We all know that "magical realm" originally explicitly means "fetish material crammed into the game by a DM whose dick...

>Is there such a thing as fetish content that is not magical realm?

It's magical realm if you're forcing it on unwilling players, user. If you and your players are okay with it, it's fine.

I've written sex scenes with my GM. It was a surreal and fascinating experience.

>But you can have fetish content that people don't get off to.
Then it's not fetish content. It's only a fetish if people get off. Anything is fetish content if your definition of it is "someone might get off to it."
Also I'm into erotic asphyxiation and bloodsport and similar things, so I feel like you are somewhat off the mark in your assessment of me. But that's also exactly what I mean: strangulation in a game isn't fetish content just because I and other degenerates get off to it, unless we insert it into the game in order to get off to it.

>This begs the question, would this be seen as equally bad if it was just a bad headcanon without the fetish elements?
Yes because:
>I remember a recent thread where someone said that even if the players never noticed and the GM then rubbed one out after the game (notice how it's always assumed that "fetish" means "instant runk", just like "attraction" must skip the middle steps and go to "instant rape"), it's still bad because the GM used the PC without their consent.

You seem to be some sort of sociopath because you seem like you genuinely can't understand why other people would be upset with your actions. It's not about inserting your fetish content in the game it is abusing your players for your own gratification.

You seem to genuinely need psychological help.

Then your opinions diverge very drastically from most of this board.
One of the reasons I post shit like this is that some people, who're either a) a majority or b) a vocal minority so autistic I feel bad about even implying it, are completely convinced that any kind of attraction to or fascination with a concept in a way that isn't completely and utterly non-sexual will instantly taint the entire game because no one can ever be sexually interested in something without instantly masturbating to it.
The logic in that is just as alien to you as it is to me, but it does mean that a lot of people on Veeky Forums get scared of putting anything original into their settings because the very presence of the material itself is damning.
You see people week in and week out asking if it's "okay" for a GM to make female NPCs or if it's "okay" to make an attractive character who's not either gruff'n'stubbled or just a walking pair of secondary sexual characteristics.
The only way you escape flak on here is to make your character as childishly, action-figure "badass" as possible - by eroding the character and focusing solely on the mechanics and how they're stronger than everyone else.
It's getting to the point where I've seen someone state that making a character who's not optimized to Hell and back is the same as magical realm, because you obviously get off on your character being hurt.
The worst thing is that I did have one player who wanted to get his character beaten the shit out of and did it in a ham-handedly obvious way, constantly denying that he was getting off on anything - but what made me kick him wasn't that he tried to make me GM his guro fantasies (I do have limits, but that's not even within sight of them) but that he was just plain a passive-aggressive asshole.
It's a correlation-causation problem.

Well, I neither can nor will argue against any of that, really. I can see why your definition is what it is given the context of Veeky Forums. You make sense to me and I agree. Carry on, brother.

You know what's an extremely typical trait of sociopaths?
The exact thing you're doing.
They instantly jump into trying to demolish or discredit people they don't like, insulting, demeaning and eroding, and when faced with it, they're always just "trying to help".

Let's put it this way.
I play a pick-up game with three completely random players who I'm not sexually attracted to at all.
One of them makes a female character, who then gets mind-controlled/polymorphed/tied up/you go fucking nuts.
I finish the game. I do not engage in the kind of panting and table-humping people seem to believe everyone with a sex drive does.
Then I go home, I piss around for a bit, and when I have a wank, what comes into my mind is that character. I finish business, wipe up and go back to the computer.
You do realize that in order to get anywhere in society above dishwasher, it's expected and accepted to not only withhold meaningless information from people, but to straight-out twist the truth, play with numbers and lie to their faces?
Can I psychoanalyze you for a bit?
You're a person with few friends who feels "persecuted". You're vaguely aware that some parts are your fault, but you grease it over with excuses and never attend to the problem. You get angry a lot, and feel that people are actively, focusedly attacking you and what you hold dear.
You find it hard to separate cause and effect, and find yourself jumping to conclusions before hearing things out. Every problem has a person at fault, and that person has a problem with you and what you like.
You consider yourself empathetic, protective, loyal and conscientious, but you're only ever treated as hysterical, overprotective, obsessive and guilt-tripping, minding other people's business for them and getting mad when they don't need you.
I will bet real money half or more of those fit, but I will also bet real money that you won't say so if they do.

