|
I thought this was far enough from a GM reference thread to warrant opening a seperate thread for this.
In the first half of Shackled Hut, bestiality and it's inevitable social reprecussions is a major theme, because...
If Mr. Groves is around here I'd be happy to know if this was intentional, and if so what was the reasoning bhind it (my guess is that part of the "grim grimm adventure" was to show the REAL results of people who fall for magical fearies and creatures).
For other GMs out there, I'm looking for a way to tone this theme down as I am a bit uncomfortable with it, and besides I get the sense it might feel a bit repetitive. Any ideas how to do so in a better way than just ignoring the parts concerning it?
I thought this was far enough from a GM reference thread to warrant opening a seperate thread for this.
In the first half of Shackled Hut, bestiality and it's inevitable social reprecussions is a major theme, because...
Spoiler:it appears no less than 3 times! First time in "Wood wife's plight", second time in Ellsprin (the woman in the besieged housed got busy with a Satyr) third time is the world famous Greta, who was discussed more thouroughly in the GM reference thread.If Mr. Groves is around here I'd be happy to know if this was intentional, and if so what was the reasoning bhind it (my guess is that part of the "grim grimm adventure" was to show the REAL results of people who fall for magical fearies and creatures).
For other GMs out there, I'm looking for a way to tone this theme down as I am a bit uncomfortable with it, and besides I get the sense it might feel a bit repetitive. Any ideas how to do so in a better way than just ignoring the parts concerning it?
Spoiler:(for example, having Sylga just be an actual human would work fine, but take away a lot of the complexity in the situation and kind of make it less interesting...)
You would have done well to spoiler it...
Or at least mention that it is a thread for GM's & Players shouldn't read.
I'm not certain I agree that bestiality is the key element, unless you are willing to contend that sex/procreation outside your species qualifies as bestiality...
In which case I can think of a number of Humans & Elves who are going to want to have a private talk with you.
The other answer is because those elements are very prevalent in a lot of fairy tales/folklore...
|
I don't think that the Wood Wife or the satyr are bestiality (and Greta only barely). Humans and fae are a classic fairy tale trope, as are humans and shape-shifted animals: "Beauty and the Beast," "The Swan Prince," "The Frog Prince," "The Crow Brothers," "Midsummer Night's Dream," the story of the selkie, the kitsune, and on and on. This whole adventure path seems to follow fairy tale themes, and this one is so common in the source material that I'm surprised it hasn't come up more. That's just the transformed animals. That's not even considering the animals that fall in love with humans (and vise versa).
Satyrs and huldra aren't animals. They're fae. Even Greta, in the context of the Howlings, isn't an animal - she's as smart and self-determined as any human.
If you're not interested in the fairy tale stuff, I don't see what the attraction of this AP would be.
Satyr isn't really bestiality since he's not an animal. Furthermore, it's common in folklore (and even calls it out in the Bestiary entry for the satyr), for satyrs to seduce and couple with women. Same thing with the huldra. Those two aren't animals anymore than a harpy or catfolk or jorogumo are. So no, those are not examples of bestiality. I don't even see how you gather the huldra is a beast since the only "animal part" she has is a fox tail. It'd be like calling a person in love with a dryad a dendrophiliac.
Greta is probably closer to what you're looking for, but it's muddled by the fact that she can change into human form. Leave it to magic to make things blurry.
|
Well Satyrs aren't beasts for a start. Besides ancient Greek myth had Satyrs be the epitome of lust, seducers who did exactly what is done in the AP. Just change it to some other type of fae. Problem solved.
The wood wife is again a fae, not a beast. In fact it's a huge stretch calling this bestiality, she looks and acts human to all intents and purposes (bar the tail). Just make her human or some kind of construct if it bothers you.
As for Greta, that whole thing is totally optional and is in fact very difficult to start. The player involved has to be wearing exactly the right thing and make a pretty difficult Diplomacy check. Even then it takes nothing away from the AP to just ignore it.
Honestly I think it's not a big deal, these are homages to Grimm's fairy tales rather than anything else. This is no different than a relationship between a human and a genie.
|
|
O.K, I get it that the creature type for satyr and huldra is not "beast" by the rules of Pathfinder... but, come on people, they are a fox lady and a goat man. I can't NOT consider having sex with something that has a tail (or hoofs or horns) bestiality. It's about people who have relationships with other hybrid creatures that have the appearence of animals.
I do see that most of you seem to think like me, that it's a theme in fearie tales so it's also a theme in Shackled Hut. That makes sense, even though I'm not super happy about it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am working on a reply, but I did flag the original post for a spoiler tag. If the moderators read this post, I think the thread subject line should have a spoiler tag for the whole thread.
