The Book of Erotic Fantasy - Where did it go wrong?

[Alzrius]

This came up recently over on a thread about the GSL, so I wanted to start a new thread where it could be discussed without being a threadjacking.

I think the BoEF is a fairly good d20 book, though it certainly had room for improvement. Everything I've read regarding what people thought of it seems to indicate that it had a rather lukewarm reception among those who bought/read it. I'm curious then what people expected regarding a book about sex and d20, and how the BoEF failed to measure up.

As an aside, this isn't the place to discuss whether or not sex is an acceptable topic in d20 books. I know a lot of people didn't like the BoEF simply because of its subject matter; that's a valid opinion, but it's not what I'm asking about here. This thread is predicated on the idea that a "d20 sex book" is one that could be done well; it just hasn't been yet.

Things (I thought) the BoEF did well:

Crunch - There was a LOT of room for improvement here (which is why I list this again under the things that could have been done better) but the book did cover a lot of things that, quite frankly, need to be covered in a d20 book about sex. It's expected that it'll have sex-based feats, spells, magic items, etc. You pretty much can't be a d20 book without those, and I thought it covered those bases relatively well.

Tone - I appreciated that the BoEF took itself seriously, rather than acting like a book of dirty jokes. I'd had enough of that in Nymphology and The Quintessential Temptress from Mongoose. Even if it was a bit clinical at times, it's attempt to rise above puerile humor was a welcome change.

The Artwork - Again, this is one I had mixed feelings on. While traditional artwork might have been better, I can't deny that the photoshopped illustrations of real people was certainly an interesting technique. I don't know if it worked so well in every situation, but it was decidedly different in a new way, which I consider to be a good thing.

On the flip-side, the BoEF also could have been a lot better in several areas:

The Crunch - While I appreciated that the book had to have a fair amount of new rules, it sort of let that dominate the book. The majority of what was there became about new classes, feats, spells, magic items, and monsters.

The (lack of) Fluff - The BoEF did have a fairly solid first chapter that dealt with the "fluff" of writing a d20 book about sex. Sex and the alignments, sex and various creatures and creature types, and the second chapter had a nice fluff/crunch mix regarding pregnancy, cross-breeding, diseases, etc. That part was good. Unfortunately, those chapters seemed to be virtually all there was in that regard. Small bits cropped up elsewhere about "laws against enchantment spells" and "new uses for existing spells" which were good, but beyond that the topic was largely abandoned. There should have been an adventure given to show how to better blend the materials presented into your game. There should have been some sort of local setting (the red light district of a city, perhaps) that could have been dropped into your campaign easily. Things like this weren't given enough coverage.

The Monsters - This is something of a crunch issue, but I felt that the monsters in the BoEF were exceptionally lacking. There simply weren't enough, and too many of those that were there were focused on being PC races. There were a lot of creature archetypes - ranging from the sexy celestial that tempts adventurers to do good with promises of heavenly rewards to tentacle demons that breed half-fiends by force - that were ignored.

The Artwork - Okay, the thing with photoshopped pics of real people were nice. But they just didn't work as well as actual illustrations would have, I think. There were a lot of places where the actual pictures actually hurt verisimilitude, and the sheer number of them that lacked backgrounds (or had such weird-looking backgrounds) made it painfully obvious that it was being done in a studio. Illustrations would have done a much better job than pictures.

How do you think the Book of Erotic Fantasy failed to adequately cover sex in the d20 system? And, more importantly, what SHOULD it have done?

 

[Xath]

Hrm...Interesting topic. I will admit, that we've found the need for some sort of sexual consequence rules in a few different campaigns now. Content-wise it's superior to the Quintessential Temptress (I've never read Naughty and Dice or Nymphology). Though...I find some of its rule concepts to be so ridiculous, I have to wonder if they really thought them through.

I can't remember the exact stats, but I think that there was something like a 20% chance that a human would get pregnant after every sexual experience. Which is....unfeasable. Also considering the unlikelyhood that any professional "adventurer" would even be able to get pregnant or carry to term after getting repeatedly stabbed and beaten in the abdominal area. So crunch in that area is almost laughable.

However, some of the feats/spells aren't entirely unbalanced, and I was interested to note that the BoeF's "Kiss of Life" spell was adapted and incorporated into the Spell Compendium as "Revivify." So the direct adaptatation game rules (feats/spells/skill use) were well done.

The fluff was also an interesting read, and certainly provides a useful view of the way other species view sex, so that the GM doesn't have to come up with that on his/her own. It also takes itself relatively seriously, so it's not to hard to incorporate into a campaign setting.

However, the thing that makes the "beef" (as that's how we refer to it in our group) a very large and awkward joke is the art. Very very poor choice publishers. It is....not good. Whenever I find myself needing to use the book, I have a thick piece of construction paper that I place over the offending art, so that I don't find the need to deal with it. (Crabs art or crazy nipple clamp art, I'm thinking of you!). It is obviously photoshopped, not very well photoshopped, and quite honestly, not very attractive. The interesting thing is that the Book of Vile Darkness has some art that's on the same explicitness scale, but I don't mind it at all. Why? Because I don't have some real person's face staring up at me from compromising positions of awkwardness. The. Art. Kills. It.

 

[DaveMage]

I think it boils down to (IMO):

1. Pretend violence (standard D&D game) is fun!
2. Pretend sex (BoEF) is silly.

I think there's a place for romance & seduction in the game, but actual sex is best "off camera" so to speak.

However, for those groups that are more, um, intimate, maybe it would work, but for the group of, say 4-6 hetrosexual males playing D&D, there's really not much of a place for the BoEF.

All that said, it wouldn't surprise me if it was the #1 best-selling OGL book ever.

