"Adult themes in war gaming" Topic

Yet again it has nothing to do with gaming rape via game mechanics but witnessing it in a combat situation as to effect the combatants and players to react to the immediate situation. Rape was a poor example as that is what everyone seems to be harping about.

How about a T-Rex materializes on top of your commanding general and splats him. As a gamer and combatant in the game you have to deal with the immediate situation of a big ass lizard appearing out of nowhere. You didn't expect it. You didn't see it on the table before it happened but there it is. Do you run? Do you shoot it? Do you ask it for a cigarette. That is the question not playing out via dice rolls or charts the act of raping, beheading or any other kind of a realistic possible adult situation that you would normally not have to deal with on a battlefield ie witnessing your commrads gunned down as POWS or seeing a house on fire and their are civilians inside screaming. What are YOU as the player going to do about it?

Whatever the situation, realistic, fantastic or just stupid, you as a player have to deal with it right then and there. It could have adverse effects on your men accomplishing their mission or it could just freak them our so bad they run away.

Of coarse I would play a more realistic "All of a sudden…!" but that is what the question posed.

Due you skirmish players just roll dice is their no human element to your game. Is it just rules and who rolls best because in a game were you can see your opponent's entire army on the field before your own, you can easily match whatever tactics he may use if you have any tactical sense. It's just move, shoot, roll, your turn. Their is no narrative that is fluid? No possibilities for the unknown to appear. In essence everyone plays 40K.

Well I guess my gaming group and I are the only gamers who play with a GM who may throw a monkey wrench into an otherwise straight forward battle. I guess the ,god strike me down for saying it, Role Playing aspect of emotions from good to bad are totally devoid in everyones games. Fine you would never do that then say so. Don't start calling me a porno-whatever, Nazi fetishist, freak, etc. Grow up and answer the question or just don't respond if you can't without insults.

YES or NO thats all I asked.

Brian

PS
Over 100 wow!

What sort of "effect" do you WANT witnessing a rape in a combat situation to have on someone's wargaming skirmishers? What do YOU think that "adult theme" should have to do with a game? What's your point with this conversation and line of questioning?

Fine, I got it. The consensuses of the board is a resounding NO.

Thanks for the exciting engagment,
Brian

Good gravy, are you all finished ransacking this guy for asking a simple question? Did you even read the first five or so posts before you grabbed a pitchfork? I think a lot of you misinterpreted the OP's intent and then ran with it… for a tedious 100+ posts.

Put a stake through this thread's heart already! (Uh oh, hope you don't condemn ME as some kind of bloodletting fetishist now…)

;)

Thick,
He asked a strange question. And after reviewing the entire discussion, including his posts, I still think that it is odd.

First, Kampf, of course we all have human elements in our games. The humans in our games are the human elements. There are, as you say, also random events. For example, in Warhammer, your mammoth is just as likely to step on you as charge against the mighty empire. Magazines in ships can exlode in battle. Your troops can even break ranks and flee! Of course there are challenges beyond your opponent.

You are right, war is not pretty, but neither is it effectively described in the terms you are seeking. Other posters are right; men don't stop fighting to rape women in the middle of a battle and it is odd that you would let dice or a strategic effect represent that. Say, for example, one side is the "bad guys". Let's pick chaos since you brought up 40k. Though I rarely play warhammer, everyone knows the game. So, if there is a huge negative impact on Bretonnian soldiers from witnessing a rape, am I to then "choose" to start raping women? How about killing babies in the most graphic manner possible by bashing their brains against walls?

There should not be an incentive to order "rapes" or engage in attorcities. That is a moral stand. It is just that simple. If you don't get it, too bad. But, we are playing chaos, so why not? Chaos is evil, right, so they should not care, therefore why should the chaos player care.

Well, it just seems stupid! It has NOTHING to do with the combat or tactics. Even if you don't care that it is amoral, if my soldiers start raping people, then how do they clobber the enemy??? That is why this is soooo stupid.

In fact, in most cases, it would urge the enemy to act with even stronger conviction! So, it should HELP THE OTHER SIDE with things that are already monekeywrenches in the works like morale and attributes that describe determination. If the men figure out that their opponents are pure evil and doing these acts, then they will act in a rage to exterminate the enemy… …as people have acted to extermiante you on this question! So, it is also stupid because at best, you are helping the other side beat your own troops. Smart!