>"instant runk"
What the fuck is a "runk"?

Masturbation.
From Norwegian slang.
Common on /int/ a few years ago, as well as on Ylilauta /int/.

OP why don't you just go and jerk off in your room instead of involving your players? Write smut fiction or something, that might actually have a willing audience.

OP why don't you just go and jerk off in your room instead of involving your players? Write smut fiction or something, that might actually have a willing audience.
No amount of logic will change that it's a creepy practice.

Oh.

this is beautiful

>be attracted to hypno
>oh no what a suprise the attractive female gets hypnotized
yeah you're a) a dickhead, and b) most likely not telling the full story of what you made the hypnotized character do c) just very easily excited (which i doubt)

>change
First you need to explain how you came to the conclusion that "it's a creepy practice".
I know it's hard.
Your subconscious is screaming and burbling, taking you right back to kindergarten - it's saying "he can't be right, he must be trolling, he must be creepy", and you're getting that sinking feeling you always get when you're forced to admit that something you held as the absolute truth since you were a kid was something you just convinced yourself of.
If "no amount of logic will change that it's a creepy practice", then you're begging the question. You can't state an absolute without proving the absence of any possible exceptions, which is teetering on the edge of impossibility.
And if I bring up even one single example of one that isn't creepy, you'll instantly rely on rhetoric to fend me off because it proves your argument wrong.
That's the trap with arguing absolutes. There are very few of them in this world, and as soon as you spit out an absolute and someone can post just one single exception, you're being shamed on the Internet.
The answer to all your problems is to realize that you, who's convinced he has absolute moral authority and can positively prove absolutes, probably are the problem.
The absolutes are what worry me. I've never met someone who talked in absolutes that intense who wasn't actually a danger to themselves and people around them.
If you get more convinced that you can decide what's right or wrong, what's "creepy" or not and who's allowed to do what on a sweeping basis, it will clinically be classifiable as a psychosis.

>You're a person with few friends
Research suggests that 1/4 of people do not have a friend they can tell a secret to. I have few friends but that describes most people on Veeky Forums.
>who feels "persecuted".
My parents are dicks but really nobody else actively "persecutes" me.
>You get angry a lot, and feel that people are actively, focusedly attacking you and what you hold dear.
My parents are dicks but really no one else gets me angry often.
>Every problem has a person at fault, and that person has a problem with you and what you like.
My parents are dicks but most other problems not involving them are not like that.
>You find it hard to separate cause and effect, and find yourself jumping to conclusions before hearing things out.
No. In fact I have to prevent other people from leaping to conclusions many times.
>You consider yourself empathetic, protective, loyal and conscientious, but you're only ever treated as hysterical, overprotective, obsessive and guilt-tripping, minding other people's business for them and getting mad when they don't need you.
I don't really consider myself empathetic, protective, loyal and conscientious. I consider myself fair and honest.
>but you're only ever treated as hysterical, overprotective, obsessive and guilt-tripping, minding other people's business for them and getting mad when they don't need you.
My parents are dicks but other people tend to treat me fine. And even then my parents have only ever been called hysterical and not any of the other things.
>I will bet real money half or more of those fit, but I will also bet real money that you won't say so if they do.
That's called a kafkatrap. It's very dishonest.

You seem mad but all I was trying do to was answer OP's question.

It's actually c).
In cases where there's a chance my dick will take the reins, I leave it to the dice. If I have to really elaborate, I can say that it was the result of a roll, or that it was petrification from a trap/medusa, or that the character stepped in some goop and now her shoes are ruined.
Because, in the end, you will never change your mind.
You think that's admirable, and people like you always do. The truth is you're just incapable of accepting other people's opinions and worldviews as on par with your own, and you likely find people as an idea scary because you can't predict them.
Someone who actually has conviction can listen to the opposition's arguments in complete calm, because they're convinced they're in the right.
People who claim to have conviction are usually people like you, who just have an output and no input and think that's mature.