 

[el-remmen]

for the group of, say 4-6 hetrosexual males playing D&D, there's really not much of a place for the BoEF.

I only ever looked through the book once and found it an unnecessary addition for my own games, so I cannot really speak to the OP's post, however I do find it silly in the comment above to think that the real life sexual preferences and genders of the players does/should have anything to do with how sex is handled in the game.

It has to do with their gaming preference, not their sex preference.

 

[HeavenShallBurn]

As noted the art was the worst part of the BoEF, they could have done much better with illustrations. It's not like there are a lack of people drawing sexually explicit images, I submit about 30% of the internet as proof.

The fluff was usually well thought out and could be incorporated into various campaigns easily if appropriate. Some of the parts on how various races or creature types view sex were creative and gave a unique cast to that race's social behavior.

The crunch was mostly decent, thought I think they had the chances of pregnancy a bit high. On the other hand considering how resilient a PC is and that they receive magical healing I don't see any problem with them being fertile. I mean if a PC can survive being immersed in Acid and heal up just fine afterward I don't have a problem with them being able to get pregnant or have a child.

 

[Xath]

However, for those groups that are more, um, intimate, maybe it would work, but for the group of, say 4-6 hetrosexual males playing D&D, there's really not much of a place for the BoEF.

Hrm...It seems to me as though you havn't looked at the book. None of the stuff in our group is handled on camera, but some of the rules are useful for handling the concequences of the things that do happen off camera.

Even though my group is 4 women and 5 men, none of the sexual stuff happens 1) on camera or 2) between PCs.

 

[Xath]

The crunch was mostly decent, thought I think they had the chances of pregnancy a bit high. On the other hand considering how resilient a PC is and that they receive magical healing I don't see any problem with them being fertile. I mean if a PC can survive being immersed in Acid and heal up just fine afterward I don't have a problem with them being able to get pregnant or have a child.

Right, but the problem is still that a PC would still be going out to adventure during the pregnancy (unless you have an in-game hiatus) and would still be experiencing trauma to the abdominal area. Then you get into a nasty realm of "can you use heal, or do you have to use mass heal spells" or "does raise dead effect a fetus." Personally, I try to avoid these situations entirely. Our group generally keeps pregnancy and the like within the realms of NPCs.

 

[Alzrius]

I can't remember the exact stats, but I think that there was something like a 20% chance that a human would get pregnant after every sexual experience. Which is....unfeasable. Also considering the unlikelyhood that any professional "adventurer" would even be able to get pregnant or carry to term after getting repeatedly stabbed and beaten in the abdominal area. So crunch in that area is almost laughable.

Actually, that's a misconception (pun intended). Table 2-3 (page 49) does list humans as having a 20% chance of conceiving. However, the text for the pregnancy check on the previous page says the numbers on Table 2-3 are chances of conception per month of sexual activity, and if checking per encounter instead, use 1/10th of the chance listed. So humans only have a 2% chance of conceiving per sexual encounter.

To be fair though, the book laid out that information very poorly, so it's easy to see why a lot of people get that wrong.

 

[Xath]

Ah, that makes alot more sense then.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I only ever looked through the book once and found it an unnecessary addition for my own games, so I cannot really speak to the OP's post, however I do find it silly in the comment above to think that the real life sexual preferences and genders of the players does/should have anything to do with how sex is handled in the game.

It has to do with their gaming preference, not their sex preference.

There is very definitely a difference. Sexuality is a very personal thing, between two persons. It is intimate, and that's why it can be so hard to roleplay this part in a "non-handwavy" matter.
Typical D&D violence lacks intimacy and emotional intensity.

I am tempted to compare the violence of torture and the "social" nature of sex in this part.
D&D violence usually focuses on cleaving through enemy hordes, and slaying demons or dragons. D&D social usually focusses on gaining allies, finding the bad guys and generally gathering information. That is a different level of intensity then torturing a victim, or roleplaying a sexual encounter with the princess you rescued from Certain Death (TM).
The first requires you to think yourself into a mood you rather not be (and hopefully never will be), the second requires you to think yourself into a mood that's intimidate and you won't share with just anyone.

Neither is comfortable. (The difference between these two extremes off course is that the latter might at least be healthy )

So, if a Book of Erotic Might Fantasy II would appear, it should perhaps also focus on role-playing tips how to avoid awkwardness. How to incorporate the rules (and which of them) without anyone being bothered by it (or which rules are to be incorporated).

--

To other stuff:
Artwork:
Artwork is important - in every book. A book on erotic stuff in RPGs should ensure that the artwork is good looking and tasty. I don't care whether it's photoshopped models or typical illustrations, it should look good. Cover a sensible range of styles, as appropriate for the given topic. No leather fetish or stuff like that (or at least not exclusively - I suppose there is place for it in the chapter on Devils, for example )

Mechanics:
The mechanics should be integrated with the rest of the game system. (Unless you're writing a non-system specific book maybe). Just because you're covering a uncommon topic doesn't mean you can be sloppy.
If you decide that "sexual encounters" can be equal to ordinary Quests, combat encounters or social encounters, ensure that whatever you do isn't broken.
Make no illusions about your rules. They won't be used by many, so they should mostly be generally useful. If they can't, ensure that stuff like feats,spells, powers, or whatever don't cost too much of the character resources. A good idea for this is using a subsystem that can be added to any character. If you do so, avoid loop-holes bleeding from your subsystem into any of the others.

Fluff:
Again, keep it tasty and cover a sensible range. From whoring over chastity to finding your One True Love, everything should be covered.

Advice and Tips:
As stated in the beginning of this post. Give some advice on how to handle the topic in your game. It would be nice if this stuff has a base in actual experience, so it might be good to have made some playtests and actually used the system in your game. I think that might be nearly the hardest part. There aren't many groups that focus on this topic.