I am currently running 5e with my 12 yo and hesitantly my 10 yo daughter. We had our first game last Saturday. I had to be VERY careful with the battles trying to not make them too graphic. My kids loved it and are looking a the PHB. I can hand them the 5e PHB without too much worry of what they'll read or see. I hope Wizards will keep things family friendly in all their future books so I can continue playing with my kids.
I don't think ALL their future material should be family friendly; there are definitely players and DMs who prefer games that lean more heavily toward the R or NC-17 ratings, and I don't think that D&D should abandon them. Of course, that doesn't mean that I want such content sprinkled throughout books that are required use for those who prefer more of a G or PG rating. It's fine if WotC wants to put out that material separately; WotC doesn't even need to publish that material themselves as long as the licensing is open enough for other companies to publish such supplemental material for D&D.
I think the official 5e material will remain at the "12 and up" level. They may allow third parties to produce more mature content, though.
Nothing in the PHB or MM is remotely close to what's commonly seen on TV. If your kids watch TV, they can flip through the PHB without worry.
There's also what constitutes "family friendly" to someone. I know people that wouldn't consider the PHB "family friendly" because of the character background section talking about non-heterosexual non-gender conforming possibilities, or the MM as being not "family friendly" because of the gendershifting succubus/incubus and a clear description that they work through sexual activities. Others wouldn't find either unsuitable for their children (nor would they if we had the 1e MM bare-breasted harpy, or anatomically correct male monsters).
Overall I doubt they'll put anything strictly mature unless they redo the book of vile darkness for 5e. I doubt they'll even license an adventure path out that's overly mature, but depending on their OGL/3pp agreements we may see non-licensed/sanctioned material that is more mature in nature but it will all hopefully be clearly labelled as such.
the game is owned by a toy company. you don't have to worry about them alienating kid money with anything cool or interesing.
This feels like such an American topic to me.
Americans enjoy censorship too much.
Some of us find censorship quite appaling.
I'm sure every country and culture has their burden to bear that seems riduclous to other cultures. Lets not smear the conversation with regionalism in any form.
abs1nth wrote:
I think D&D has been tamed, PG-thirteened, family friendlied, and censored enough. I can respect the fact that it's not 1978 anymore and the bare breasted harpy wouldn't fly this day and age, but making the game any less edgy at this point would lose it's appeal for the intended demographic, imho.
Wow, this is soooo much nicer and respectful than the post I almost made. Good for me.. 
I think D&D is fine the way it is, with "12 and up" written right on the covers. There's also tons of 3rd party stuff (maybe not for 5e yet, but still) and adult themed or kid themed fantasy out there already. As someone already said, what is kid friendly anyway? Some would say D&D isn't, nor has ever been, 'kid friendly'. In the US at least, blood and gore is viewed as ok, but a woman's nipple showing isn't. Also, many religious people would really dislike mentions of gender equality, LGBT equality, and any mention of devils, demons, and deities other than the ones they believe in.
Besides, any DM can 'G' it or 'NC-17' it at their table.
I play with 21+ adults exclusively, so there's beer at the table, and violence/horror/adult situations in all of our games. I'm glad I can do that. It'd be just as easy to run a Disney-esque D&D adventure for kids. WotC's art is already censored, but still cool, IMO. I'd hate to see undead, demons, etc. not be at least somewhat freaky looking in books like the MM.
Anyone remember the Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark books? I had them in the 80's. The art was wonderfully scary. In the new editions, the art is no longer Stephen Gammel's brilliant illustrations. It's dumbed down, way less scary, and way less creative. That shouldn't happen to everything just because some parents are worried about their children having nightmares.
Bottom line is; no product line should be forced to do a parent's job of handling their kids' questions, fears, desires, and ideas. Anyone can just not buy or view that which they find offensive. Censorship, on pretty much any level, should be a crime. I'm a firm believer in the "Don't like it, don't look at it" philosophy.
I don't see anything family UN-friendly in a bare-breasted drawing of a creature. We start our lives sucking bare breasts and appreciation for the human body is embeded into our very nature as humans. There is nothing harmful or evil or immoral in the human body that will lead a person into a path of wrongness.
On the contrary... What we do as a society, in creating taboos about sexuality and the human body, is what's harmful to people and especially young ones such as teenagers. We take things that are perfectly natural and harmless such as sexuality and the appreciation for the human body, and turn it into a "forbidden" subject creating repressed people. Ideally young folks should be given orientation about such things and learn early that this is a perfectly normal part of life. We should not try to hide such things at all costs as though it was something evil that will cause younglings to become mentally disturbed people. If anything it is repressed folks who tend to screw up their lives with bad decisions.
I'm not saying this game should have more explicit content. Unnecessary sexually-explicit content in any media (games, movies, etc) just make the art form and entertainment look silly and the creators like people desperate for an audience at any costs. I even find the amount of nude-scenes in HBO series, for example, extremely boring as they usually contribute nothing to the ongoing story and we just have to sit through all those scenes that don't really mean anything until the actual story moves on.
However, trying to hide the human body, or avoid the exploration of sexuality, when it actually makes sense to be shown or contributes to the concept of the art or entertainment in question, is equally silly, as there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.
I say no to unnecessary explicit content that's there for no reason other than fish for more audience.
