Did political correctness creep into your 1E AD&D games?

[Vlospiress]

These days, I think I encourage "real acting" over "taboo acting" (in general, acting as in emulation of what someone from a realistic adventure would do; not "funny voices"). For one I don't play with kids and I don't want to play with immature people. I am as much as a lover of quasi-historical authenticity as I am a classic era S&S fantasy lover. As you can guess I thrive off of shock and sensation so you can imagine all the historical goodies I have waiting for my players...

For instance, I never realized the Third Reich meant Germany... Just kidding! (Sorry, I said "historical goodies" and it immediately thought of Roger Debris the director of Springtime for Hitler in the 1968 original THE PRODUCERS.)

Seriously, how many times have I said I hate "big plain-collared, wide-eyed innocent defense of the farms from the kobolds" dreck? Well I feel the same way about anything anachronistically "VANILLA".

On the other hand, some of the more vulgar things that we believe are recent modern problems are blurred by PC thinking in many "edifices" and "cornerstones" of society. I'm not saying they're doing "wrong" I'm saying they might want to do the right thing to protect (or whatever) but sometimes they don't have all the facts and will spread "common thinking" to fill in gaps.

What is important for a vulgar game?

A) No kids, you can say whatever you want or whatever realism is necessary for the fun of it.

B) No blurring of the fantasy with reality. If you're going to pour "real sexual interaction" into the game then I'm going to whack your nose with a rolled up adventure module! Man or woman!

C) No weekenders. Glib players can't embrace realistic style content at all. Make sure they sound like reasonable adults before drafting them.

D) No patience for dullards. If they want to drag it down to their level. EJECT!!!

I think I agree with you, but if its going to be vulgar let it be vulgar for a reason, not just for the sake of it.
If the witch queen is a man eating (literally) sex pot you don't have to go in to too much detail

[geneweigel]

I think I agree with you, but if its going to be vulgar let it be vulgar for a reason, not just for the sake of it.
If the witch queen is a man eating (literally) sex pot you don't have to go in to too much detail

Well, if it feeds the "quasi-historical" beast then so be it.

My players love the shit that I dredge up. I can't really share the level of detail but for instance ancient war descriptions as you can guess fascinate me but shit I'm no "war gamer" I just love to roll out the troops and deploy them "in-game" properly. Same for heavy content, I don't have a game called "Sluts and Stewes" but when you go to that part of town you might just have to do all kinds of "horrible" things that Hollywood can't put in a film to survive thats the nature of this quasi-historical beast that I refer to. You can imagine what I'm referring to but frankly I won't bring it up but thats what makes fascinating "vulgar" game content. That unsettling experience that can't be discussed everywhere but possibly may inspire and that might just be what this whole game experience is about.

[thedungeondelver]

In the game world, ethical ambiguity can abound, but at the end of the day, evil is evil and good is good. D3 describes a town (Ehrei-Cinlu) that sounds like it's straight out of Tekumel; drug and torture parlors, slaves being led around on chains, all sorts of horrible debauchery and it is described as a place of ineffable evil. It's weird, nasty, creepy, and the characters should be uneasy being there. Even a LE character might think "You know, even I have limits. This is...this is just wrong."

With that said, the modern perception of "politically correct" never comes up in my games. Just the bare bones of AD&D's operation forbid it! All jokes about modern politics aside, how many governments (at least in industrialized western societies) would brook the existence of a "thieves' guild". Not a crooked bunch of businessmen, or a criminal syndicate with multiple layers of plausible deniability between it's members and the law, but straight up a Lanhkmar-like open establishment dedicated to burglary, robbery and occasionally murder? Damn few. Tavern wenches are tavern wenches, feudal monarchies where "citizens" are chattal (regardless of how highly they regard their overlord) exist, and there are rigid and for some unbreakable cast systems. LG characters don't suddenly decide they're Vincent d'Onofrio campaigning for John Kerry and try to drag those systems down: they look at the lower ranks of the world and ask themselves, hey, are these people being protected by their leader? Can they shoulder their tax burden? Are the levies fairly compensated after a campaign? Yes? Then all is Just and fine.

[PapersAndPaychecks]

My players love the shit that I dredge up.

Yeah, I got the impression your players felt like that from the videos of your sessions. (Thanks for posting those--they certainly opened my eyes to some new DMing techniques.)

[geneweigel]

My players love the shit that I dredge up.

Yeah, I got the impression your players felt like that from the videos of your sessions. (Thanks for posting those--they certainly opened my eyes to some new DMing techniques.)

Heh, those videos are a nightmare because I never get what I want. That particular session had many golden moments all of them not recorded. A major part of that session was interaction with a demon idol which should have been recorded and the fact that that particular segment is not on any film just irritates the shit out of me.

[francisca]

I think I agree with you, but if its going to be vulgar let it be vulgar for a reason, not just for the sake of it.
If the witch queen is a man eating (literally) sex pot you don't have to go in to too much detail

Let me second that.

Chris Carter, the creator of X-Files made a relevant remark once: "Never show the monster." The idea is that the imagination of the audience will probably create an image much more terrifying than anything he can put on camera.

I think the same principle extends to D&D, in many aspects of the game, though its tougher, because a good part of D&D **is** fighting the monster. In other respects though, its enough to say "High class Brothel" or "Really sleazy brothel" and let the players fill in the blanks for themselves. There is really no point in detailing exactly which acts are available from every whore in town, and where they can perform such acts. By extension, I'm not interested in rules supplements which detail sacrificial rites, sex acts (like the ill-fated OGL Book of Erotic Fantasy), etc...

[geneweigel]

I think I agree with you, but if its going to be vulgar let it be vulgar for a reason, not just for the sake of it.
If the witch queen is a man eating (literally) sex pot you don't have to go in to too much detail

Let me second that.

Chris Carter, the creator of X-Files made a relevant remark once: "Never show the monster." The idea is that the imagination of the audience will probably create an image much more terrifying than anything he can put on camera.

I think the same principle extends to D&D, in many aspects of the game, though its tougher, because a good part of D&D **is** fighting the monster. In other respects though, its enough to say "High class Brothel" or "Really sleazy brothel" and let the players fill in the blanks for themselves. There is really no point in detailing exactly which acts are available from every whore in town, and where they can perform such acts. By extension, I'm not interested in rules supplements which detail sacrificial rites, sex acts (like the ill-fated OGL Book of Erotic Fantasy), etc...

As that particular creator/director sometimes doesn't make any sense , I'm not so sure. Carter's "you make sense of the dross" techniques had me scratching my head so hard it was annoying through that series and films. The cheapo Hollywood precursor to that, a sort of "Save the Monster to the last minute and make it zip by" technique has always really annoyed me as well. One of the things about the D&D game was that it gave you the monsters up front and I think its a big appeal.

Just to clarify what I was saying, I don't think I was implying whores and "orally" detailed sex acts being discussed frankly, I don't pull that kind of crap. I was implying more in the sense of lying down with dogs and you'll get fleas in a more moral degradation perspective. When the magic is dispelled a hideous truth is revealed, etc., etc.,

[Chainsaw]

I think I agree with you, but if its going to be vulgar let it be vulgar for a reason, not just for the sake of it.
If the witch queen is a man eating (literally) sex pot you don't have to go in to too much detail

Let me second that.

And let me third it. I love a nasty, mean, dark campaign world - but I don't indulge or revel in it. My players might hear about an evil magic-user kidnapping young maidens, but I don't go into detail about what he does with them. The players can likely imagine far worse than what I'd debase the game trying to describe.

[francisca]

Just to clarify what I was saying, I don't think I was implying whores and "orally" detailed sex acts being discussed frankly, I don't pull that kind of crap. I was implying more in the sense of lying down with dogs and you'll get fleas in a more moral degradation perspective. When the magic is dispelled a hideous truth is revealed, etc., etc.,

Gotcha, and I didn't think you were.

There are those out there, who feel the need to do so.

[Coleston the Cavalier]

*a little late to the discussion*

No.
In fact, our party (including my paladin) slaughtered evil critters - both mature and young.

[EOTB]

*a little late to the discussion*

No.
In fact, our party (including my paladin) slaughtered evil critters - both mature and young.

Edit - that's how I play lawful good now, too. Lawfulness extends to those who are a part of the social compact, and goodness extends by default to most humans on assumption, but not to the evil 'round about.

Back in the day (my day started post Gary but pre-2E) - sure, a little. I would like to say that I was an iconoclast from birth, but such is not the truth. But age burns off the idealism of youth, and has made my game grittier. I hadn't read widely enough yet to fully develop my own ideas for playing the game, and so by default tended to echo the Williams-TSR company line.

But really, it didn't effect my gaming in that time at all. Everyone was operating under the same basic assumptions, even if we would at times go over-the-top opposite in our RPGing.

Now, however, it would be unappetizing.