What We Lose When We Eliminate Controversial Content

[Justice and Rule]

That is how I feel about the question vis a vis the Forgotten Realms, which is what you asked about.

But it's not the question. I'm trying to ask how important you think it is to the setting, regardless of "canon" or what not. I'm asking if slavery is integral to making the Realms work as a setting.

Forgotten Realms is a good example of what we lose due to censorship. Apparently, Ed Greenwood's original was heavy on the Free Love, and all those "festhalls" on the city maps were originally brothels/sex clubs, and people were overall very open about experimenting and trying new things, like Belts of Gender Change. We can only dream of the D&D that could have been if not for those uptight evangelicals, or concede that these changes probably were a good idea to create a marketable product.

 

[Irlo]

Forgotten Realms is a good example of what we lose due to censorship. Apparently, Ed Greenwood's original was heavy on the Free Love, and all those "festhalls" on the city maps were originally brothels/sex clubs, and people were overall very open about experimenting and trying new things, like Belts of Gender Change. We can only dream of the D&D that could have been if not for those uptight evangelicals, or concede that these changes probably were a good idea to create a marketable product.

I wouldn't say that was loss due to censorship but rather to editorial oversight.

But I'd also say that wasn't a loss at all, regardless of marketablity.

 

[Micah Sweet]

But it's not the question. I'm trying to ask how important you think it is to the setting, regardless of "canon" or what not. I'm asking if slavery is integral to making the Realms work as a setting.



View attachment 277869

I think those parts of the setting would not be the same without them, and as I said I value setting fidelity. Do they need slavery to make sense? Maybe, maybe not, I'm not deeply versed in Realms lore, but like @Bedrockgames I don't feel something has to be integral to be included and have worldbuilding value.

 

[Micah Sweet]

But it's not the question. I'm trying to ask how important you think it is to the setting, regardless of "canon" or what not. I'm asking if slavery is integral to making the Realms work as a setting.



View attachment 277869

Oh, and I don't understand the dog picture. I only speak meme well enough to ask where the bathroom is.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

The problem is, you’re ignoring the fact that pepperoni has been used to the virtual exclusion of other toppings, resulting in numbers of pizza lovers who would love to have pizza with you feel unwelcome because every time they come to the restaurant, there is a very good chance (not 100% but still high) that the pizza will have pepperoni and not other toppings.

In other words, you insist on sticking to theoreticals and ignore actual facts and history.

I am using metaphors because this topic is about "Controversial Content" not "Slavery".

If use a singular concept like slavery as an example, then the discussion is about slavery. If I say controversial content people just ignore that and say slavery.

By speaking theoretically I'm discussing all controversial content not just a singular controversial topic.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

Just talk about putting slavery in a product, for Lathander's sake. All this beating around the bush is so frustrating because those who are defending the idea have problems seemingly even talking about it directly. The metaphors aren't real, they aren't even good comparisons.

Let's just talk directly about the topic. Like, let me ask a direct question: which slavery is indispensable to the Forgotten Realms as a setting? Like, which instances are integral to the setting so that it functions.

The topic is controversial content, not just slavery. I'm trying to discuss the entire idea of controversial content not a single instance of it.

 

[Minion X]

View attachment 277869

I think you can confirm most of my claims just by reading Greenwood's QAs on the Candlekeep site.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

Why would you think it's fair or reasonable to tell everyone else that they do need a trope because otherwise their worlds won't be as realistic or as rich?


"I said that when you remove concepts (aka specific colors of crayons) from the list of available topics that can be included in a game (the box of crayons) then the area your game can cover (your pictures color palette) is not as wide as if you still had access to all concepts (a larger color palette)."

"Previously in this thread I have stated that you shouldn't remove the red crayon from the box, because it limits possibilities in storytelling."


And I'll go through with one last analogy as well.

If a pizza parlor chooses to not sell a specific topping, then that's perfectly OK. Ledo's pizza has salami and meatballs as potential toppings, but Pizza Hut doesn't--but Pizza Hut does have sun-dried tomatoes, which Ledo's doesn't. And California Pizza Kitchen has broccoli and avocado, which neither Ledo's or Pizza Hut sell.

Why? Because they are different restaurants selling different types of pizza.

Just like different companies produce different games and different genres of game with different target audiences, and will thus include different topics. And some companies are choosing not to sell slavery as an option for their pizza.

Notice that in the parts of my posts you quoted I never claimed that everyone had to use the red crayon, I just said it should stay in the box for others.

But now that I'm being personally mocked for trying to come to an understanding I think I'll bow out of this discussion.

 

[Faolyn]

Forgotten Realms is a good example of what we lose due to censorship. Apparently, Ed Greenwood's original was heavy on the Free Love, and all those "festhalls" on the city maps were originally brothels/sex clubs, and people were overall very open about experimenting and trying new things, like Belts of Gender Change. We can only dream of the D&D that could have been if not for those uptight evangelicals, or concede that these changes probably were a good idea to create a marketable product.

Sexual harassment, as far as the eye can see!

That's what really would have happened, considering that teens and young adults were the main players at the time.

 

[Faolyn]

Does that mean that no one should sell pepperoni then? That from now on if you want pepperoni you need to make it yourself?

Pepperoni (and red crayons) =/= having fun with the idea of treating people as property.