I say yes to barebreasted Harpies and sexually-driven Succubi as they make for much more interesting fictional creatures, both visually and lore-wise.
seti wrote:
I want a more R rated game. Its kind of funny looking at art in 1st ed by which I mean cartooon boobies. THese days you have HBO and online porn of any variety easily accessable but cartoon boobies are bad wrong fun LOL.
Unless they start going crazy on things that tend to skew a little more adult that already exist within D&D, and have since the game was created, I think we will be fine.
For instance, if they change Succubus/Incubus from "Predatory sex demons" to "Affectionate bad people" in the MM description, then we have a problem with WotC going to far down kid-friendly lane.
Until then however, writing and illustrating the books with a 12+ audience in mind is not a bad default place to have.
UPDATE: Just out of curiosity, I checked the Monster Manual to see how they treated our old friends the Succubus/Incubus. First of all, I'm happy they made them one creature, because having separate entries in the past never really made much sense to me. Anyway, the entry on them is a bit long and I'm sure I couldn't post all of it, but here is the one line that stuck out to me:
"Appearing in the guise of a humanoid who has previously appeared only in the victim's dreams, the succubus or incubus seduces or befriends its victim, indulging all its desires so that it performs evil acts of its own free will."
Looks like they kept the predatory sex demon thing without being so explicit as to horrify the poor children. I am good with this.
Rastapopoulos wrote:
Shasarak wrote:
While I agree there is a perverse double standard when it comes to the open portrayal of violence and the censorship of nudity and adult situations, D&D probably isn't the platform from which to fight that particular battle nor are these forums.
To paraphrase Thomas Jefferson........ Whenever WotC prints something, there will be someone somewhere that does not like it.
But I want my rules for orgies and articles like back in the old days, aka "Demonology made easy .... how to sell your soul for fun and profit" <- actual title of dragon magazine article
iserith wrote:
I still remember quite vividly the night my friend and I went to the theater to see Ronin back in '98. While we were sitting there waiting for the movie to start, a couple came in, two kids in tow, and sat down in front of us. I'm guessing the kids were probably around 10 and 8.
Not long after, the mom leaning over to ask her husband, "Isn't this movie R-rated?" And when he nodded, she came back with, "Is there sex and nudity?" But he shook his head and said, "No. I don't think so. I think it's for violance and language."
She nodded and actually said, "Okay, good."
True story.
Given my own experience convincing my parents to buy me the "Red Box" old D&D back when I was 12, I would have had a much rougher time of it if they'd seen bare-breasted succubi grinding on some poor mortal on the cover rather than a big red dragon. The game has a great balance right now, witih material user-friendly enough for the teenager but gritty enough for adult-themed gamers to bring elements into the game of their own accord.
I'm happy to let my 10 year old read the books so far (unless she's sneaking a peek at the adventures).
Someone mentioned why 12+ is on the box (something with legal obligations for games) but I forgot what it was. It's like how DSLR cameras have a 20 minute video record limit so they don't have to comply with the regulations for video equipment that is defined as something that can record for over 20 minutes.
As long as the killing isn't too graphic, it's okay?
Or am I just assuming and your battles fight things like golums, skeletons, animated objects - ie, stuff which isn't alive. Which doesn't feel.
Just as an aside: I think I would love to play in a campaign where the taking of a sentient being's life is a big deal and not done lightly. Even those of bad guys.
ChrisCarlson wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
In response to the OP: I really don't think that there's any need for concern here—it's unlikely (at best) than any future products will be any less "family friendly" than the current Starter Set, PHB, MM and Tyrrany of Dragon adventures unless it's a product specifically marked as such.
Kishri wrote:
Azzy1974 wrote:
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
The primary conceit of dungeons and dragons is stabbing sentient creatures with sharp pointed objects and stealing their valuables. If you're protective of your children, I can't imagine it being family-friendly at all.
Then again, these sorts of things mystify me. What exactly makes something family-friendly? Wikipedia is telling me it's avoiding "nudity, sex, high violence, horror, profanity, ethnic slurs, innuendo, drug use, racism, and the such" but then again, these seem like precisely the things I'd want my kid to be exposed to in a thoughtful way and safe setting. Maybe my opinion will change, but I want my kid to be informed and prepared for the world, not ignorant of it.
There's safe gaming and then there's gaming which, even if it still uses a few safety tricks to get there, touches on real life problematic issues.
Seems a lot of gamers just want to escape reality, though.
ChrisCarlson wrote:
In response to the various similar posts about my comment:
I wasn't implying moving away from murder hobos to try the novel idea of "role play first", or whathaveyou. I was talking more about a kernal of a nugget of an idea of maybe a campaign with the fundamental philosophy that taking sentient life was a very serious matter. Even when the opposed forces maybe even deserve it. The potential for interesting conflicts and situations that require alternate resolutions could be fun to navigate.
I'm not normally a fan of murder hobo play in general already.
My daughter is 6, and watches all sorts of TV with me that most people wouldn't consider "age-appropriate" for her, i.e. Castle, NCIS, Scorpion, Warehouse 13, Eureka, Babylon 5... the list goes on. And she already wants to play D&D with mommy and daddy. Probably start her on something simpler first, though.
Oraibi wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote: