Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

Discussion and Analysis of Sex and Female Characters in Paizo's APs


Pathfinder Adventure Path General Discussion

51 to 100 of 195 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Pawns Subscriber

I've been lurking on this thread for quite a while, and I think one underlying aspect people aren't bringing to the fore quite enough is the GM's role in all this. An AP might or might not include mature content, but it's up to the GM to handle it.

I happen to be GMing Stolen Lands right now with my 8 and 11-year-old sons, plus 6 adults. It's quite easy to motivate the NPCs without resorting to sexual predation, so everyone's having fun, and the kids aren't being exposed to things that I personally don't think they're ready to hear. (My poor 8-year-old is playing a female elven cleric of Calistria, and I can't tell you how many guys have walked up to the table and said, "All right? Who's playing the cleric of Calistria? I want to get to KNOW her!")

Then we point at my son and the offensive offender sheepishly shuts his yap. My son has no idea what's going on, but he thinks it's hilarious how embarrassed they get.

On the other hand, I'm also GMing Hook Mountain Massacre for 3 adults who are deeply into roleplaying, and I'm definitely playing it over-the-top, Deliverance bad. My players will be uncomfortable sitting at the table with me. But they'll thoroughly enjoy themselves. (One woman and two men, if you're curious.)

EDIT: Oh, and @Gwen Smith -- I FEEL your pain! My wife loves to paint minis for everyone's characters, and I can't tell you how many hours she spends covering up the sculpted bare skin with carefully-textured tights or other more tasteful garments. I believe one of her quotes was, "Can't they make a female paladin who ISN'T exposing herself?"


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Gwen Smith wrote:


Honestly, I find the gender blindness (and gender balance) a feature. I get enough sexism in everyday life; I don't want it in my games.

That's a reasonable stance and as a male I freely admit that I don't have to put up with the pervasive sexism of both the hobby and the world as a whole.

The arguement of you can't have "realism" in a world of magic and monsters I can't agree with though. When I talk about "realism" I'm not talking about setting so much as I'm talking about human nature. Violent, lawless criminals (pirates for example) act in a certain fasion. Some of which is very, very ugly and If I see pirates acting contrary to that I'm just not buying it. I want people, reacting to a world with magic and monsters in a manner that's consistent with human nature. That's the sort of "realism" I'm talking about and when it's not there the game dosen't work for me.

- Torger


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Torger Miltenberger wrote:
Gwen Smith wrote:


Honestly, I find the gender blindness (and gender balance) a feature. I get enough sexism in everyday life; I don't want it in my games.

That's a reasonable stance and as a male I freely admit that I don't have to put up with the pervasive sexism of both the hobby and the world as a whole.

The arguement of you can't have "realism" in a world of magic and monsters I can't agree with though. When I talk about "realism" I'm not talking about setting so much as I'm talking about human nature. Violent, lawless criminals (pirates for example) act in a certain fasion. Some of which is very, very ugly and If I see pirates acting contrary to that I'm just not buying it. I want people, reacting to a world with magic and monsters in a manner that's consistent with human nature. That's the sort of "realism" I'm talking about and when it's not there the game dosen't work for me.

- Torger

Indeed. In a world where magic is prevalent, gravity still works, people can still die, and humans can still be a!$*#+~s.

And since magic can overcome death, the only constant left is taxes ;)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
NobodysHome wrote:

"Can't they make a female paladin who ISN'T exposing herself?"

Why, yes. Yes they can ;)


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Odraude wrote:
NobodysHome wrote:

"Can't they make a female paladin who ISN'T exposing herself?"

Why, yes. Yes they can ;)

or if you prefer to paint your own

http://www.reapermini.com/OnlineStore/nicole/sku-down/14345#detail/14345_G

http://www.reapermini.com/OnlineStore/female%20armor/latest/14348

http://www.reapermini.com/OnlineStore/female%20sword/sku-down/65026

http://www.reapermini.com/OnlineStore/female%20sword/sku-down/30011

Finding those took less than 2 minutes.

- Torger


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Torger Miltenberger wrote:
Gwen Smith wrote:


Honestly, I find the gender blindness (and gender balance) a feature. I get enough sexism in everyday life; I don't want it in my games.

That's a reasonable stance and as a male I freely admit that I don't have to put up with the pervasive sexism of both the hobby and the world as a whole.

The arguement of you can't have "realism" in a world of magic and monsters I can't agree with though. When I talk about "realism" I'm not talking about setting so much as I'm talking about human nature. Violent, lawless criminals (pirates for example) act in a certain fasion. Some of which is very, very ugly and If I see pirates acting contrary to that I'm just not buying it. I want people, reacting to a world with magic and monsters in a manner that's consistent with human nature. That's the sort of "realism" I'm talking about and when it's not there the game dosen't work for me.

- Torger

There's certainly a dark side to human nature, and violence and bigotry are certainly part of it. I don't see that Pathfinder has avoided that, really. Golarion has a dark side to it, with oppression, war, slavery, torture, vivisection, etc. all playing fairly prominent roles in the society.

I'm not familiar with the episode in question (and I'm trying to avoid spoilers), but it's pretty clear that "lawless" and "evil" are never intended to be equivalent in Pathfinder. I don't know if the author actually intended for those pirates to be "bad guys" or "evil people" or just ordinary lawbreakers.

Either way, you can easily demonstrate the ugliness of human nature without including sexual violence. As a storyteller, I often see sexual violence used as a cheap and easy signifier of "Look! This guy is evil!" or a token attempt at giving a female character some "depth" (and more often turning it an emotional crisis for her male protector). Too many times, sexual violence is used as titillation with only the thinnest veneer of character growth or plot development. (If you want a demonstration of this aspect, think about why you rarely see male characters get raped in any genre. If rape is such a useful setting tool or character building device, why does it almost never happen to the main hero?)

Pathfinder has a such a rich toolbox for authors to pull examples of evil from, and I'd be a bit disappointed if they ignored that in favor of over-used tropes. Magically keeping someone alive while you dissect them over and over is pretty darn evil, and as a bonus, you can demonstrate your evilness on PCs of both genders.

On the pirate ship you were talking about, it's complete possible to have gender-neutral sexual violence: have them rape every character who comes on board, just to be fair.


NobodysHome wrote:

I've been lurking on this thread for quite a while, and I think one underlying aspect people aren't bringing to the fore quite enough is the GM's role in all this. An AP might or might not include mature content, but it's up to the GM to handle it.

I happen to be GMing Stolen Lands right now with my 8 and 11-year-old sons, plus 6 adults. It's quite easy to motivate the NPCs without resorting to sexual predation, so everyone's having fun, and the kids aren't being exposed to things that I personally don't think they're ready to hear. (My poor 8-year-old is playing a female elven cleric of Calistria, and I can't tell you how many guys have walked up to the table and said, "All right? Who's playing the cleric of Calistria? I want to get to KNOW her!")

Then we point at my son and the offensive offender sheepishly shuts his yap. My son has no idea what's going on, but he thinks it's hilarious how embarrassed they get.

On the other hand, I'm also GMing Hook Mountain Massacre for 3 adults who are deeply into roleplaying, and I'm definitely playing it over-the-top, Deliverance bad. My players will be uncomfortable sitting at the table with me. But they'll thoroughly enjoy themselves. (One woman and two men, if you're curious.)

EDIT: Oh, and @Gwen Smith -- I FEEL your pain! My wife loves to paint minis for everyone's characters, and I can't tell you how many hours she spends covering up the sculpted bare skin with carefully-textured tights or other more tasteful garments. I believe one of her quotes was, "Can't they make a female paladin who ISN'T exposing herself?"

Has she seen the Reaper one with the full plate mail, full face-plate helm, and apparently a push-up breastplate? The woman is covered in metal from head to toe...except for her boobs.


Gwen Smith wrote:
Torger Miltenberger wrote:
Gwen Smith wrote:


Honestly, I find the gender blindness (and gender balance) a feature. I get enough sexism in everyday life; I don't want it in my games.

That's a reasonable stance and as a male I freely admit that I don't have to put up with the pervasive sexism of both the hobby and the world as a whole.

The arguement of you can't have "realism" in a world of magic and monsters I can't agree with though. When I talk about "realism" I'm not talking about setting so much as I'm talking about human nature. Violent, lawless criminals (pirates for example) act in a certain fasion. Some of which is very, very ugly and If I see pirates acting contrary to that I'm just not buying it. I want people, reacting to a world with magic and monsters in a manner that's consistent with human nature. That's the sort of "realism" I'm talking about and when it's not there the game dosen't work for me.

- Torger

There's certainly a dark side to human nature, and violence and bigotry are certainly part of it. I don't see that Pathfinder has avoided that, really. Golarion has a dark side to it, with oppression, war, slavery, torture, vivisection, etc. all playing fairly prominent roles in the society.

I'm not familiar with the episode in question (and I'm trying to avoid spoilers), but it's pretty clear that "lawless" and "evil" are never intended to be equivalent in Pathfinder. I don't know if the author actually intended for those pirates to be "bad guys" or "evil people" or just ordinary lawbreakers.

Either way, you can easily demonstrate the ugliness of human nature without including sexual violence. As a storyteller, I often see sexual violence used as a cheap and easy signifier of "Look! This guy is evil!" or a token attempt at giving a female character some "depth" (and more often turning it an emotional crisis for her male protector). Too many times, sexual violence is used as titillation with only the thinnest veneer of character growth or plot development. (If you want a demonstration of this aspect, think about why you rarely see male characters get raped in any genre. If rape is such a useful setting tool or character building device, why does it almost never happen to the main hero?)

Pathfinder has a such a rich toolbox for authors to pull examples of evil from, and I'd be a bit disappointed if they ignored that in favor of over-used tropes. Magically keeping someone alive while you dissect them over and over is pretty darn evil, and as a bonus, you can demonstrate your evilness on PCs of both genders.

On the pirate ship you were talking about, it's complete possible to have gender-neutral sexual violence: have them rape every character who comes on board, just to be fair.

Thing is, some people would look at the "keeping alive while dissecting" part and think that is a 'a cheap and easy signifier of "Look! This guy is evil!"'. There's always a fine line between good storytelling and 'shock value' and it is blurry and different for everyone.

And as for 'just to be fair', that bothers me a lot. I can't explain it, but trying to meet some 'prejudice quota' just to not offend people seems very disingenuous. I feel that any and all kinds of violence is bad, but excluding one from storytelling without batting an eye on the others seems... wrong to me. I can't explain it right now.

That said, Paizo hasn't limited usage of rape on only women, as you can read with Hook Mountain Massacre as well as the allusion to it in Sins of the Saviors.

Spoiler:
I forget the NPC's name, but he's tortured by a succubus and her daughters for centuries. Given the nature of succubi, we can only wonder what they did to him sexually.

I'm still a believer that any of these kinds of violence and evils, from racial to religious to sexual, shouldn't be ignored, but shouldn't be overused. They should be approached with care and caution and maturity.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

Odraude wrote:
Thing is, some people would look at the "keeping alive while dissecting" part and think that is a 'a cheap and easy signifier of "Look! This guy is evil!"'. There's always a fine line between good storytelling and 'shock value' and it is blurry and different for everyone.

Keep in mind that we play these games to have fun. Making your friends uncomfortable might be fun, but may not be so for the person who is upset.

Odraude wrote:
And as for 'just to be fair', that bothers me a lot. I can't explain it, but trying to meet some 'prejudice quota' just to not offend people seems very disingenuous. I feel that any and all kinds of violence is bad, but excluding one from storytelling without batting an eye on the others seems... wrong to me. I can't explain it right now.

But, wanting too much "realism" means that our characters would not be "Chelaxian, Garundi, or Elven" (rather the would be Spanish, African, or English).

Let us also keep in mind how dirty and unhealthy the world was. Your heroes would be dealing with things such as " the bloody flux" (now called "Dysentery"), "Gangrene", and "vermine everywhere." Widespread hygene and sanitation are decades away, not to mention that food storage was relatively primative.

And, don't try to use magic to heal these problems. That is a great way to get burned at the stake.

Finally, remember the both Sexism and Racism are the social norm.

Odraude wrote:
That said, Paizo hasn't limited usage of rape on only women, as you can read with Hook Mountain Massacre as well as the allusion to it in Sins of the Saviors.

Yes, I HATED that adventure as a GM.

Odraude wrote:

Spoiler:

Spoiler:
I forget the NPC's name, but he's tortured by a succubus and her daughters for centuries. Given the nature of succubi, we can only wonder what they did to him sexually.

Spoiler:
The name your lookng for is "Nelevetu Voan", now known as "Mr. Mutt."

Lord Fyre wrote:
Odraude wrote:
Thing is, some people would look at the "keeping alive while dissecting" part and think that is a 'a cheap and easy signifier of "Look! This guy is evil!"'. There's always a fine line between good storytelling and 'shock value' and it is blurry and different for everyone.

Keep in mind that we play these games to have fun. Making your friends uncomfortable might be fun, but may not be so for the person who is upset.

Odraude wrote:
And as for 'just to be fair', that bothers me a lot. I can't explain it, but trying to meet some 'prejudice quota' just to not offend people seems very disingenuous. I feel that any and all kinds of violence is bad, but excluding one from storytelling without batting an eye on the others seems... wrong to me. I can't explain it right now.

But, wanting too much "realism" means that our characters would not be "Chelaxian, Garundi, or Elven" (rather the would be Spanish, African, or English).

Let us also keep in mind how dirty and unhealthy the world was. Your heroes would be dealing with things such as " the bloody flux" (now called "Dysentery"), "Gangrene", and "vermine everywhere." Widespread hygene and sanitation are decades away, not to mention that food storage was relatively primative.

And, don't try to use magic to heal these problems. That is a great way to get burned at the stake.

Finally, remember the both Sexism and Racism are the social norm.

Odraude wrote:
That said, Paizo hasn't limited usage of rape on only women, as you can read with Hook Mountain Massacre as well as the allusion to it in Sins of the Saviors.

Yes, I HATED that adventure as a GM.

Odraude wrote:

Spoiler:

** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **

Before you call me out on getting a kick out of making people uncomfortable, you should probably re-read my earlier posts because I even said...

Quote:
Now, every game is different and what works for mine may not work for yours. And that's okay. Players and GMs should only play what they are comfortable with and ultimately, have fun.

Or this:

Quote:
That said, it is ultimately up the the GM to allow it and a GM should really calibrate the expectations of the group before including that. That requires knowing and communicating with your players. I remember running a HERO Champions game that was going to take place in the Middle East and deal with Israel. However, one of my players was Jewish and she expressed that she was uncomfortable with it, so I simply didn't do it. So honestly, if it's too much for you and your players, remove it.

Or even this:

Quote:
I'm still a believer that any of these kinds of violence and evils, from racial to religious to sexual, shouldn't be ignored, but shouldn't be overused. They should be approached with care and caution and maturity.

And again, too much realism isn't what we are looking for. I made a point in saying that this setting IS NOT medieval Europe and that's a classic mistake people fall into. This is a setting that has magic and is a mash up between several real world cultures, ages, and mythologies as well as Pulp, Science Fiction, Sword and Planet, and other Fantasy genres. In addition, it also has our more 21st Century morals.

All I am saying is that there should be a balance on both the lighter side of fantasy and the darker side of it. There is room for themes of righteousness, themes of depravity, themes of redemption, etc. It's just that at least for me, I am okay with certain adventures having these mature themes as long as it is used sparingly and approached with extreme caution and maturity.


I'm not bothered by it, so long as people don't disregard what I was saying.

Sure that sounds narcissistic, but I really don't want to see my friends hurt again.

Here's a quote of an incident related to the topic as well as some ranting on my end about stupid players.

Icyshadow wrote:

It's more likely that any traumatized women in the same table would feel uncomfortable about such themes at best, or in the worst case start reliving some traumatic experience near these people. Worse yet, the insensitive moron playing the "durr hurr rape is fun and I fap to it" character would probably just complain "Waah, waah!! Someone is ruining my fun!!" at which point I'd tell him to get the hell out of the table and never come back, even if I wasn't the DM of said table. Sadly, the damage would already be done. I once had to comfort my childhood friend (she started crying and was rather miserable for a while) who was thinking about a traumatic event (rape was involved), just because one other guy (my former DM) was being an insensitive jerk and thought his words couldn't really hurt as much as he thought they would.

Let's just say I wanted to punch that guy really hard in the face for it.


Icyshadow wrote:

I'm not bothered by it, so long as people don't disregard what I was saying.

Sure that sounds narcissistic, but I really don't want to see my friends hurt.

Here's a quote of an incident related to the topic as well as some ranting on my end.

