not the guardians of goodness or justice, despite the branding, but of law and order. Laws can be just or unjust, used to promote either—as we well know. Buying off congressmen to get porkbarrel and other kinds of bad laws passed is widespread, and distrust in the enforcement of such unjust laws should be promoted.<br /><br />The Nuremburg Principles were formulated in the wake of the Holocaust to establish the guidelines that could have averted it and could prevent another one from happening. Chief among those is that authority figures are not to be followed blindly any more, that under international law it is essentially illegal to do so; you are required to be your own moral agent and to evaluate the laws you are asked to submit yourself to, and if they are unjust it is your duty to challenge those laws. Any law enforcement agent/agency who enforces unjust laws should be distrusted, and anyone who cares at all about the moral underpinnings of civilization should promote such distrust. To ban depictions of people fulfilling their moral duty in such cases is deeply immoral.<br /><br />All nineteen of these clauses (and the plagiarism clause, as noted above) are profoundly broken in some way that ethically matters. Companies should adhere to published ethical standards, but like many others this one is so simple-minded and authoritarian as to be morally compromised.Rick Marshallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01707062453047354335noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-182803364547590672010-03-15T17:30:05.080-04:002010-03-15T17:30:05.080-04:00Moving on...
To put this document into proper his...Moving on...<br /><br />To put this document into proper historical context, it was released right after TSR went after fan sites in an effort to protect its IP. MPGNET was set up to allow these documents in a controlled environment, but the code had a chilling effect on actual submissions. Although it kept off stuff that was definitely "mature but immature" (e.g. The Complete Guide to Unlawful Carnal Knowledge, which was essentially a sex netbook), it also effected everything that didn't conform to a very narrow and restrictive morality. For the fan community, it was one insult after another.<br /><br />Fortunately, TSR went bankrupt soon afterwards, and Wizards of the Coast initiated a much more permissive and sensible net policy when it took the reins.Melanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07165894144553629675noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-67009639039999246282010-03-15T16:49:22.937-04:002010-03-15T16:49:22.937-04:00...on the free speech issue (and the infallibility......on the free speech issue (and the infallibility of authority) again, I'm reminded of Steve Jackson, who actually did face some efforts on the part of <a href="http://www.boogieonline.com/revolution/express/techno/sjg.html" rel="nofollow">government agents</a> to shut him down. His reaction was to fight for his own rights and those of his employees/co-workers. He did not decide to shy away from mentioning computers, hacking or authority figures in his company's subsequent work. In contrast, this document shows a company turtling up and sacrificing its creative opportunities out of fear that not doing so might adversely affect its sales or market position. The circumstances aren't identical: I can see that arguments can be made for or against either action in either circumstance, but I know who I'd rather write for.richardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13517340075234811323noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-3482641510599435162010-03-15T16:32:15.137-04:002010-03-15T16:32:15.137-04:00Why let any old Joe write an adventure with a bunc...<i>Why let any old Joe write an adventure with a bunch of kinky sex, gory violence, and promotion of larceny when that's as deep as it goes?</i><br /><br />The first amendment?<br />No, I know TSR isn't the state, and I'm flamebaiting a little there, but I do rather worry whenever I see comfortable assertions about censorship. Here we see a company stating what its products will and will not be about, and being pretty restrictive about it, going far beyond banning explicit portrayals of sex and violence - going far beyond norms in many other media at the time - and all while promoting adventures limited only by your imagination! And sure, you could make your own games about whatever you wanted, as long as you practised don't ask, don't tell on any message board associated with TSR... <br /><br />In the end I think this document is troubling because of what it forecloses. Any editor has the power to censor silently and absolutely. TSR didn't have to put this document up in order to control what appeared under its imprimatur - as noted above, it definitely was an act of PR, probably aimed principally at parents. Its effect, though, different from that of mere editing, is to prevent submission of ideas. Perhaps "most reasonable won't care" if an idea gets presented that violates the code but for excellent reasons... but that idea is much less likely to appear once you've thrown this big bucket of ice in the way.richardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13517340075234811323noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-63741142463268603172010-03-15T16:00:04.585-04:002010-03-15T16:00:04.585-04:00Somewhere between the Stepford Wives world of this...Somewhere between the Stepford Wives world of this TSR code and the tiresome, puerile "shock aesthetic" of the shopping-mall goth, White Wolf Vampire crowd... there lies sanity.George From NYhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06158111795024631345noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-72012763434039807102010-03-15T15:51:20.895-04:002010-03-15T15:51:20.895-04:00>That did get a chuckle; doubly so knowing Phil...>That did get a chuckle; doubly so knowing Phil's background and having heard about how he was introduced to Gary. Ca'n't quite visualise a response of "sorry, but that doesn't meet our ethics code" under those circumstances. :)<br /><br />I don't know that story; can you pass it on?<br /><br />thanks,<br />MarkMarkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04409904855518312412noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-38895702031043795902010-03-15T15:51:11.456-04:002010-03-15T15:51:11.456-04:00In any discussion of "mature content" li...In any discussion of "mature content" like this I think it is helpful to distinguish between "content developed by and for mature people" and "content which only mature people should be allowed to consume". The inclusion of gratuitous violence/sex, positive portrayal of illegal activity, etc, may fall under the second understanding of mature content, but not necessarily the first. Not even "morally grey" content is necessarily the first sense of mature content. There are many classic examples media that contain little mature content (in the second sense) but are still appreciated by mature people (Star Wars comes to mind).<br /><br />That said, I do think that there are times where to remove the second kind of mature content would also cheapen the experience (e.g. Hotel Rwanda). There is much value of the second kind of mature content, but most people don't use it well. Why let any old Joe write an adventure with a bunch of kinky sex, gory violence, and promotion of larceny when that's as deep as it goes?<br /><br />While I do disagree with individual aspects of the ethics code, I do agree with the idea of an ethics code in principle. The fact that some really meaningful stuff might be blocked does not bother me, mainly because if the story/adventure/whatever is really that good then it will likely be successful anyway and most reasonable won't care. Codes of conduct will never be perfect, but that does not mean that they should never be created.Willhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00112895093329193986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-89663688440866770302010-03-15T13:26:26.562-04:002010-03-15T13:26:26.562-04:00F*** that code of ethics. I'm pretty offended ...<em>F*** that code of ethics. I'm pretty offended by the people defending it. Makes want to go buy 10 copies of Carcosa tonight and write an adventure violating every single item, just on general principles.</em><br /><br />But you're talking about buying a privately-produced product and making your own personal product.<br /><br />The "code of ethics" is a corporate policy for a large corporate publishing company. Those are different things entirely.Lord Kilgorehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08100447170529010062noreply@blogger.com