I'm not into it myself, but I convinced my DM to bring a Gorgon Sea Sorcess into the game as a questgiver, npc, and a love interested for my character Cain, based on the whole Cain and Abel Shtick. Eventually they settled down together on a farm and had a kid named Grendel.
Once again, not into monster girls or scalies. I just really wanted my character to have a kid with some monster chick and name the kid Grendel.

so how about you tell us what you made the hypnotized character do ?

I literally bonked the example together as a theoretical example.
But considering the premise of the OP is that there's nothing actually sexual/explicit involved, I have to assume you didn't read jack shit before posting.
Let's say that it was nothing but attack a party member. That happens, and while the MC is my cup of tea, I go shiitake whenever it starts being about combat.
You have people who'll masturbate to less.
What about, then, if a player makes a character that seemingly accidentally hits all my buttons, and I then runk my dunk sykeliky to the character themselves even though I'm doing all of jack shit in the game?
You can think of an excuse for thoughtcrime. It doesn't change the fact that in this situation, you literally cannot imply harm to anybody without assuming things yet unproven.
Your problem is that you think in terms of absolute morality, which is decided by a flawless and all-seeing entity who can perfectly profile people over the Internet and for some reason never realizes their own mistakes.
If you're not religious, I'm officially really worried and want to know where you live so I can research how to combat cults of personality legally.

>Could a GM possibly include this kind of content out of pure interest and have it better the game? I'm not talking about a GM who needs to see something anatomically implausible happen between a shota catboy and a 10-foot futa dragonborn to get off, but for example a GM who has an arm/armpit fetish and just makes it a part of the local traditions to wear certain clothes.
This is the topic. As said before, it is still exploitive behaviour even if other people won't catch you.

>Is there such a thing as fetish content that is not magical realm?

In my setting, tieflings exist because a bunch of foolhardy and decidedly lost human settlers discovered dark ruins deep within a shithole jungle, happening upon a colony of succubi that had been stranded on the mortal plane. The two parties drew up an agreement that secured the humans an innate arcane edge, while the succubi got to regularly 'harvest' human energy.

You be the judge.

sure, why not?

This is magical realm content.

Succubi regularly "harvesting" human energy makes no sense as the punishment because Succubi are sexy. And if there was no punishment or problem then Succubi wouldn't be demonic. Using Driads, Niads, Nymphs or some other kind of spirit wouldn't be as dumb. Alternatively, you could have the Succubi be some kind of ugly horrible hag monster (and not MILFs you stupid fucks.) But the point is that if the creature is demonic it should result in bad things and not good things.

W-what if the Succubi talk really really dirty while they harvest your energy?

I justify it by it being all background content and erasing the stupidity of the 4E/5E racial origins for Tieflings, as well as the events described above not being known by the general public.

But you're probably right. Oh well.

Which in and of itself is an absolute

SITH DETECTED, GET HIM BOYS!

I think having one origin for Tieflings is dumb. Just have them be the spawn of any demonic influence.

Some fetishes are more visibly fetishy than others. Some kinks might naturally show up in a campaign anyways. For example, I'm turned on by priestesses, princesses, sleep (especially magically-induced), and tentacles. In most fantasy settings, you're getting at least one of those. I don't have to let the other players know I'm turned on, and if they already know I get off on those things for one reason or another, we just joke about it and move on.

there are of course boundaries you don't cross unless its a flat out ERP game but mostly, sexual content in a game is fine, and in my opinion mostly unavoiadable, the vanilla stuff is always going to be there. The issue arises when you make a normal game all about the sex stuff instead of focusing on what your players want to do. while you can take aspects of a more risqué' fetish and use them for some off the wall story telling, the story needs to focus on the party, not the deviancy. general rule of thumb is don't use anything your uncomfortable with, and if your having any second thoughts about the possibility of your players being uncomfortable with it, then don't use it. As for myself i cant crowbar anything from my end into the game because 1. im mostly sure my players would not be okay with it in the slghtest and 2. its obvious as fuck. Just be subtle with it, if you post neon signs saying its a sex thing, then the players arent allowed to think its anything other than a sex thing, and thinking it is a sex thing, your players get weirded out

>being this much of a sith lord

The only people who complain about their parents this much are people who still have to live with them. I don't think you're much cut out to make judgment calls on social situations if that's the case.

Well, the problem is that fetish per se isn't really something you can play (at least if you're not playing Bacchanal).

I'll use a non-yucky example: if the GM was a gun nut that used up a whole deal of the game as a discussion about the various pros and cons of different weapon calibres, it would still be a bad thing just because it would use up game time instead of just... playing. It's not narratively meaningful, if you can see what I mean.

A longwinded discussion about how Okayado-san's exotic brothel has harpy and centaur whores, or even a description of said ladies and maybe their arts, would be the same thing. Plus, be yucky. In the armpit example actually I would just laugh it off, but it's a pretty "acceptable" fetish, bizzarre perhaps but not demonized. and the example is very non-time consuming.

That being said if you can turn a gun nut obsession in meaningful game experiences (I don't think we need examples) I suppose you could turn fetishbait into something playable? I... I dunno, maybe there actually is a sizable monster population in the city and amusingly enough said whores are the most "free" ones (brothel is very classy institution, to get monstergirls you need to pay pretty large sums) but even more ostracized - social drama and shit.

It would probably still be awkward as hell.

>You know what's an extremely typical trait of sociopaths?
The exact thing you're doing.
They instantly jump into trying to demolish or discredit people they don't like, insulting, demeaning and eroding, and when faced with it, they're always just "trying to help".
I thought sociopaths were often glib, charming narcissists. That doesn’t sound like behavior that a glib, charming narcissist would exhibit. Where are you getting this information?

>That's the trap with arguing absolutes. There are very few of them in this world, and as soon as you spit out an absolute and someone can post just one single exception, you're being shamed on the Internet.
That doesn’t make much sense, really. You’d have a reasonable justification in calling it a creepy practice if it was creepy in the great majority of situations. A lot of social judgments work that way.

>First you need to explain how you came to the conclusion that "it's a creepy practice".
This assessment is derived from social norms. It’s not unlike the social rules which suggest that you shouldn’t masturbate at the table.

You also seem to have an unusual degree of confidence in your ability to predict the attributes of other people. Why’s that?

>You can think of an excuse for thoughtcrime. It doesn't change the fact that in this situation, you literally cannot imply harm to anybody without assuming things yet unproven.
Conventions like this don’t really have a basis in moral philosophy, but I don’t think this is a particularly good argument anyway, especially in the domain of sexual ethics. Consider the voyeur who goes undiscovered: who has he harmed? Has he committed a victimless crime— and one which is, therefore, not a crime at all? True, those he spies upon might be outraged if they knew, but they don’t, so who has been harmed? Here, presumably, we condemn someone on the basis of potential harm rather than actual harm. It’s likely that the basis for creepiness operates in a similar fashion; players would be disturbed to learn that the GM is masturbating to their characters, and the GM knows this, but does it anyway.

Again, the sense of revulsion doesn’t run on arguments like this, but they’re easy to construct in any case.

I don't understand magical realm fetishism meme. Can someone give me an example?

1d4chan.org/wiki/Magical_realm

That's not a perfect analogy, because masturbating to someone else's character doesn't relate to an invasion of privacy like voyeurism does. People have the right to masturbate to the thought of whatever they like; it's when you're imposing on someone else, like if a GM purposefully directs a game in a particular direction specifically because it gets him off. If, say, the GM runs a normal game, the characters don't hit any particular buttons of his, and he just has a habit of masturbating to anything and everything because the novelty gets him off, then he's not wronged the players even if they'd be grossed out if you told them about it.