And Kampf, saying "Well I guess my gaming group and I are the only gamers who play with a GM who may throw a monkey wrench into an otherwise straight forward battle" is even more stupid than the original question. Yes, I am sure that we would ALL agree that you are the ONLY creative guys out there who play war or role playing games. But I don't blame you lashing out since this is a bit of a pig-pile.

Now, let me also say, that in RPGs, I have alluded to rape as one of the horros of war. But it happens once the city is taken; not while it is being taken! It is what spurs the players on. As flavor for what the players are fighting against, yes, attrocities are fair game. Gaming their effects, yes, it is just sick and even worse stupid. People have mentioned the Nazis. And that might be fair for some Nazis. But, and I'll shock people, I'll bet there were many members of the German army in WWII who actually also thought rape was bad. Some might have even tried to stop it if it were happening to people around them just as US GIs did in vietnam.

Kampf, you said "a more realistic "All of a sudden…!"" I have to disagree. It would be anything but realistic. In an RPG, where the players are WWII resistance fighters sneaking into a Nazi camp and they witness something happening and have to make a choice, that I would say, is fine. In fact, I'd even say that is good because it gives the dilema for the players. But that can and should be left to GM narrative and story-telling; not dice. But this question was not listed on RPG boards only. So, I assume that you are talking about mass combat games too.

Maybe in your game you would have to have a penile fortitude ranking to see just how mighty it was. And then you could have a beer-goggle skill to deal with raping ugly old men. Or what about a… I digress…

I am sure you are a fine fellow, but gaming the effect in wargames, to answer your question, yeah, it is stupid.

Coming in rather late to this, but here's my 2p worth…

Do "adult themes" belong in a wargame? No, not really. It's been expressed in various ways already – but basically for me the "adult" stuff is things that fall between the cracks in a wargame and are thus invisible (or virtually so) in terms of game mechanics and any verbal descriptions given by referee or players during the game. "Martians eat human brains, so Human units are at -1 to morale when fighting them" or somesuch is all that's needed. I don't need any more realism on cannibalism, rape, or massacre of civilians than I do realism on swearing, gangrene in wounds or sexually transmitted diseases.

Adult themes in an RPG? Yeah sure, why not. However, I wouldn't run one in an open room at a big con, where the table next to me might be 11 year olds playing the My Little Pony RPG. And I wouldn't run it at home for mates who I knew would be upset by those themes (exactly the same way that I curtail my use of the F word when my Mum's around – common sense and common decency prevails).

And the RPGs I've run where stuff like massacres, rape etc has been a plot theme – it happens off screen, and the players find the evidence later. e.g. squad on patrol finds bodies of massacred civilians, it gradually clicks that their side did it, squad goes hell for leather trying to find out who did it and make sure they get brought to justice… meanwhile having to cope with what the news does to relations with the locals.

You don't need to describe stuff like bodies in burned out basements in forensic detail. In fact it makes the game creepier and edgier if you DON'T – the players' imaginations will do the job for you.

Second, my games are usually about dealing with the consequences of your actions. The one time some players decided to commit some war crimes of their own (butchering prisoners, looting everything in sight), they foolishly left a trail of evidence pointing straight to them and thus the whole party had to create new characters a few sessions into the campaign. And that included the characters who didn't commit the crimes, but had neglected to stop or report them.

And finally the players have to cope with the FULL gamut of "adult themes" in my game – they are just as likely to have to deal with black marketeering, alcohol & drug abuse, girlfriend cheating on them, some NPC falling in love with them, politicians on a PR exercise coming to visit, mail arriving from home saying their pay's been screwed up and the mortage is in arrears, rumours about the Next Big Push, etc. It's all grist to the soap opera mill!

Well, that's how I took it, too Evil Twin… that he meant this stuff to be off screen to affect his gameplay. I still think that's what he meant and he says it is, so why is everyone freaking out? If it's not your cup of tea, fine, just say so. I just don't get why so many people got personal with their responses.

(Geez, here I am responding after telling everyone to let the thread die out, lol…)

I don't know. It has always struck me funny that the phrase "adult theme" is so often used to cover the most childish behavior.

If awful thing happen in war, shouldn't this be -at least by implication- present in wargaming? In principle, I suppose so. However, whenever I have attended an "adult themed" game, it usually seemed to be about silly bathroom-humor or depictions of sexuality so unrealistic that a prepubescent child would understand more.

Judas Iscariot "The difference between the two is that Rape is recognized as being a crime that crosses a line that even murder does not."

