Recent Posts
Something on today's blog caught my eye:
Pathfinder Society scenarios must be no more offensive than PG-13. Scenarios are played in public at public settings and children will be playing them. As an aside, the number of submissions that involve violence toward children is staggering—no more of those, please.
So I am wondering what purpose violence towards children serves in an adventure / scenario proposal? Does it make the villain more evil?
It brings a sense of vengeance to the players, it pulls at their heart strings and makes them want to save the children...an especially good ploy at developing better empathy in younger players as well.
The children should be shown to be "in peril" but should not be graphically shown in Pathfinder scenarios.
It's an easily created shorthand for the truly despicable, and as such is a bit easy and tasteless.
Endangering children is one thing, but parading such acts as a way to motivate players is unnecessary. There are plenty of other nasty things one can put into a fantasy game and I'd only save such stuff for the more disturbing Horror Gaming (Chill, in particular was fascinated with Ghost Children).
That said, Paizo are the only writers who can integrate such stuff into a game without making it feel sensationalist.
It's an easily created shorthand for the truly despicable, and as such is a bit easy and tasteless.
I agree. I've, as a DM, only used children on one occasion and even then the child (a newborn half-fiend)was threathened by a priest of Pholtus. It was meant for some soul-searching on the nature of EVIL for my players.
To those authors who did hurt children in their submissions for the last open call: why did you do what you did?
its a subject i tend to avoid. Most are uncomfortable discussing it. I have only ever used it as an element in one story, which was for WFRP, in which the shade of a dead man terrorfied and physicially abused his wife and child from beyond the grave. I included it so that the group could explore the emotional fall out of such a relationship safely.
I wrote it in the wake of have been caught up in an insident of 'domestic abuse', in which i took a beating from another man, while non-violently defending his partner, whom he had been kicking on the floor in the street.
I wrote the peice to excersise my own demons about the insident and to my knowledge every one who played it, enjoyed it. I think such themes can make for excilent gaming, but generally, should be avoided in published material.
I've certainly put NPC children in harm's way as a GM, but generally only in situations where the PCs can save them. To me, saving and protecting children is such a quintessentially and unquestionably heroic act that I might be depriving my players of part of being a hero if I didn't do this.
That said, I naturally shy away from using violence against children as a means to show how evil a villain is, and I've never used it for the added shock value of having it happen to children, as opposed to adults.
Oliver Twist. Jaws. Schindler's List. The Omen. Jurassic Park, Every other Stephen King book. I could go on, but the point is that children in peril is a VERY effective trope and one that's been used by countless better entertainers than us here at Paizo.
The problem is, though, that there's far too many proposals where children in peril isn't used as part of the story, but almost as a lazy shortcut to making a bad guy an even badder guy. In the worst cases, children in peril are used purely for shock value. It's like folk are trying to one-up each other to outdo each other, almost, and that's not a way to get a submission accepted.
In any case, it's been far too recurrent a theme in the proposals. Just as we've decided to ramp back on undead in adventures, we want to ramp back on the dead babies and undead kids. Let's move on.
Faery Tales often endanger children. Roald Dahl often endangered children. It's provocative. Kids like that stuff. You can't nerf what turns kids on. Death is sexy. It's us adults that can't handle it.
That said, too much useage of dead kids in an attempt to give an adventure shocking ballz is not a good thing.
<sigh>
::crumples his Thresher Babies adventure proposal and tosses it in the trash.::
I've played with GMs who have attempted to make their villains seem more evil by having them target children. My response has always been to try to figure out why they're harming children, as opposed to pursuing "reasonable" villainous activities like acquiring power, taking vengeance on those who wronged them, etc.
Generally the answer is that the villain is targeting children because they're really really evil ...
The corollary is of course that the villain is really really evil ... because he's targeting children.
To those authors who did hurt children in their submissions for the last open call: why did you do what you did?
I am not one such author, and I agree with the general sentiments of this thread.
However, after an entire thread condemning the practice (or in the case our Editor-in-Chief, discouraging the laziness and recent commonality of it)-
Do you think someone is really going to come forward now, admit it, and then subject themselves to the court of public opinion?
Rather, I think all that needs to be said on the subject has been said.
I had a Thresher Baby growing up. It was like $10 bucks cheaper than a Cabbage Path Kid. But boy it it make a lot of noise. It would just cry, and cry, and cry, and cry, and...
Did you go into NYC and buy it at the main store made to like like a Thesher Baby Trauma Ward? Man, they had great marketing.
Am I the only one that remembers and cherishes the dead baby jokes from childhood ?>?????? ?
Just the only one that will now admit it.
:)
Okay, I was a crass youth. I snickered at a few.
Though to affirm what James was saying, after the first wave of dead baby jokes, they became tiresome in ever increasing escalation.
Same with Helen Keller jokes. The best ones were always the first few.
Just the only one that will now admit it.:)
Okay, I was a crass youth. I snickered at a few.