Lucky trips and ew

This is where this thread should have ended

In a perfect Veeky Forums, maybe

You do know that the only person you can get to make more of it is you, right?
You severely underestimate how easily distracted and aroused Veeky Forums is.
If you write some obviously made-up or hypothetical clusterfuck about loli vampires and God knows what else showing up in a game that never happened, people will be posting screenshots five years later.
It never seems as interesting to the person who writes it, though.

>Is there such a thing as fetish content that is not magical realm?

I think you need to chill a bit, broha. I don't think this much psychoanalysis is warranted especially when its based on a question like "Is it morally wrong to jack off to your players characters?"

And that's where our opinions diverge.
You have a voice in your head telling you exactly what things have "value" and "should" be talked about, while I talk about things that happen to come to my mind.
I'll be kind here.
You do know that you're shutting yourself off from a lot of your one single life because you decide prematurely that "X is bad" or "Y is not something you talk about" based solely on personal bias, don't you?
People like you don't go places except their piss-bottle-filled room unless they get the stick out of their ass and learn that there's no one pointing out what kind of discussions are the right or the wrong ones to have on an Internet imageboard that specifically fills the niche of not caring a whit about what you say and forgetting it the next day if it does.

What you're doing is a really fucking typical defense mechanism - you're not posing any arguments, you're not bringing up anything, but instead you're trying to shut down the opposition through shaming and taking the moral high ground.
If you're trying to keep your opponent from replying, chances are you just don't want to hear what they say.
If you really thought you were right all the way down to the bottom of your soul, you'd have no problem listening to people who don't agree.
But you don't, and you can't.
One day you'll realize there's a world outside the hugbox, filled with humans just like you who hold different opinions but have the same right to have them.
I'll leave you while you shriek your head off and get your mom to call your special teacher.

I prefer my friends NOT know specifically what I jack it to. OTOH there are no kids at our table, we're all guys and adults who (believe it or not) have managed to have sex, so we're not keeping it PG-13 either. Some of my players' best shenanigans have been spurred by the quest for poon.

>Is there such a thing as fetish content that is not magical realm?
It is impossible to have a game that does not have fetish content in one way or another.
Races in your setting have feet?
That's a fetish.
Everybody gets their feet cut off?
That's a fetish. Say hi to the amputee fuckers.
People have different lower bodies with hooves and other things other than feet?
That's a fetish. I've fapped to more fauns than days you've been alive, son.
Everybody becomes a blob that never had feet to begin with?
Guess fucking what.

The distinction between "thing that is a fetish to someone somewhere" and "magical realm" is in the attention that is payed to it. I'm going to assume that most of your characters have had digestive tracts that produce fecal matter, yes? How many times have you described a sturdy chocolate mudshark burrowing it's way out of your supple rectal cavity? I'm going to go out on a limb and guess fucking zilcherino. It's all about the attention payed. The clothing that you mention as being traditional? The line is drawn when the GM starts describing freeflowing armpit hairs glistening with sweet summer sweat like dew in the morning, wafting pungent odors of exertion. If it's just "this is how they're dressed," and there's no obviously sexual content like dicks hanging out, then it's not overtly magical realm. That's where the distinction is made - the GM wasting time that the players have set aside to have fun in order to give attention to something that nobody else wants there, and making others uncomfortable in the process. It's just like a GM describing a "cutscene" where the players can't interact until he's done, something usually referred to as "Dungeon Master-bating" (ironically enough to the topic at hand.) Magical Realming is just worse because I walk away knowing what gets your rocks off, something I don't discuss even with most of my close friends. Just don't waste people's time on shit they don't want and you're fine.

You must realize user, most people on Veeky Forums do not actually play games with other people. They have ideas about what it is "supposed to be like" like fifth graders do about sex.

>People have the right to masturbate to the thought of whatever they like;
Yes, but that doesn’t mean some subset of this behavior can’t be sensibly regarded as creepy.