One last point. Interestingly enough, in the US, anyway, capital punishment can be legislated by the various states for murder. However, when it has been attempted to legislate capital punishment for rape, the Supreme Court has struck it down as "cruel and unusual", and thus unconstitutional, saying that it was out of proportion to the crime committed.

Just an aside.

Maybe I missed the answer to this, but why do you, Kampf, think it is necessary to include this stuff in your game? Exactly what does it add to the game?

Void Trekker: I think there is a general cultural assumption that killing someone can be OK but rape can't; to use your example, while the death penalty hasn't been instituted for rape, you can be sure there will ALSO never be instituted an official rape penalty for murder.

We understand that soldiers, police, and even sometimes citizens may have to kill another human for some reason, but I don't know of anyone who can think of a situation in which a rape might be justified or necessary.

I can't see why a variety of adult themes wouldn't be OK for certain games, assuming we're not talking about "Adult Themes" wherein we really mean juvenile rubbish or as judas put it earlier, Pornography.

smokingwreckage "…while the death penalty hasn't been instituted for rape, you can be sure there will ALSO never be instituted an official rape penalty for murder."

Yeah, I think we can definitely agree on that one .

"I don't know of anyone who can think of a situation in which a rape might be justified or necessary."

Dunno. Torture of various kinds is as old as warfare, and I am sure rape has been used to this purpose. However, if what you are saying is that it offends our sensibilities more, I agree with you.

"I can't see why a variety of adult themes wouldn't be OK for certain games, assuming we're not talking about "Adult Themes" wherein we really mean juvenile rubbish or as judas put it earlier, Pornography."

Again, I agree in theory. However, I have never seen it put into practice such that exactly this sort of thing didn't happen. In any case, most of the games that try to "deal with these issues seriously", such as HOL and F.A.T.A.L., are themselves pure childish crap.

I guess, in the last analysis, I just rely on my instincts with this question. Whatever explanation someone gives me for why my meal SHOULD smell like rotten eggs, and why I SHOULD eat it anyway, if it don't smell right, it ain't goin' in my mouth.

Ditto for "adult themed gaming".

Closing comments.

Someone asked what the addition of "adult themes" could add to a game. The answer, of course, is drama. Much as the rape sequences in West Side Story, or Man of La Mancha contribute to the those stories. However, this is probably not the market to explore this, because the site if for miniature gamers, and they are more interested in Tactics than drama, as a group – if I may be so bold as to stereotype.

I also found the tendency to lump those interested in adding drama through "adult Themes" into a pile and labeling them sickos kinda amusing. This is purely a matter of perspective, and I know plenty of people who would label people who are interested in replaying the brutality of war as a game sickos. Course, those people would see the adult themes people as sick as well, I suspect.

I don't think this thread was ever advocating developing a mechanic that explicitly modeled the "adult themes". It was about whether adult themes could be incorporated at any level. I also find the term adult themes misleading. It is not a code word of sex, nor does it mean issues that mature people are faced with. It most often means issues that we would generally want to protect young people from. In that respect, all wargaming addresses adult themes to some extent.

And the hobby is about tittilation. Nothing demonstrates this more than the movement from Grand Tactical simulation towards cinematic skirmish games.

But, considering the general level of anger, I think this thread has run its course.. Personally, I found it fascinating.

Well put Kokigami.

"In that respect, all wargaming addresses adult themes to some extent."

That is true. But the originator did list rape etc. as his example. So, everyone went with that.

That said, we should deal with adult themes in wargames, right? I am going to now decide if my soldiers have done their income taxes; if they are attached to a political party; if they are paid up on their life insurance; how many kids they will orphan when the perish in that next charge; if they are pro-life or pro-choice; and how they plan to save for retirement. Those are all adult themes, so let's incorporate them!

We DON'T incorporate them because they are games. These are wargames and for better or worse, even the historicals, are light hearted examples of play. So if I don't want to "play" about rape, torture, or taxes, but I do want to "play" about heroism, strategy, tactics, and put some damn fantastic painted lead on the table, then these are the games for me.

And as to the legal reason that there is no death penalty for rape; it is simple. Though there was a constitutional basis for the opinion, many commentators think that the Supreme Court's stand was based on the simple notion that having the death penalty for killing, but not for rape and other crimes, is that it would be the last thing stopping someone from murdering their victims. The idea, as silly as it may be, is that a rapist might rape and then release a victim instead of killing the person because at least he or she will only go to prison for life, not be put to death. That is a justification, not my view. It is the same rationale as a charge called felony-murder. That is, if in the commission of a crime, a person dies (you rob a grocery store and a man falls over dead from a heart attack) it is the same as if you murdered him with the gun. Thus, criminals won't engage in crimes where there is a chance that someone might forseeably die.