Though to affirm what James was saying, after the first wave of dead baby jokes, they became tiresome in ever increasing escalation.
Same with Helen Keller jokes. The best ones were always the first few.
When did I grow up to be transported to a world full of socially minded fuddy-duddys ??????
Same with Helen Keller jokes. The best ones were always the first few.Oh, and the 'Mary, Mary' jokes and the 'Mommy, Mommy' jokes! Classics of tastelessness...
Oh those pitiful punch lines:
"Mommy was did dad's airplane land on your strip?""Mommy why was daddy's gorilla in your jungle?"
I remember one that used headlights, a car and a garage. Wow... tripartite elements. That was a real evolution in that lame convention.
Dead baby jokes are a personal choice, but Paizo has to look at their product from a different angle: will some content cost them customers.
I've never had a dead baby issue in anything I've designed. But I can tell you how an episode of violence toward children can seem appropriate for an adventure and then get rewritten.
My original instructions for Dralkard Manor were to include an attic whisperer, which I was really excited about. But to haunt the house with one of those, is to tell a ghost story about suffering kids. While I felt like Shane and I handled it tastefully, it was still precisely a story that involved violence towards children. We tried to skirt having actual violence represented, and just alluded to it, but then that's a door Paizo chose not to open, which I certainly understand. We received a second set of instructions and had to write the whole thing over again.
So, I can see how some authors might propose adventures trying to make evil more evil, or trying to make an adventure creepier, without feeling like they are sinking to low, or shocking people for effect. We wanted to use a very imaginative and creepy monster, and actually make the a story about setting them free. You can see how perspectives change.
Same with Helen Keller jokes. The best ones were always the first few.Oh, and the 'Mary, Mary' jokes and the 'Mommy, Mommy' jokes! Classics of tastelessness...
Oh those pitiful punch lines:
"Mommy was did dad's airplane land on your strip?"
"Mommy why was daddy's gorilla in your jungle?"I remember one that used headlights, a car and a garage. Wow... tripartite elements. That was a real evolution in that lame convention.
Ok...here's FUNNY...
"What is the difference between a baby and a onion?
No one cries when you chop up the baby."
Dead baby jokes are a personal choice, but Paizo has to look at their product from a different angle: will some content cost them customers.
Thanks for the input. And honestly, yes, I understand and realize what you're saying as well as what Paizo realistically needs to do to stay afloat.
I think what I'd like to say to the OP is this...if it offends, try simply swapping the referrence for something else.
Dead Baby? No problem...make if a dead harp seal (nobody expects the spanish inquisition!!!)...
Personally, blood and gore are not something I find to be scary. It is however, frequently used. I just swap it for something *I* find to be more appropriate for the scenario.
Is that not too hard for some folks to do? Or must everything for them be scripted out?
My original instructions for Dralkard Manor were to include an attic whisperer, which I was really excited about. But to haunt the house with one of those, is to tell a ghost story about suffering kids. While I felt like Shane and I handled it tastefully, it was still precisely a story that involved violence towards children. We tried to skirt having actual violence represented, and just alluded to it, but then that's a door Paizo chose not to open, which I certainly understand. We received a second set of instructions and had to write the whole thing over again.
Attic whisperer... oo, I like that.
Then again, I can see Robert Redford going around whispering to attics and telling us what they wanted.
Am I the only one that remembers and cherishes the dead baby jokes from childhood ?>?????? ?<------ :)
No. You are not.
Cosmo, hon (assuming you're female)...
Your avatar almost LOOKS like a dead baby joke :)
Smile!
I want you to imagine kissing lovely Cosmo right on her beautiful face. Are you imagining it?
Now... your hand moves up her sweater...
When did I grow up to be transported to a world full of socially minded fuddy-duddys ??????
Don't mind me Flynn, I'm old.
(So old in fact that I've listened to the Beatles before! The White Album! On vinyl even!
Besides, read my posts again.. I'm not as clean as I've led you to believe.
When did I grow up to be transported to a world full of socially minded fuddy-duddys ??????Don't mind me Flynn, I'm old.
(So old in fact that I've listened to the Beatles before! The White Album! On vinyl even! ** spoiler omitted **
Besides, read my posts again.. I'm not as clean as I've led you to believe.
Much as I listened to Kansas (and ashamedly a few Barbara Mandell albums) on vinyl...
Faery Tales often endanger children. Roald Dahl often endangered children. It's provocative. Kids like that stuff. You can't nerf what turns kids on. Death is sexy. It's us adults that can't handle it.
That said, too much useage of dead kids in an attempt to give an adventure shocking ballz is not a good thing.
<sigh>
::crumples his Thresher Babies adventure proposal and tosses it in the trash.::
I don't think endangering fictional kids is a major issue, but killing off wee moppets to lazily make some kind of a point isn't really what's needed- it's not sexy, it's just juvenile and kind of sad, and does nothing for the hobby's image.