I just explaining this because I want Lord Snow to understand that their post was not flagged because I objected to it, but because I think it's spoilery.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
O.K, I get it that the creature type for satyr and huldra is not "beast" by the rules of Pathfinder... but, come on people, they are a fox lady and a goat man. I can't NOT consider having sex with something that has a tail (or hoofs or horns) bestiality. It's about people who have relationships with other hybrid creatures that have the appearence of animals.
I do see that most of you seem to think like me, that it's a theme in fearie tales so it's also a theme in Shackled Hut. That makes sense, even though I'm not super happy about it.
Fox lady is stretching it. She has a fox tail, which really isn't as big of a deal as, say, the fact that she is hollow.
Has nothing to do with types and subtypes and more to do with folklore, since I'd consider sex with a magical beast bestiality. If you want a proper word, I'd call it xenophilia. They are a completely different other species that have some animal features. Bestiality is just someone having sex with pure-blooded animals, like horses and dogs.
So, guy f!&#s a harpy? Xenophilia.
Guy f#+!s a dryad? Xenophilia.
Guy f&~$s a satyr? Xenophilia.
Guy f@#~s a donkey? Bestiality.
Guy f+@%s a displacer beast? Bestiality.
Guy f*@&s a tree? Dendrophilia and lots of splinters.
And to be honest, The Shackled Hut doesn't focus on the sexual part of the first two's relationship. For the huldra, it doesn't even mention anything about them bumping uglies. And for the satyr, it states that the couple formed the beast with two backs in passing as part of the narrative explaining the beginnings of the NPC. So with the exception of Greta (which is a sidebar at worst), the sexual part isn't the focus of the campaign.
Personally, I'd be more concerned with the witch that cooks children alive and feeds them to the trolls than what a man and a hollow fox girl wanna do.
De-emphasize any sexual congress that makes you uncomfortable, but don't white wash over the interesting fairy-tale influences at play here. You don't have to turn every relationship into full on Rule 34, do you? Romances and couplings and births of children can have the gory bits handled off screen can't they?
|
|
I am working on a reply, but I did flag the original post for a spoiler tag. If the moderators read this post, I think the thread subject line should have a spoiler tag for the whole thread.
I just explaining this because I want Lord Snow to understand that their post was not flagged because I objected to it, but because I think it's spoilery.
Sure, no offense taken or anything. My mistake was assuming that only GMs use these AP specific messageboards in the first place, which is why I didn't see a reason to spoiler tag it. Won't happen again :)
I'm not really too worried about Spoilers really. Admittedly, I always assume the AP threads are filled with spoilers.
| 21 people marked this as a favorite. |
My reply:
On this topic, however, I wish to speak sooner rather than later.
Also, I took no offense at the original post. I may or may not agree, but this is a legitimate discussion.
If Mr. Groves is around here I'd be happy to know if this was intentional, and if so what was the reasoning behind it (my guess is that part of the "grim grimm adventure" was to show the REAL results of people who fall for magical fearies and creatures).
Well, there is no agenda behind it, other than to tell a story.
As has been pointed out, the satyr and huldra are an aspect of traditional folklore.
More than anything, I added those elements to the adventure because they're comments and discussions on relationships. That is an aspect I like to bring to adventures that I don't always see my peers utilizing as a story-telling technique. I come from a strong roleplaying tradition, and when an adventure is all traps and combats without any roleplaying, relationship development, and meaningful (and sometimes difficult) choices—I consider that adventure to have failed.
Okay, let's first talk about Sylgja, the huldra. First off, she's not a fox woman. She's hollow on the inside with tree bark! She's not an animal, and honestly I'm not exactly sure what she is, other than the product of real world mythology. A mythology that depicts huldra as sometimes being in union with woodsmen, hunters and foresters. I didn't make up the term "wood wife". But rather than objectify Sylgja, let's talk about who she is. She's a wife who cares very much about her husband. They live in isolation because their relationship isn't accepted by most communities. Not because she has a fox-tale, but because she is fae. She's worried about her life-partner who has gone missing. Because she's not quite human, she doesn't understand the human concept of death. If the PCs fail to rescue her husband, she does understand what it means to be alone—and that terrifies her. In a way, she objectifies humanity, because she makes the mistake of thinking her husband can be replaced. Sylgja isn't human, but she's soooo close. And she experiences love, loss, and fear. This is an opportunity for heroics or for tragedy—and the PCs have the power to decide which outcome it will be. It also underscores an actual and truly intended theme—mortal and fae unions are perilous. Note, I said "fae" and not "beastial". That is a traditional mythological theme
If all someone takes from that is, "Hey, that lady has a fox tale—how kinky" then I guess I failed.