My point was that the moral intuition which undergirds our condemnation of undetected voyeurism resembles the intuition by which we find the masturbation scenario creepy. In both cases it’s the hypothetical harm, or hypothetical grossness, we care about, and this criterion applies whether the scenario is actually realized or not. The players would be grossed out if they knew, and the spied-upon parties would be outraged, and both the masturbating GM and the voyeur are aware of these facts; this is sufficient, in the view of our existing social norms, to render the first act creepy and the second immoral.

>but for example a GM who has an arm/armpit fetish and just makes it a part of the local traditions to wear certain clothes.
You are making a false equivalence. OP is describing deliberately altering a game setting to appeal to your sexual fantasies even if it is not noticeable. You are talking about something entirely different.

OP's behaviour is unacceptable because it is exploiting others for their own sexual gratification.

Except it isn't?

the distinction is if it's the gm's fetish or not
there is no such thing as a middle ground
let's take the armpits as an example
either it is mentioned once as an offhand thing , maybe twice when a foreigner shows up and it's pointed out because it identifies him as such but other than that it never really gets mentioned as much since it's random worldbuilding that doesn't really matter to the players at all for the most part
in this case i doubt the gm will get his kicks and he's better of rubbing one out in the bathroom using his imagination after the session ended
the other option is that is is mentioned enough for the gm to get his rocks of at which point it becomes noticeable for the players and a problem
there is ofcourse the chance that the players won't notice and the dm will still get his kicks, but honestly , why would you ? if it becomes noticeable you're annoying/creeping out your players lessening their experience and you can just as easily jerk of to a video of your specific fetish later

"Magical realm" is something unique to cooperative storytelling. One could conceivably be disgusted by pedo-Amira, but it's another thing.

I really doubt she's let him get any so far. They'd be all flustered about the lack of pregnancy and maybe one of them's infertile.

In my long experience, you can get away with pretty much anything as long as you do one or more of these things:

1) play it for laughs
2) make it clear (or pretend) that what you are describing is gross to you as much as it is to the players
3) play it veeery sneakyly, getting it under their radars

Number 2 in particular is the only way ro insert demonized fetishes such as rape without losing players or facing heavy social repercussions.

shit, so thats how i came up with that idea

and that's why my players like her so much!

Suits of armour are my fetish, so I'd certainly hope you can make fetish content without it being magical realm

>Is there such a thing as fetish content that is not magical realm?
Yes, if the players don't mind/actually like that it's there

The thread is about whether it is moral to magical realm your players and not whether it is possible to get away with it. Do you have any empathy for your players?

Regardless of whether your players would notice it is immoral to use the game to get your rocks off without the consent of the other players.

What urine based pun are the diaper bears?

So long as the sexual part isn't a main focus of it, it's not a magicla realm. For example, you could have a dominatrix boss fight with minions in full gimp gear whose hands are bound so that they have to headbutt you. You could have barechested barbarian girls, so long as their chest size isn't ever a topic. You can have a pedophile who kidnaps girls and binds them in his basement for his own sick pleasures and magical experiments so long as it's the player's mission to fucking smite the shit out of that degenerate. You could have a real motherfucking demon, a goat-headed beast woman of voluptuous size and shape, as big tits and ass as you want, fuck give her a dick as well, so long as it is made VERY clear that it is playing on the aspect of sexualization gone too far and reaching a point where it must be stopped.

Magical Realm is more about shoveling a fetish onto your players with the pretense that it existing in the world is good and natural, and not something outlandish, chaotic, and potentially evil.

Heh. They stuck by me for the better part of a decade (some of them even longer), so I must be doing something right.
Besides, sexual content in a normal RPG is not inherently bad, and I use it rarely.

>No amount of logic will change that it's a creepy practice.

Holy shit user. Learn to fucking argue.
>thing is bad
>why?
>it is and you can't argue otherwise

This topic needs to be kept alive, so I'm bumping it for survival's sake. I have little to say on it right now though. So here, have a thing.