Icyshadow wrote:

It's more likely that any traumatized women in the same table would feel uncomfortable about such themes at best, or in the worst case start reliving some traumatic experience near these people. Worse yet, the insensitive moron playing the "durr hurr rape is fun and I fap to it" character would probably just complain "Waah, waah!! Someone is ruining my fun!!" at which point I'd tell him to get the hell out of the table and never come back, even if I wasn't the DM of said table. Sadly, the damage would already be done. I once had to comfort my childhood friend (she started crying and was rather miserable for a while) who was thinking about a traumatic event (rape was involved), just because one other guy was being an insensitive jerk and thought his words couldn't really hurt as much as he thought they would.

Let's just say I wanted to punch that guy really hard in the face for it.

See, that's the kind of thing I don't want to have happen. Like I've said above, I want a company to approach all of these sensitive subjects maturely and with caution. But most importantly, I want GMs out there to make the final decision on whether or not they want to include that kind of stuff in their game. In the end, it falls upon the GM to have proper communication with his players so things like that don't happen.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Odraude wrote:
Before you call me out on getting a kick out of making people uncomfortable, you should probably re-read my earlier posts because I even...

I agree.

However ...

Odraude wrote:
All I am saying is that there should be a balance on both the lighter side of fantasy and the darker side of it. There is room for themes of righteousness, themes of depravity, themes of redemption, etc. It's just that at least for me, I am okay with certain adventures having these mature themes as long as it is used sparingly and approached with extreme caution and maturity.

This is where are core conflict is. The problem is that the line of "used sparingly and approached with caution and maturity" is a difficult one to define. Paizo FAILED to do this with Hook Mountain Massacre. {Yes, I do realize that Nicolas Logue's original manuscript was far worse.)

And, I also believe that our beliefs (being based on emotions) on this are held strongly enough that neither of us can be "logically" argued from our beliefs.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I can see the point Lord Fyre is bringing up here right now.

The portrayal of the Ogres was not very subtle nor sparing when it comes to the details.

Even though a DM could keep those things toned down, he'd still be forced to read the original script before making any changes.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Icyshadow wrote:

I can see the point Lord Fyre is bringing up here right now.

The portrayal of the Ogres was not very subtle nor sparing when it comes to the details.

Even though a DM could keep those things toned down, he'd still be forced to read the original script before making any changes.

Correct.

I am the GM for the RotRL campaign. I did read the adventure and was sickened by it. And, I am a 49 year old man, not a child.

My PCs went straight from The Skinsaw Murders to the Fortress of the Stone Giants. Complete with the three level boost. (I even gave them the cash difference between the Lvl 7 and Lvl 10 and let them go shopping through the rule books.) I will likely regret that later, but I simply could not go through those pages again.

It is easier to add the "Grimdark" for those who must have it then to take it away. (... since those who don't want it will have to read it.)

Taldor

I think Hook Mountain Massacre is interesting in that it broke the artificial boring limits of usual D&D political correctness, and makes for a refreshing change from most of what is published. It reads like a cheap horror movie, but there is a coherent story inside it.

The villains are cheap degenerate Ogres hillbillies. They have verysimilitude. They could come out of a medieval fairy tale. And it is pleasurable to off them for the good of Varisia. They are much more interesting than random orc #534895 who is just "doing bad things maybe ?".

Should every adventure be like this ? Hell no.
Should we ban horror movies because one has offended someone in the world ? No. But one has the choice not to go see horror movies.

My girlfriend loves them for instance, and I'll pass. That's not a valid reason to ban her from seeing them.

Give me more Hook Mountain, please.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Gwen Smith wrote:
On the pirate ship you were talking about, it's complete possible to have gender-neutral sexual violence: have them rape every character who comes on board, just to be fair.

True. Sometimes violent criminals will use sexual violence as a means of establishing dominance regardless of gender and I would accept that as far more believable than I would a completely sexless pirate ship.

I'm not saying that anything of that nature should be forced on players that aren't comfortable with it but I think I a side bar in a module saying something like "if you wish to run a less sanitized ship we suggest the following..." wouldn't be out of line considering the subject matter.

I defiantely don't think it should be any DMs (or player's for that matter) go-to plot device. Still, as ugly and despicable as it is, it's a part of humanity and simply pretending that it isn't cheapens the game for me. I get that it's entirely possible to explore evil without going there. But sometimes (pirate ships, prisons etc etc) a lack of it (at least as a posibility) will feel false. Especialy when care has been taken to make everything else seem fairly reasonable.

