Personal Experience with StarFinder (SF) game and nephews:
When SF came out I had a copy and my nephews were asking about it and had some questions, I posted their question under my name and got a less then helpful and professional response on the Paizo Forums (which also served as good example for them at that age). It made them not want to play the game and the older still has not played pen and pager games to this day.
My brother-in-law asked if that was standard forum behavior and I said it can be but not all forums are the same. I am fairly sure he talked to his kids about it and is a reason the have not been more involved in pen and paper games.
Game Reviews for Content:
In the past I have been asked many times if I new a good review site for rpg and or computer games for content, which I do not and sort of prefer not to be held responsible if a site has a shift in content standards, ie today this is fine and tomorrow there is a huge shift in another direction).
But I know a lot of parents screen the things their kids do and or are doing for reviews and information. And quite a few times have removed that activity do to content.
What I can see about this rule:
Parent 1 does not know a lot about RMU (P1): I had to stop my kid from playing RMU because to cast spells you have to act out negative personal traits.
Parent 2 knows more about game (P2): No you to cast evil spells your character has to act out negative social traits, normal spells do not have that condition.
P1: Well I have seen a change in my kids behavior as he likes to make the best possible character, so are evil spell lists more powerful then other spell lists?
P2: Yes they can be.
P1: So to be better you have to act out negative social things.
I can see the argument (and have had it with others in this type of discussion) in that killing monsters is much more problematic then "negative social traits" but I have also had people say that they have seen problematic changes in their kids behavior do to things on TV (cartoons, TV shows, computer games, social forums, etc) and had to remove that and other activities from their kids lives.
So quite simply, why have a rule that makes it easy for parents to not let them play RMU because they might have to act out (roleplay) negative social traits?
Again I want to state that every parent, GM and group have different tolerances for many game concepts and I have seen quite often a parent info site provide a review of a game that brought up a negative game aspect (even if small) and thus a parent not let their kids play the game. Quite simply they already have a lot to deal with and they do not want to run the chance of having to deal with anything more (ie they do not need any more on their plate with their kids).
Does that make sense?
MDC