Fetish stuff is an age-old tradition in D&D. It's hard to get away from, considering so much of the human psyche is tied to it in one way or another. Just off the top of my head, the classic examples are...
>genderswap
>transformation
>mind control
>vore

And if it wasn't 2 AM I'd probably be listing a whole lot more. It' just such a basic part of what evokes emotions in us, be they positive or negative. Fuck, look at ancient myths. Loki turning into a mare and getting knocked up by a monster stallion? Fetishy as fuck, but damn if it isn't a hilarious story.

Play it for laughs, play it for horror, and hell, if you've got chemistry with your group you can play it for straight up eroticsm too. Don't worry so much about it.

Monstergirls/monsterraces is a pretty good fetish to have if you want to go magical realm on people, since it doesn't seem weird (unless you make it weird.)

True, which is why I'm glad the random dump folder I opened had that in its first 10 pics. I was browsing for something to post and found something very fitting.

Relevant to the topic of this thread,

I want to run or have the chance to be part of a group playing Blood in the Chocolate for the inflation, blueberry, and bbw content. I will never do this with any of the groups I currently play with.

GETTING AWAY WITH IT ≠ MORAL

Regardless of what you insert, even if it is fucking hand-holding, if you put it in for the purpose of self-gratification instead of for everybody then it is exploitive.

I would read an oversized coffee table book named "Eight Million Indescribably Specific Fetishes"
>are completely convinced that any kind of attraction to or fascination with a concept in a way that isn't completely and utterly non-sexual will instantly taint the entire game because no one can ever be sexually interested in something without instantly masturbating to it.
Genuinely never understood this stereotype, its like people think that nerd-types are so sexually stunted that they see a mildly attractive magic card with skin and start jacking it in the middle of the game store.
I have spent an hour reading jojo doujins out loud to my friends over discord because we were making fun of them and my DIO impression is on point. I would be pretty surprised to find that they were all secretly stroking it while i read that one where Jotaro gets raped by his mom.

I know that. Monstergirls are an admitted fetish for me. Particularly lamia.
In a recent quest I decided I wanted to play as a harpy character, but I did so knowing full well that magical realm shit makes the game not fun for everyone. So instead of flaunting around acting like a faggot with feathers, I had another use for the character, gathering information through spying and asking the crows what they know, using flight to scout unknown territory, and make retarded bird jokes and mock our employers with Perform(Comedy).

I don't know if that's still considered magical realm, but I remember actively avoiding that scenario. Would you say in that case it's less about the self-gratification and more for the good of the group overall?

>hand-holding

YOU GO TOO FAR, SIR

"Eight Million Indescribably Specific Fetishes" kinda sounds like a Noble Phantasm from the Fate/series.

>I don't know if that's still considered magical realm
I don't know, depends on what you define as magical realm. I personally think having a fetish be the root reason you do something in a game is the definition of 'magical realm', but that's not necessarily a bad thing, there's varying degrees of magical realm. You can do it so subtly it just seems like a normal fantasy element, or you can make a campaign fall apart from your sheer faggotry.

>Would you say in that case it's less about the self-gratification and more for the good of the group overall?
Probably yeah. Whatever it is don't feel bad about it if you're not making other people feel uncomfortable, which playing as a harpy that generally moves to accomplish what the party was trying to do probably didn't.

Hey, thought just occurred to me.
If Magical Realms are worlds made of fetishes, then what are the Forgotten Realm?

Settings made for reasons unknown. Possibly no reason, given their inconsistency.

... And? What, you've never added something to a game that was just for you? A small reference or quote that flew over the heads of the rest of the group? Fucking hell user, there's nothing wrong with treating yourself once in a while.

I want to play your game

DMs are supposed to have fun too. If it doesn't bother the palyers, why not do it?
Also:
>MORALITY
get off your subjective high horse

>DMs should have fun too
Most players do not want to and did not agree to run a fetish game.

>You can do it so subtly it just seems like a normal fantasy element,
>... And? What, you've never added something to a game that was just for you?
>If it doesn't bother the palyers, why not do it?
GETTING AWAY WITH IT ≠ MORAL
It is still a betrayal of the other players trust.