- Torger


Lord Fyre wrote:
I am the GM for the RotRL campaign. I did read the adventure and was sickened by it. And, I am a 49 year old man, not a child.

Speaking of ROTRL:
One of my players (my brother, actually) was noticeably disturbed by elements of the first book, Burnt Offerings. Particularly, Tsuto--whom he was disgusted by, and called, "one of the worst people I've ever heard of." (If not the worst, I can't recall exactly.) His character ended up beheading Tsuto after he surrendered, in a very Dexter fashion. I haven't read through the third book yet, but from what I hear it's really bad. I wonder how he (and my other players) will receive the later books... I did warn them it gets dark, and is very much a horror-story at times.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Regarding RoTRL:
Ok, now I'm in danger of sending this on a tangent, but Tsuto?
Yes, the guy is a creep, but unless I missed something badly in my multiple readings (or they changed something in the AE version) he doesn't even warrant a blip on the sexual malevometer.
Yes, he tortured his 'father' to death, the same father who beat his mother to death, and wasn't actually his father, just his mother's husband.
Yes, he tortured his sister with the intent of getting her to side with him, but as far as I'm aware there was never any sexual context to it.
Not saying this to imply sympathy for the guy, but if Tsuto qualifies as the 'one of the worst people I've ever heard of' for your brother, your brother needs to get out more.
Hell, Aldern Foxglove pretty much steals Tsuto Kaijutsu's lunch money & runs giggling off into the night in terms of bad-wrong-vile, & that's before he becomes an undead.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Irnk, Dead-Eye's Prodigal wrote:
** spoiler omitted **

Regarding ROTRL:
I wasn't referring to any sexual violence perpetrated by Tsuto, but rather the way in which he tortured and killed his step-father. I don't know if it was added in the AE version or whether it was always in the adventure, but the fact that he poured liquid-burning glass atop his step-father, turning him into a grotesque human-statue, is what did it. I'd say that's pretty messed up and rates pretty highly on my "crazy murderer" scale. No Albert Fish--but still pretty bad.

Odraude wrote:

And as for 'just to be fair', that bothers me a lot. I can't explain it, but trying to meet some 'prejudice quota' just to not offend people seems very disingenuous. I feel that any and all kinds of violence is bad, but excluding one from storytelling without batting an eye on the others seems... wrong to me. I can't explain it right now.

That said, Paizo hasn't limited usage of rape on only women, as you can read with Hook Mountain Massacre as well as the allusion to it in Sins of the Saviors.

That "to be fair" line was probably too flip, and it clearly blurred my point. My bad.

You actually expressed my point better. In general, storytelling currently does exclude one type of violence (sexual violence against males) without batting an eye at the other (sexual violence against females), and it should feel wrong.

Over the years, I've met too many people who defend scenes of sexual violence against women as "necessary" for realism or story development, then reflexively cringe at a scene of sexual violence against a man (even in the same story) as "going too far". What's worse, these otherwise intelligent people can't even see the contradiction, mostly because that double standard is so ingrained into western European culture, going back to the first written works in Sumeria and Egypt.

And again, I appreciate the fact that Paizo does not follow these trends or fall into the sexist tropes that are so endemic to the fantasy genre as a whole. I want them to keep doing that! Hence, if they respond to the "please make it darker" requests, I hope they make it darker in a balanced way, so everyone at the table has an equal opportunity to squirm.


Odraude wrote:
NobodysHome wrote:

"Can't they make a female paladin who ISN'T exposing herself?"

Why, yes. Yes they can ;)

That is a nice one. (Adds it to the list.)


Torger Miltenberger wrote:
Odraude wrote:
NobodysHome wrote:

"Can't they make a female paladin who ISN'T exposing herself?"

Why, yes. Yes they can ;)

or if you prefer to paint your own

http://www.reapermini.com/OnlineStore/nicole/sku-down/14345#detail/14345_G

http://www.reapermini.com/OnlineStore/female%20armor/latest/14348

http://www.reapermini.com/OnlineStore/female%20sword/sku-down/65026

http://www.reapermini.com/OnlineStore/female%20sword/sku-down/30011

Finding those took less than 2 minutes.

- Torger

The Sisters of the Blade series is really good. Also, I like just about all of Werner Klocke's sculptures.

Unfortunately, there aren't more of them. I'm on the verge of creating my characters around available minis, instead of the other way around.