Alright,

Now that I have had time to get past all of the rape talk (I have some VERY BIG ISSUES WITH RAPE!)…. I have been thinking more about this:

So, far, all of the talk of "adult themes" has dealt with the opposition of people who commit such acts.

When I was younger, I was in a line of work where I constantly had to allign myself with people whom I had no respect for, and would have sooner shot in the head…

But… I had a goal that only said person could help me attain…

Which brings me to the point…

What about troops in an army, or soldiers in a unit who have one of the worst examples of mankind as a leader, but feel that they have a morale compulsion (or a personal obligation) that they must help said person…

I can think of many examples on both sides of the wars mankind has fought… Pedophiles, perverts, sadists, and so forth…

But, outside of an RPG setting, these types of things are easily represented by asbtract mechanisms in the game….

As has been mentioned by a few… Such acts are not limited to any one side, nor are these people to be considered the enemy.

One such example was a resistance fighter having to make a choice about halting the rape of a woman, or ignoring it and going on with the job he had in order to be able to save more lives (ie that "greater good" argument)…

Judas makes a point; but I think that a lot of that stuff is at the Heavy RP Drama end of the gaming spectrum. Wargaming is usually intended to be intellectual rather than emotional and so in most cases I would say it was "out of place" in a genre/ expectation/ enjoyment sense.

So when Patton sent his men in to save his son in law that was a tactical decision? He purposely sent a understrength, ie whatever I can spare, unit to send them to liberate the POW camp where he had kin. They got the hell shot outta them and for what tactic, strategic purpose? It was done because of the emotional aspect of the man's character that's it.

Why did Hitler send troops to rescue the Duce? Was for some great tactic? Did he think it would do anything for the war? No he wanted to bolster his image to show that he wouldn't leave this Allies to the wolves and also show that he could.

Tactical or not, all these men from division commanders to the lowly private had his own will and on a small scale such as skirmish level gaming it would make its self more known. The humanity of small scale wargaming makes for more thrilling and exciting gaming were each man has a face and that when the s#$t hits the fan they can become larger than life (Audie Murphy)or revert to their most base and vile characteristic(Mangela).

For those tacticaly minded you don't lose any kind of tactical function but you have to realistically modivate and rally tour human men to do as they have been trained AT TIMES. Your decision to maneuver your tank platoon to engage another tank platoon will still be more tactically advisable then sending your stretcher bearers to do it. Do you think the majority of men on Omaha beach tried to clear it because they wanted to drive the Germans from France so a 2nd front could releive the fighting on the eastern front to allow for whatever? Hell no, they did it because they didn't want to die.

If you have never played a skirmish game with a sneaky GM you are missing out because these soldiers that we paint and play with all of a sudden act like real soldiers and not the little pieces of metal that we push around. Veterans can break mentally and the possible sight of something extraordinary can cause a coward to rise up and push forward. Try it, you may like it. And if you hate all aspects of RP then don't. I wont flame you for it.

Hell, were all grown men playing with little toys how much weirder or geeky can you get. Oh, role play with them.

KILL THIS THREAD ALREADY!

Brian

DETAILED GAMING OF ATROCITIES IS BEYOND THE PALE, PERIOD.

ANY types of tabletop atrocities can be abstracted into a scenario or a set of rules if there is a need for it. there is just _no need_ to play it out on the tabletop.

way back when i first got into wargaming with leads, i came across a single sheet of typewriter written rules titled "TOURNEMENT RAPE IN THE WARGAME" that purported to cover this event from the stone age to modern times.

it was pretty abstract, but, i was repelled by the idea, and asked WHY? some of the answers i got caused me to drastically change my association with local gamers. this was one type of tabletop "fun" that i was not going to participate in and i found a new gamers with a mindset similiar to my own

sure there are real life battlefield occasions when it is needed to kill prisoner or prisoners, but who wants to game it out? a simple CRY HAVOC table would determine if the prisoner or prisoners were killed. i sure as hell do not want to game out an AGINCOURT, WAR OF ROSES, DEERFIELD, OR MALMEDY massacre on the tabletop

one of the most dangerous time for any enemy soldier is within 15 minutes of the end of the firefight, after he/she has surrendered and the blood still runs hot within the victors, adrenalin is still flowing, and reactions tend to over-ride the process of rational thought.

shooting or hacking down _any armed combatant_ is acceptable during a wargame; man or woman . we all know there are lots of armed men and women leads out there.

shooting at escaping prisoners on the tabletop might be required by scenario rules and has been around for many years to.

tracking the path of arrows, quarrels, slingshot, other hand hurled weaponry, stray bullets or beams in a small scale skirmish to see if any innocent bystanders are accidentally "hit" (thus adding more problems to the shooter's already stressed tabletop existence) is an accepted thing.

thank GOD, no miniatures makers out there make children armed with guns or grenades – and hopefully none ever will!

i use unarmed civvies (men, women, kids) in my games and have for a lot longer than most folks have; because they tend to be a key element to the success or failure of a scenario, years ago, some one dubbed them "atrocity figures".

since they are un-armed and need protection from wotever, the soldiers, militia, and police are tasked with safeguarding them, escorting them to safety "under fire", conducting evacuations"under fire", etc.

these civvies act like sheep, or flock like birds, when confronted with dangers on their own: they react in a number of pre-determined ways according to a die chart, usually not the way that the military/police want them to!

the only way to get them to do what you want them to is to provide an armed soldier/policeman, say 1 for every 5 civvies. . .

clever folks will not that detaching soldier/police for guards or escorts, reduces the number of combat effectives that the commander has available to contain, or delay the threat.

detailed tabletop gaming or RPGing of murder, rape, torture, mutilation, etc, is really, really grotesque.

i cannot figure out why anyone would ever want to do such a thing.

DAWGIE

What really bothers me about this is the apparent inability of the GM to come up with a different motivation (why lead soldiers need "motivation" is beyond me) for the actions of the troops. As far as skirmish level gaming goes, you don't need a motivation beyond the fact that, in real life, soldiers fight for their squadmates, not some ideology or "The other guys commit atrocities". You don't really care about that. You care about the guy you shared a meal with, who gave you dry socks, whose family had you over for dinner when you went home with him last time. Those ten or twelve guys around you in a place called hell are your family. You don't need any other motivation to fight for them.

And Dawgie, someone makes an armed child. Might be Reaper. Think the name of the fig is Alice.

phililphall 25 Jul 2007 4:57 a.m. PST
"someone makes an armed child. Might be Reaper"

Not sure about Reaper or GZG, but at the very least Hasslefree has several child adventurers, variously armed. Only one has a gun tho I think.

---

kampfgruppecottrell 24 Jul 2007 4:10 a.m. PST:
"If you have never played a skirmish game with a sneaky GM you are missing out because these soldiers that we paint and play with all of a sudden act like real soldiers and not the little pieces of metal that we push around"

While we have tried this back in the RPG days, I guess I'll have to miss out in the future as we don't really have enough members in our group (if you can even call it that) to spare one as a GM. Could be one reason why I like rule sets that involve more complex morale and motivation than "fight steadfast or run like Heck"…

This might not be germane to all the varied discussion on this topic, which may not be 'healthy', but at least the discussion was, but this quote rather caught my fancy the other day and just sprang up reading some of the posts from those writers with religious bents -

"An Ethical person knows it is wrong to commit a certain act; A Moral person simply does not commit the act."

I dare anyone to read this thread's original post, leaving out the word rape, and then tell me that Brian deserved all the heat he got from US BEEDONKEYDONKS(MYSELF include) who posted such replies.

QUOTE OF ORIGINAL POST

"I have read several members make remarks about adult themes within their war games and how it isn't appropriate. Now I do believe that if you are playing with any kind of kid it needs to stay within that mind set but when play with other adults isn't it more realistic to play more realistic?

Take a WWII game in which you have SS Police units hunting down Russian partisans in a Russian village, wouldn't all the hell and horror of the Eastern front be appropriate for that game such as raping, murdering and destroying anything and everything in site. Wouldn't a female spy use her sexuality to seduce or manipulate whomever it took to get what they want? Wouldn't certain fantasy creatures such as a zombie actually rip apart a living person and feast on their flesh? Don't we all kill each other on the gaming table?

I am seriously trying to get a consensus about this because I have been writing my rules in a realistic manner with all aspects of horror, sexuality and vileness a particular character or creatures would have if they were real. I also depict racism, patriotism, love, hate, mercy and all other human emotions that would be depicted on a real battlefield.