Okay, let's talk about Maret Truskin, the mother of Garen the young satyr. Maret doesn't have the largest role from a combat perspective, but she is the proverbial heart of this story. A story which is mired in tragedy but which the PCs can alleviate somewhat. Here is a woman who had a forbidden relationship with a fae creature and was ostracized by her community because of it. She loses her son, because he can't accept that he causes her to be an object of shame. Which is particularly sad, because we don't know if Garen's father seduced Maret or not with guile or magic. Maret carries on, and her innate goodness eventually attracts the love of a good man who looks beyond Maret's past and instead focuses on who she is as a person. This have a loving relationship and have two children of their own. Then one day, Garen falls into the wrong crowd and talks about his mother to some other faerie creatures that he really didn't understand. Those quicklings and the twigjack are revolted at the thought of a faerie creature sleeping with a mortal, who they view as nothing more than animals. Ironic isn't it? The view humans as animals. So what they do? Faernip and that Tindlecrick execute that good and decent man in front of his wife and children and leave him to bleed out in the snow. Then they lurk just outside, and wait for the fear and desperation to be so great that Maret and the kids dare step outside. The quicklings and the twigjack aren't animal-people, but they are prejudiced in a way that turns our notions of acceptable relationships upside down. Now humanoids are the dirty shameful objects of perverse lust. But, lest we start to cast stones—look around. So were the townspeople of Ellsprin. The townsfolk drove Maret outside of their community, and they filled young Garen with so much shame as to run away from home, so his existence wouldn't be a blot on his mother any longer. That fawn wanted to protect the only person who ever loved him, his own mother. So we have humans being bigots, and we have faeries being bigots—and you have one poor woman stuck in the middle just trying to protect her children. She's just watched the love of her life get killed. And, I stick your PCs right in the middle of this crucible—and I force them to struggle with the question of "what is the truth"?
When you read this encounter, do you perceive the subtlety of what happens? If the PCs approach the house, Maret Truskin shouts out a warning. She's just watched her husband brutally murdered and she is besieged in her own house, but she has the presence of mind to shout out a warning to the PCs that they're walking into an ambush. Maret is a good person.
What of Zzababa the female quickling? She just lost her mate trying to make a miserable half-breed fey realize how superior he is to the muddy race he was half-born from. She and Faernip were chaotic evil, but they really thought they were doing Garen a favor. Zzababa is definitely evil but she turns on the young man in grief and rage at what she perceives as an injustice.
What is the truth? Where is justice?
As a Designer I have never been interviewed or asked any questions about myself. I share a story that is a partial inspiration of this encounter. I'm 46 years years old, and when I was wee lad of about 8 years my mother took me to a seminar on science fiction at the University of Michigan, Flint campus, where Theodore Sturgeon was lecturing. Most of it went over my head, but he talked to me afterwards and was very kind. He presented me an autographed copy of e pluribus unicorn and told me I would enjoy it one day. I read it decades later and the first story in the book is called The Silken-Swift. It's a beautiful short story about about heartless and evil virgin and a unicorn who contest the very meaning truth, justice, and purity of the soul.
Maret's story is ripe with tragedy, but the PCs can be the instruments of change. They can reunite mother and son. They can avenge the death of a good man. Finally, they can be the salvation of innocence (and get a handy magic item! Whoohoo! I can be practical too!) The PCs can't undo the past, but they bring about a new beginning. Two grieving mothers can become friends and draw strength in supporting each other.
If all one takes from that is a decade ago "somebody slept with a goat-man".. well, I have done the best I could. I can offer no apologies.
Again, an actual theme might be that relationships between faeries and mortals are perilous. But I never considered these to be animal people but rather "fair folk". No one makes these comments about dryads, but the implication is very much the same.
Okay, and then there is Greta. I suppose a point about bestiality can be made there. However, Greta isn't looking for a human to be her mate, rather she can be fooled by the rime pelt. The implication is that once she discovers the truth, it's possible for her to look past it. Really, what I'm doing is playing a game with the implications of Diplomacy.
Too often I see NPCs presented as window dressing or objects presented for interaction—if the PC wants that interaction. I was playing with the notion that NPCs are not static and fixed, just waiting for PCs to do all the talking and make the first move. Rather, they're individuals who are capable of initiating interaction (besides looking for someone to go on missions and quests!). I think it would be cheesy just to have a vapid character rush up and flirt with PCs for no good reason, and Greta should not be doing that. This is where Diplomacy comes into play. If you use Diplomacy to gather a positive reaction from an NPC, is it crazy for them to look at you as someone who is attractive? I tend to find people in the Real World "like" people who "like them back", and that can manifest as showing an interest and speaking nicely—as well physical attraction, of course. I certainly do not think all (or even) most uses of Diplomacy should be misconstrued as an invitation to flirtation—but who knows? If the circumstances are right?