Torger Miltenberger wrote:
Gwen Smith wrote:
On the pirate ship you were talking about, it's complete possible to have gender-neutral sexual violence: have them rape every character who comes on board, just to be fair.

True. Sometimes violent criminals will use sexual violence as a means of establishing dominance regardless of gender and I would accept that as far more believable than I would a completely sexless pirate ship.

I'm not saying that anything of that nature should be forced on players that aren't comfortable with it but I think I a side bar in a module saying something like "if you wish to run a less sanitized ship we suggest the following..." wouldn't be out of line considering the subject matter.

I defiantely don't think it should be any DMs (or player's for that matter) go-to plot device. Still, as ugly and despicable as it is, it's a part of humanity and simply pretending that it isn't cheapens the game for me. I get that it's entirely possible to explore evil without going there. But sometimes (pirate ships, prisons etc etc) a lack of it (at least as a posibility) will feel false. Especialy when care has been taken to make everything else seem fairly reasonable.

- Torger

I do see your point. (Since I'm not familiar with the material in question, I can't say whether I would agree with you in this particular case.)

Most of all, though, I respect the fact that you're arguing for actual story development instead of just hoping for more breast shots. Seriously: it's a pleasant change of pace.


Lord Fyre wrote:
Odraude wrote:
Before you call me out on getting a kick out of making people uncomfortable, you should probably re-read my earlier posts because I even...

I agree.

However ...

Odraude wrote:
All I am saying is that there should be a balance on both the lighter side of fantasy and the darker side of it. There is room for themes of righteousness, themes of depravity, themes of redemption, etc. It's just that at least for me, I am okay with certain adventures having these mature themes as long as it is used sparingly and approached with extreme caution and maturity.

This is where are core conflict is. The problem is that the line of "used sparingly and approached with caution and maturity" is a difficult one to define. Paizo FAILED to do this with Hook Mountain Massacre. {Yes, I do realize that Nicolas Logue's original manuscript was far worse.)

And, I also believe that our beliefs (being based on emotions) on this are held strongly enough that neither of us can be "logically" argued from our beliefs.

Hook Mountain Massacre will always be that one adventure that no one will ever agree on. Some people, like myself, were alright with it (reminded me of Home, the episode from X-Flies) while others were sickened by it. So admittedly, that blurred line between maturity and shock value is already different between just you and me. At the very least, they haven't gone that far in an adventure since. As far as I know anyways...

Paizo Employee Digital Products Assistant

Removed a few posts and their replies involving some back and forth. Please flag and move on.


Has anyone who plays male characters had their males subjected to sexual violence?

In my time of gaming I have had two male characters raped and one coerced into preforming.

Not one of my female characters have ever been.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Gwen Smith wrote:


I do see your point. (Since I'm not familiar with the material in question, I can't say whether I would agree with you in this particular case.)

Most of all, though, I respect the fact that you're arguing for actual story development instead of just hoping for more breast shots. Seriously: it's a pleasant change of pace.

and I, likewise see yours. Thank you for a civil exchange of ideas on a very sensative topic.

Good gaming to you.

- Torger

P.S. if there are people out there that desperate for "more breast shots" they clearly must be on a different internet than I am ;)


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
The NPC wrote:

Has anyone who plays male characters had their males subjected to sexual violence?

In my time of gaming I have had two male characters raped and one coerced into preforming.

Not one of my female characters have ever been.

I've had one of each gender end up victim.

- Torger


In Golarion, things such as rape seem to be universal and gender free.

Yes, there are women being the victim. There are also men. Rape typically happens among the lawless and the barbaric. This includes, but is not limited to, the Shackles, the River Kingdoms, and the Hoards of Belkzen. The more civilized areas have more civil forms of the same principle, be it Paracountes Zarta Draleen coming on to a Pathfinder, or Baron Jacquo seducing a maiden.

Take Skull and Shackles to mind. There is at least one female NPC who was a victim of sexual abuse, at least one who is targeted but avoids it, and at least one who sees men as play things, and numerous ones with no sexual implications whatsoever in their back-story.

I'd say all-in-all, it's realistic, gender neutral, and well done.


As to the concepts of rape, i will refer to some of the above posts. Some tables are not mature enough to handle such concepts, some players are offended by them. It's up to the DM to change things to meet those players' needs.