Let me know what you think.

Brian

Battleground Weird War II"

I have been watching this topic for several days now and have even contributed to some of the STONING(Biblical not Experimental) that this young man has endured. It has been at the point several times that he has been told, literally by US BEEDONKEYDONKS (MYSELF included) that he would be better off to go out back and SHOOT HIMSELF. This all from the very people (MYSELF included) that he came to for advice.

And you know WHAT he got STONED FOR? One word--raping !!!!!!

A few folks, it is true, did try to offer some constructive criticism.

The fact still remains though, US BEEDONKEYDONKS (MYSELF included) keyed on that 1 word--raping. Even after the young man tried to correct himself with explanation, he was accused of being every type of vile pervert one could imagine. I am surprised that he wasn't accused of being on the "GRASSY KNOLL" in Dallas or PIMPING for Monica(there's a scenario for you Brian).

There was even discussion about the Legal System and how differently it treated RAPE as opposed to MURDER because murder bore a mandatory death penalty, in many states and rape doesn't. And the band played on.

What is even funnier about all the ridicule, is the fact that I would offer odds that most if not all those replying negatively, have watched the GREAT Mel Brooks movie "BLAZING SADDLES". IT contains a scene, where Harvey Korman, the Lt. Gov. is recruiting his army to take out the town of Rockridge. When asking one of the bad guy applicants what qualifications he had to belong to the BAD GUYS army, his reply was, "Rape, Murder,Robbery, and Rape". When it was pointed out that he had mentioned Rape twice, his response was, "I like Rape". I would offer further odds that most (MYSELF included) of those responding both ways, in this thread, thought that line was HILARIOUS. Why? Because it was in a movie that was a comedy. So it really isn't quite the TABOO that it has been made out to be by us.

Most everything else in the original post was totally ignored.

Sure some debate went on about murder, but I've got a flash for you, WAR IS MURDER, ask anyone who has been there.

The point of this post is to say shame on many of us (MYSELF included) for not offering our criticism in a more constructive way, as Brian had asked.

It probably will be a long time before Brian, or any other fledgling rules author , asks for our help, thereby giving US the OPPORTUNITY to help shape the FUTURE of OUR HOBBY,
but then, maybe that is what we deserve.

If this post has offended anyone who has also posted on this thread, take a good long look in the mirror, then send me an email, my address is posted.

Chuck Kennedy

If we are playing a game in which Vikings are ransacking a village then if one of the players chooses to cut off all the heads of the males and rape or enslave the rest of the females then that is well with the context of the game. The game would not be about raping or cutting off head but it could be a factor within in. The game would be the attack of the village by the Vikings and the defense of the village by the villagers.

Well mouth, you seem to have missed his continuing mention of rape. And note it is the very first thing the Vikings are said to be doing. Not pillaging, not cutting off heads, RAPING.

He pretty much failed to answer any of the questions about WHY he felt a need to include "Adult Themes", which is pretty much code word for sex, by the way, in a tabletop miniature game. Or any of the other "Adult Themes" he quotes. He obviously hasn't "seen the elephant" because he has a totally skewed view of what war is actually like. He HAS watched to much Hollywood War.

And I'm willing to bet that we in no way changed his mind about including those sorts of rules in his game. And he will continue to feel oppressed for not being allowed to display how "cutting edge" his rules are at a convention.
And if you think this is the first time so called "adult themes" have come up you never had your convention picketed by the peaceniks back in the '60's and 70's. And they were objecting to standard wargaming of the Charge! variety.

Oh, and by the way. HE asked. HE used hot button words. And you call me a "donkeydonk"? And if you believe HE was offended, perhaps he shouldn't have asked the whole board readership for an opinion about an offensive subject. After the original post about being turned down at a convention, this took on all the aspects of a whine looking for support. Well, he didn't get it. He didn't get it in Spades. Tough. You can't take the answers, don't ask the question.

phililphall,
Well and thoughtfully said.
And BTW, I didn't single anyone out as a BEDONKEYDONK and in fact, included myself in that group, but I guess it's like my old PAPPY used to say,"the kicked dawg always hollers the loudest."
Regards,
chuck

DAWGIE "thank GOD, no miniatures makers out there make children armed with guns or grenades – and hopefully none ever will!"

Someobody makes 25mm Hitler Youth, though I can't think who. I have seen pictures of these on TMP.