The Greta plot hook is for fun and has zero to do with the larger story of the AP. If it makes a GM or players uncomfortable, it should certainly be set aside. The encounter runs fine with out it. Its an option to play with, nothing more.
Whew... long post. I am going to post now, and if I have left anything unsaid, I'll do my best.
NEEDLESS REPETITION
1.) Rather old school folklore
2.) Relationships more significant than sexual themes
3.) The perilous nature of fae and mortal relationships the theme rather than suggestion of bestiality.
I'm not really too worried about Spoilers really. Admittedly, I always assume the AP threads are filled with spoilers.
Yes, I feel the same, but I feel responsible as an author and a contract freelancer to play safe. If the moderators don't feel it is necessary I'm cool with it either way.
I'm not really too worried about Spoilers really. Admittedly, I always assume the AP threads are filled with spoilers.Yes, I feel the same, but I feel responsible as an author and a contract freelancer to play safe. If the moderators don't feel it is necessary I'm cool with it either way.
S'all good. Also, good explanation, though I didn't realize that the huldra had tree bark in her. That just really confuses things now haha.
S'all good. Also, good explanation
Thank you!
I forgot to say one thing. I really play around with some of the concepts explored in the BBC version of Being Human. (I can't quite adapt to the American version)
That show has a vampire, werewolf, and a ghost as the main characters. But the show isn't about a vampire, a werewolf, and a ghost—it's about being human.
I'll hush up now. :D
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's a superb explanation. And to be honest? Personally I never saw a problem with any of the relationships nor did I see it as "bestiality" or the like. The reason? These are intelligent sentient beings. It's no more bestiality than the relationship between Spock's parents, despite them being two different species.
I've considered these relations. And to be honest, the only reason I'd not use them is because I've already two NPCs who play a significant part of my current group... and would have troubles integrating more NPCs unless I recruited a player to run them (and even then the one player with the most experience to RP multiple characters is male... and with the character most likely to enter into one of those relationships).
But then, I'm not as young as I used to be, so my abilities to run multiple NPCs with distinct personalities isn't what it used to be. ;)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the better question is why is it NOT in all of the others.
With so many races out there and so many creatures that can take human form, I don't consider beastiality an issue in fantasy role-play any more than I consider homosexual or multi-partner relationships an issue. To be honest, I'm rather pleasantly surprised we haven't had more of an uprising about some of the violence against children in the story...
I saw it as a faerie tale aspect. Children do go out into the woods... and never return... in those stories. Heck, I could very well see the mother refusing to let her kids out of her sight for the rest of the adventure even should the boy survive unharmed. :)
Though I am curious as to how to run this if a PC goes with the child. One PC can't keep the child safe from three wolves. At least one would get past him or her if he or she has the kid run for it. And I could see the wolves attacking... and one going for the kid while the other two went for the PC.
It's horrific... and yet it also drives home the horror of that situation and of struggling to save a child from those horrific odds. (That's when having a horn like Boromir comes in handy. ^^)
how common were half dragons in 3.5 hmmmm?
how common were half dragons in 3.5 hmmmm?
Common enough that Paizo flat-out stated in the Half-dragon write-up in the Bestiary that the vast majority of Half-Dragons in Golarion were actually the result of magical experimentation rather than breeding.
Dude you had better not read any Greek Myth... Zeus like to shape change into an animal and get funky with the ladies, once as a bull, once as swan... I think a shower of rain as well. Also you had better not watch any Animae as cat girls seem to be all to frequent.
Every culture has animal and plant spirits doing the dirty with humans... Frankly I am surprised you are surprised....
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Dude you had better not read any Greek Myth... Zeus like to shape change into an animal and get funky with the ladies, once as a bull, once as swan... I think a shower of rain as well. Also you had better not watch any Animae as cat girls seem to be all to frequent.
Every culture has animal and plant spirits doing the dirty with humans... Frankly I am surprised you are surprised....
Indeed. If a girl with a fox tail counts as bestiality even if she's fey, then I guess aasimar born of angels are products of bestiality since angels have bird wings, outsider type be damned! And let's not get started on devils with their hooves and bat wings. Clop clop ;)
I mean this all in playful jest Lord Snow :D
I saw it as a faerie tale aspect. Children do go out into the woods... and never return... in those stories. Heck, I could very well see the mother refusing to let her kids out of her sight for the rest of the adventure even should the boy survive unharmed. :)
Though I am curious as to how to run this if a PC goes with the child. One PC can't keep the child safe from three wolves. At least one would get past him or her if he or she has the kid run for it. And I could see the wolves attacking... and one going for the kid while the other two went for the PC.