As to everyone else, rape exists. It is not a pretty thing, it is not something to be taken lightly, but it exists. Consider the Half-Orc dilemma.

Some half-orcs are descendant from true breeding half-orcs. The rest are from Human/Orc couplings. Yes, it is possible for the couples to have a mutual attraction; she sees a big, strong man, he sees an image of beauty type thing. However, orcs are typically brutal and many humans find them repulsive. This results in couplings often being forced or accidental.

Thus your human raised half-orc character has one of three possible pasts:
1) Mom and dad were that one in a million outlier couple.
2) Mom/Dad was raped by mom/dad.
3) Mom/Dad got REEEEEEAAAALLLLY drunk that one night....

Now take these options and spread them across every human raised half-orc.


Obligatory OotS reference: Very ugly backstory


Lord Twitchiopolis wrote:

Thus your human raised half-orc character has one of three possible pasts:

1) Mom and dad were that one in a million outlier couple.
2) Mom/Dad was raped by mom/dad.
3) Mom/Dad got REEEEEEAAAALLLLY drunk that one night....

There are more explanations than these three. Some are more functional, even.

Back when Half-orcs had an Int penalty, it made sense that they would adopt captured humans as something like the Mamlukes or Janissary Corps; acquiring their expertise for battle against other orcs and men. These adopted humans wouldn't necessarily be forced to reproduce with orcs, but their offspring would be prized as advisors, tacticians, or even leaders. They might be motivated by power and influence over the child, or even love if they managed to integrate into the culture (some CE humans might flourish!) And yes, some would likely by by force. Over great spans of time it would be known that a little human blood makes for a smarter, more versatile orc.

Okay, so maybe a sort of eugenics program isn't so much better than a default rape scenario... but that particular explanation is my favorite, since it creates an institutional role for LOTS of half-orcs, who would occupy a social position more amenable to adventuring.

*oh, btw, the whole above Mamluke scenario works just as well for an Orc in a human society, except you'd want to breed for different ability scores. A Kellid tribe, for instance, may want a strong warrior for a son, in which case a little orc blood would do the trick. None of this holds up with Pathfinder half-orcs, sadly. This is all 3.5 rationale.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
The NPC wrote:

Has anyone who plays male characters had their males subjected to sexual violence?

In my time of gaming I have had two male characters raped and one coerced into preforming.

Not one of my female characters have ever been.

I do, on rare occasions, include scenes of sexual violence in my games. Before I do so, I always check in with my players out-of-game to make sure that they are comfortable with that direction of the plot. I won't run that plotline if there are any objections. When I do run such scenes, male victims are about as common as female victims.

Spoiler for Hook Mountain Massacre:
I included one recently when the PCs found the rangers that had been captured by the Gaul Family. Three of the Graul boys had poor Kaven (the youngest and most attractive of the three male captives) tied to a sawhorse in the barm, complimenting him on his "purty mouth" and making him "squeal like a pig."

I would not make a PC become a victim of sexual violence unless I had really, really good reason plot-wise. I would NEVER spring it on a player: this kind of roleplaying challenge is a minefield. At a minimum, I would have a long, private, out-of-character discussion with the player first, and not on gaming night. To date, I've never done that.

The closest thing I've done like that was in a group of 6 players, where three of us each took turns being GM, running our own PCs as GMPCs while we were GMing. I ran a plotline where my PC was drugged and captured by slavers, the the rest of the party had to track her down and rescue her. They found her six game-months later, working involuntarily in the brothel she'd been sold to.

I ran that plotline for several reasons-- 1) I wanted the PCs to really, really hate the bad guys; 2) Give a sense of urgency that one of their friends had been captured; 3) Not have to run my GMPC for a while; and 4) Give myself the roleplaying challenge of playing a character who'd been severely traumatized, and had developed a rather different personality because of it.


I checked through Shattered Star 3 and am familiar with other portrayals of same-sex couples but I do wonder if Paizo isn't catering to the 'Girl on girl is hot' fetish.

Shattered Star:
The couple shown is very 'humanized' and prettied up. The harpy is more of a 'winged girl with clawed feet' and the Catfolk woman is less of the ARG's 'Cat headed humanoid' and more 'anime catgirl'

Will there be male/male couples in future products?

51 to 100 of 195 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder Adventure Path / General Discussion / Discussion and Analysis of Sex and Female Characters in Paizo's APs All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.