Coreheim

agree, popmouth - still, on a purely rational basis that liablity belongs to the people who fail to discern

The inclusion of the joke in the SoS FAQ makes it much more problematic for me to actually suggest this set of rules for the group I play Mordheim with. There are both several woman playing as well as at least one younger player; while I could certainly just print it out and bring it to them, they'll want to know where it comes from. If it was just a matter of relatively raunchy jokes, the ladies wouldn't care, but actual rape jokes are a much different thing for many people (including several of the existing players.)

So, while I do certainly hold a philosophical objection to the FAQ and a separate fluff based objection to the Sisters being omitted from the included warbands, my biggest concern is a practical one: you have made it very hard for me to bring these rules up to my players, much less sell it to them.

good criticism, LeSquide

i fail to see the case a gender-specific, though. you might not have noticed, but l00 is a woman too

In this particular case, it is because I happen to know the women involved do indeed find rape jokes very offensive (to the point where one of the other players almost drove them off a while back due to an off color joke.) I happen to find them personally distasteful, but not extraordinarily so.

This doesn't stop me from being curious about the rules changes and re-balancing; Even as a primarily Mercenary player, I would be much more likely to risk melee combat in the Coreheim rules, for example, where the chances that I'd do some damage were considerably higher than under the original rules.

I'm also a big fan of the gallery you have up there.

Freud, writer of the Sisters FAQ, would probably respond with something similar to the following. A retreat from the Coreheim rules caused by the mention of rape would indicate an anxiety surrounding the act of rape. Ones anxiety towards rape could be a reality anxiety, but could also easily be a neurotic anxiety, fear there is a primitive desire of the id for the object of which one is afraid. One may have an irrational fear of being raped because one really wants it. One would be afraid of their own conscious for having that desire. The fear is derived from a personality at war. The id wants to be sexually attacked. Society has shaped the superego to understand rape as something horrible. Being pulled in two different directions, the ego becomes afraid. This fear causes one to withdraw from Coreheim, rather than giving it a real read.
Recognizing and overcoming ones neurotic anxiety towards rape would allow them to release the psychic energy consumed by their fear. Psychic energy that could then be devoted to playing a fun table top game.

I'm sorry. I am not one for whom rape jokes are inherently unfunny (although most of them simply aren't). Also I haven't read the offending material nor likely will as another tabletop game, no matter how perfectly balanced it is. But that has got to be the most douch baggy pseudo-science answer to a valid criticism I've ever read on the internet anywhere.

If you don't want to change it, don't change it. But essentially saying people who are offended by it are emotionally stunted is crap of the highest order (Freud has largely been disproven for at least 50 years, btw).

After reading it, yeah, that's pretty tasteless, disrespectful and unnecessary. It certainly hurts the professional feel of the piece and limits the amount of players it would appeal to.

On the other hand, it does send my sense of self-righteousness soaring - perhaps my id secretly likes people who think rape jokes are funny, because I envision myself tearing their head off, thus impressing some offended woman, thereby increasing my chances of passing on my geneseed.

Yeah, that's probably it... Gods, but the internet is so unsatisfying.

God. Could this thread be any worse?

/cues midget porn snuff film.

@cianty: That's web based debating for ya'!

Snappy_Dresser wrote:

/cues midget porn snuff film.

Ha ha. Something like this:

Popmouth wrote:

@cianty: That's web based debating for ya'!

Yeah. Gotta love it.

hehehe

even if you don't belive in freud, one modern study found that 80% of women fantasized about being raped as opposed to only 10% of men

of course, in the typical female rape fantasy it is always the well-clad, high-status, high-income male that rapes her, and it never involves much violence, typically just a token "no" that is then violated



whereas real rape is most often conducted by low-status males and tend to include a good deal of violence

I think there's a nice debate and opinion exchange in this thread... if you find this thread offensive you probably haven't read any of the World of Warcraft forums.. or any other Internet forum for that matter...

If you don't like open debate and freedom of speech then "tah internatz" is not for you.

Asp wrote:

of course, in the typical female rape fantasy it is always the well-clad, high-status, high-income male that rapes her, and it never involves much violence, typically just a token "no" that is then violated

whereas real rape is most often conducted by low-status males and tend to include a good deal of violence

I was going to question the results of said "modern study" but this explains a lot. Gotta see things in context.

hehe

another interesting point is all the movies produced 1950-80 where the heroine resists being kissed and then melts away in the arms of the hero after being roughly handled did not emerge out of the blue, but catered to the a priori fantasies of the majority of women

ah, the days before political correctness ^_^ - at least they were honest

Maybe you could throw in a good old castration joke to balance things out.

Asp wrote:

of course, in the typical female rape fantasy it is always the well-clad, high-status, high-income male that rapes her, and it never involves much violence, typically just a token "no" that is then violated



whereas real rape is most often conducted by low-status males and tend to include a good deal of violence

Actually rape is most often contucted by people who either are partners, friends or in other ways familiar to the victim. The "maniac-behind the bush" is far more rare... Though I guess that leads us into a far more complex topic.

DeafNala wrote:

Maybe you could throw in a good old castration joke to balance things out.

freud did

Asp wrote:

DeafNala wrote:

Maybe you could throw in a good old castration joke to balance things out.

freud did

You mean Freud's work is a contributing factor in Coreheim & not merely a name conjured up to excuse a lack of taste & social graces? Remarkable.

Asp wrote:

another interesting point is all the movies produced 1950-80 where the heroine resists being kissed and then melts away in the arms of the hero after being roughly handled did not emerge out of the blue, but catered to the a priori fantasies of the majority of women

Might be that the culturally acceptable behavior for women make resistance, token or otherwise, a requirement for not being a tramp (in their own minds and the eyes of others), as opposed to stemming some inherent desire to be raped. It might pour over into womens' sexual fantasies as they attempt to keep up a lady-like selfimage in the face of "dirty" thoughts.

Also we could say this caters to a male fantasy of being gosh darn irresistible.

There are a lot of ways to look at things.

Ok, what? I was looking into Coreheim to see if it would work for my local group and here I find out it's made by a bunch of rape-apologists. Never ever going to use it now, obviously.

Trying to dress up your rape-fantasies as a joke or defend it with psuedo-science is also rather lame. Does your mother know you think she secretely wants to be raped?

Hasselt wrote:

Does your mother know you think she secretely wants to be raped?

Thanks, this made my day.

Hasselt wrote:

made by a bunch of rape-apologists.

Though I too find the Sisters FAQ tasteless (among other things I'm a Sisters-player myself), they are not rape-apologists, but rape-joke-apologists. Worlds apart, to be fair!

As several others have pointed out, the presence of such a FAQ is limiting the amount of people who are willing to try Coreheim out. This is of course prejudicial (of this alternate ruleset), and maybe irrational, but from a marketing standpoint I think it would be wiser (and perhaps more rational?) to leave that kind of jokes out of the website.

folketsfiende wrote:

but from a marketing standpoint I think it would be wiser (and perhaps more rational?) to leave that kind of jokes out of the website.

I agree, i asume that Asp wants Coreheim to be played by an ever growing bunch of people. So if a few people already critizied the same paragraph in the rules i would think that it would be wiser to take it away (as surely more people will have negative comments about it) then defend it with psuedo-psychological arguments...

I'm very interested in Coreheim myself, and don't really care about thoose jokes. But they serve no real purpose in the ruleset and might be keeping some potential players from using it. So why not just take it out?