I don't think endangering fictional kids is a major issue, but killing off wee moppets to lazily make some kind of a point isn't really what's needed- it's not sexy, it's just juvenile and kind of sad, and does nothing for the hobby's image.
Two thoughts come to mind...
Thought #1 "Oh please...."
Thought #2 "Would you like a ladder?"
I don't think endangering fictional kids is a major issue, but killing off wee moppets to lazily make some kind of a point isn't really what's needed- it's not sexy, it's just juvenile and kind of sad, and does nothing for the hobby's image.Two thoughts come to mind...
Thought #1 "Oh please...."
Thought #2 "Would you like a ladder?"
Well....
I agree with Firbolg actually. I think he's right.
I know you want to demonstrate a good sense of humor Flynn, but you really can't confuse tasteless jokes with good RPG material.
They're two different things. You can appreciate both on some level, but that doesn't make them anything alike.
Well....
I agree with Firbolg actually. I think he's right.
I know you want to demonstrate a good sense of humor Flynn, but you really can't confuse tasteless jokes with good RPG material.
They're two different things. You can appreciate both on some level, but that doesn't make them anything alike.
*wishes he had two ladders to hand out*
When did I grow up to be transported to a world full of socially minded fuddy-duddys ??????Don't mind me Flynn, I'm old.
(So old in fact that I've listened to the Beatles before! The White Album! On vinyl even! ** spoiler omitted **
Besides, read my posts again.. I'm not as clean as I've led you to believe.
Well Watcher, since our last conversation about the Beatles. I can tell you I've met someone who listens to the Beatles, he's old though ;>
Well Watcher, since our last conversation about the Beatles. I can tell you I've met someone who listens to the Beatles, he's old though ;>
Good on you, young man! ;)
Don't worry, we all end up in Soylent Green.
(That's an old movie, just in case you never heard of it. Charleston Heston's in it. He's dead now, but he was quite old when he died.)
Snark all you want, it's true. The fact that you're unable to discuss it without resorting to a passive aggressive attack on the person disagreeing with you a testament to that.
<Begin Snark>
First of all, I do not make it a general habit to alter my actions simply concerning how another might perceive me. Junior High really kinda nerfed that for me.
Second, I stated an opinion regarding the fact that if you do not like what you read, YOU as the DM have the choice to alter it AS YOU SEE FIT. This is an approach that I would truly like to see more of the world take in how they view themselves and others.
Third, if snarkiness is pointing out that someone needs to climb down from their high moral perch, so be it. It's an opinion. It's mine. You're entitled to yours.
Fourth, (again) as previously stated, I *do* realize that Paizo is a business and needs to be aware of it's client base and their desires. When a company is as obviously self-censoring as Paizo is (kudos, you do what I wish I had greater ability [or drive] to do myself), I find it somewhat humorous that people only ask for more censoring.
Fifth, I find it rather humorous to think that by censoring our hobby, we'll somehow alter the pre-decided view of those who feel it is somehow offensive. THIS IS FANTASY. It is NOT all children friendly.
Read Brother's Grimm, then get back to me.
<End Snark>
To those authors who did hurt children in their submissions for the last open call: why did you do what you did?I am not one such author, and I agree with the general sentiments of this thread.
However, after an entire thread condemning the practice (or in the case our Editor-in-Chief, discouraging the laziness and recent commonality of it)-
Do you think someone is really going to come forward now, admit it, and then subject themselves to the court of public opinion?
Rather, I think all that needs to be said on the subject has been said.
Well, I can hope.
I do not want to condemn anybody, I just really want to know why they added the children. For example, elsewhere in this forum someone posted his submission for #20 and it too included a child about to be savaged by a monster. In that particular instance I believe it was used for shock value, given that succubus sex games were also involved ;>
Mr Helt also gave some good reasons why he included children, I just want to know why there is a surge of dead babies.
I don't think endangering fictional kids is a major issue, but killing off wee moppets to lazily make some kind of a point isn't really what's needed- it's not sexy, it's just juvenile and kind of sad, and does nothing for the hobby's image.Two thoughts come to mind...
Thought #1 "Oh please...."
Thought #2 "Would you like a ladder?"
Three thoughts come to mind:
Thought #1
Q: Difference between a truck load of babies and a truckload of sand?
A: You can't shovel sand with a pitchfork.
Baby jokes are easy to come up with, it's just a matter of how low are you willing to go and just how few friends you want to keep.
-it's a long way from just cynically throwing baby carcasses about willy nilly like visceral tinsel to pimp up a weak story and to shock your players.
Brothers Grimm were harsh moral tales to keep folks on the straight and narrow, not a gorefest just for the fun of it.- if that's your take, then I'm afraid you're waaay off the mark.
Thought #2
Do you actually have kids?
Thought #3
Since you've decided I need a ladder, I guess you'll need a map to find your way out of the nihilistic dead end you've found yourself in (wow, handing out opinions on other people is fun- just like Junior High!)