>get off your subjective high horse
This is the last resort of a sociopath. You are just looking for an excuse for what you plan to do anyway and don't caret about being good to other people.

All right, guess I'll stop GMing because I like it.
I'll stop keeping secrets from the players, stop making NPCs, stop hiding the plot and just say that everyone wins.
Am I a bad person if I write a bit of OC on a PC after I get home, but then don't tell the player?
Am I a bad person if an image pops into my head of the character in a compromising situation and I don't immediately bow and scrape?
Am I a bad person if I insert a reference that none of the other players know about simply because they don't?

You have the social awareness of an angry special kid, and I know because I've been a GM for those at a local youth club for years.
You lack social experience and have bad experiences with your own lack of confidence making you unable to doubt people in person, or you might just have been spoiled silly and ended up thinking of everything less than pampering as abuse and lies.
People don't tell each other everything. Not even "normal" people. Everyone has those fantasies, everyone rubs one out to something iffy once in a while and everyone has violent or sexual thoughts as a matter of fact.
If someone actually came to you and was 100% honest like you want, you'd be the one accusing them of being creeps.
Society isn't perfect. People can interact with each other day in and day out because you have some level of freedom to withhold small things and tell white lies. Everyone does it, everyone expects it and they'll think you're hysterical and perfidious if you give people shit for small stuff like this.
I'm betting you've never taken a look at yourself from that perspective, and if you have, you came up with some kind of special pleading.
It's obvious you're autistic, because you're expecting complete perfection, purity and honesty from other people even when it's at odds with what everyone else than you does - and you think people would hate someone who rubbed one out to a PC more than someone who gives people shit like you.

well, aren't we projecting.
Nobody here (the current discussion, not the thread in general) is talking about running a fetish game. We are talking about one-offs in a longer campaign.

Moreover, if:
>If it doesn't bother the palyers
then
>It is NOT a betrayal of player trust

And finally, about morality: treating your personal moral values as absolutes is the highest form of arrogance. Your opinion isn't inherently right. Have some humility, ye crusader.

This has been my consistent message throughout the thread.
>Don't insert sexual content in a game for your own self-gratification regardless of if your players didn't notice because it is a betrayal of your players' trust and they would be creeped out if the figured out the truth.
This is not saintly behaviour. This is a bare minimum of social behaviour.

This has not been my message.
>People don't tell each other everything.
>and you think people would hate someone who rubbed one out to a PC more than someone who gives people shit like you
I am talking about people introducing setting elements for their own sexual gratification. Not keeping secrets about masturbating to a PC once. You are making a dishonest and false comparison.

You are calling me angry, autistic, a kid and a spoiled brat. You are constructing a straw man. Now I admit I do call people sociopathic but that is specifically because they seem to lack empathy for the players at their table.

>It is still a betrayal of the other players trust.
This is some autist maximus shit. GM can do what the fuck he wants if the players are fine with it.
>This is the last resort of a sociopath
Oh, you're that retard I've seen posting lately who's always screeching about how everyone who disagrees with you is ACTING JUST LIKE A SOCIOPATH.

I should make my own version of this making Jesus say:

>Fetishes in your game is magical realm.

But user, morality is subjective.
Take infibulation, for example: it is practiced throughout Africa for religious reasons, while in western nations it's considered a gross mutilation and child abuse. Yet circumcision, while being also a genital mutilation performed on an unconsenting child, is not only tolerated and largely ignored for religious minorities (jews and muslims) in almost all western countries, it is considered desirable in any male child, regardless of religious denomination, in crazy places like the USA.

>Am I a bad person if I write a bit of OC on a PC after I get home, but then don't tell the player?
No, but you are if you don't share it with us.

you misunderstood me.
I'm not saying that fetishes in a game are not magical realm. I'm saying that a couple of game session in an otherwise normal year long campaign do not make the game as a whole a fetish game.

Are they though?
i.4cdn.org/gif/1513606262511.webm

I thought that the term magical realm implied a negative response from the players, not just the mere act of putting sexual/fetishy stuff in the game