MOUTH OF THE SOUTH "It probably will be a long time before Brian, or any other fledgling rules author , asks for our help, thereby giving US the OPPORTUNITY to help shape the FUTURE of OUR HOBBY, but then, maybe that is what we deserve."

Gosh. Here I am, destroying the future of the hobby. Oh well, it. Pass me another beer Martha…

I've already posted several so your wrong. I don't scare that easy.

Brian

Battleground Weird War II
link

Oh and by the way phililphall I don't need your approval or support all I asked was your opinion and I got it in spades.
Thanks for chiming in,
Brian

Brian,
Tho a somewhat crusty crowd, I think they taught you a couple of valuable lessons.
1. Think before you speak.
2. Learn from your lessons.
3. They can't kill you.
And most importany of all
4. They can't eat you.
Remember those four things and you will be hard to beat.
chuck

Some themes especially 'adult themes' are not proper for gaming concepts and integral mechanics.

Have game Masters in RPG systems injected such issues? Yes for as long as college level kids have been playing RPG. If a GM wants to add such material on their own, that is his choice. It is also the choice of any other members in the group including females, not to participate.

I think this whole thing has gone on too far. I wasn't offended by any other this, it's just automatically assumed these things happen in war. You don't have to play out all the details unless you're role playing, at which point you're not war gaming any more.

I can see scenarios where squads are to escort civies from the battle field, who wants the people soldiers are supposed to protect getting blown up. The only situations that can come out of this is troops accidentally gunning down their own people or friendly fire (isn't there a better word for it? friendly fire isn't friendly)

Doesn't GZG have miniatures of a survivalist family including an armed son and daughter.

Ron,

Tell me that you have never seen VC or NVA forces that used children (ie, under 16) as "soldiers" while you were in SE Asia back in the day….

As for people making these miniatures of such (Children, etc…):

We are rapidly approaching the time when people are going to be able to create anything that they can imagine.

Whether that is the tentacled demon raping the Japanese School girl, or the child-soldiers of third-world insurgencies… It will just be a matter of posing a 3DO file, and adding the appropriate equipment; then "printing" it out.

This, to me at least, speaks much more to the "adult themes" in gaming than does the actual themes, or acts, represented…

Seeing as I am more interested in tactical to grand tactical gaming; adult themes would only arise as an abstraction of the qualities of a unit or its enemies…

I am a bit too old to want to wallow in the explicit details of those specific acts.

IT is a sad but true fact that the VC used children as expendable one shot weapons of war during the RVN WAR.

I, and others have seen, fought, and killed or wounded children bearing arms and serving as soldiers in VC units. simply by the act of picking up that weapon and engaging in combat made them legitimate targets.

I am quite sure this also happened during the FRENCH INDO CHINA WAR, and anywhere else partisan warfare reared its head during WW II, or other wars where regular fought irregular.

rape, murder, arson, robbery, theft, burglary, torture, mutilation, casual brutality, massacre, counter massacre, etc, all stalk the war zone, where ever it is, regardless of time and place.

I and millions of other combatants from all sides of every conflict, past or present, bring the horrors home with us when the war is over: it is not something that most cannot take off along with the uniform, and is part of us for the remainder of our lives.

FORTUNATELY, most of us keep these horrors to ourselves, go onto to lead normal lives as civvie. SOME like me deal with the "night horrors", flash backs, PTSD, etc, as best as we can.

I hated the VC and the NVA soldiers with a burning passion because of the things i saw them do to soldiers, and civilians. I never killed a POW, or an unarmed WIA enemy, but, i did shoot "corpses" as a matter of CYA (too many soldiers were killed by "dead men" in my war). if i thought any VC or NVA was a threat to me or mine during or after a fight, i had no trouble with shooting them on the spot.

i hated VC sympathizers too, but, realized they were doing what they had to do just to "live" if for no other reasons. if i caught them with weapons or food caches, passing info, etc, i dealt with it according to the LAWS of LAND WARFARE, not as a barbarian filled with bloodlust.

A lot of us realized that to some of the RVN civvies, we were _THE REDCOATS _, and not allies helping to defend their country from foreign invaders.

if i had ever found one of my soldiers engaged in rape, , i would have shot the SOB dead then and there.

WAR is a horrible experience, and introducing the worst elements of it into our gaming as played out table top actions is something i can see no need for. ABTRACTING it is fine, depicting it detail is not needed.

DAWGIE