It's horrific... and yet it also drives home the horror of that situation and of struggling to save a child from those horrific odds. (That's when having a horn like Boromir comes in handy. ^^)
I'm personally not bothered by cooking kids, but I'm not really bothered by sex and violence in RPGs. Granted, I don't really want my games turning into parodies of 90's comics, where everyone has leather, belts and pouches everywhere, and riddles the bad guys with bullets ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let's not dogpile Lord Snow, folks. I was taught about Theseus and the Minotaur in Junior High, yet somehow my teacher managed to skim right past the whole story of Queen Pasiphaë.
Anyway, I feel like its a good discussion and I don't want to punish a poster from bringing up a concern in a polite manner.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let's not dogpile Lord Snow, folks. I was taught about Theseus and the Minotaur in Junior High, yet somehow my teacher managed to skim right past the whole story of Queen Pasiphaë.
Anyway, I feel like its a good discussion and I don't want to punish a poster from bringing up a concern in a polite manner.
I know I know, just jesting and all that. You can tell from my use of emoticons ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sorry I had no intention to dog-pile
I would recommend LS take a look at world myth, its a wonderful way to expand your knowledge base for telling cool stories as a DM.
In some Australian Aboriginal Dreamtime myth animals are people and people are animals, one being the avatar of the other interchangeablely. There is a lot of sex and magic and adventure, involving these interchangeable people/animal spirits.
|
|
My reply:
** spoiler omitted **...
Hey, thanks for the detailed response!
Let me start with an apology. I never intended to say that the encounters I mentioned in the opening post were nothing but kinky animal sex or something. I actualy really liked all of them, with their sense of gritty "reality", what I like to call a "grim Grimm" story. They are much more complex than an averege Pathfinder encounter and some of them reminded me in a lot of ways some of the encounters from "Edge of anarchy" and "seven days to the grave", which were the adventures with the most morally challenging events Iv'e ever seen in an AP so far.
I was just suprised that time and again, a great deal of the complexity stemmed from what I (still :P) percieve as hints at bestiality, and the way being cought in such an act would drive you apart from society and might have other dire reprecussions.
Thnaks to your excellent post I now have a much better understanding of what sort of a role these encounters should have in the adventure, which is very helpful. So, thanks again! :)
Dude you had better not read any Greek Myth... Zeus like to shape change into an animal and get funky with the ladies, once as a bull, once as swan... I think a shower of rain as well. Also you had better not watch any Animae as cat girls seem to be all to frequent.
Every culture has animal and plant spirits doing the dirty with humans... Frankly I am surprised you are surprised....
I actualy read a lot of greek myth, ever since having a class on the subject in 1st grade (in a way, greek mythology was the first fantasy story I read. Looking back it might have been quite a lot for a 6 years old to handle). I am indeed awere of Zeus's sexual adventures, and I never thought of them as anything other than bestiality. It was a way to present Zeus as THE alpha male, I think - he is the husband of every mortal female, if he so desires. That sits well with his character as I came to know it.
Still, there are many things in greek mythology that I didn't expect to see in a Baba Yaga AP, so frankly, I don't even see why the presence of bestiality there should have prepared me to encounter it numerous times in Shackled Hut.Indeed. If a girl with a fox tail counts as bestiality even if she's fey, then I guess aasimar born of angels are products of bestiality since angels have bird wings, outsider type be damned! And let's not get started on devils with their hooves and bat wings. Clop clop ;)
I mean this all in playful jest Lord Snow :D
I kind of see your point there, though I hope you'd agree with me that there IS a difference... fae creatures, who originate from pagan folklore, are much more akin to the animals they resemble than angles or demons ever were. Let's examine the "Satyr seduces young woman" storyline - as I mentioned before, I read my greek mythology, and I know that's the origin of this storyline. And as the 8th dwarf mentioned, bestiality was common in greek mythology and Satrys weren't percieved as "ousiders from the First World"... They were goat-men. Thier "goatness" was an important aspect of them, while the bat wings of a devil are just there to make it look more hideous and scary.
let's not dogpile Lord Snow, folks. I was taught about Theseus and the Minotaur in Junior High, yet somehow my teacher managed to skim right past the whole story of Queen Pasiphaë.
Anyway, I feel like its a good discussion and I don't want to punish a poster from bringing up a concern in a polite manner.
No problem, not feeling dogpiled since everyone is bringing up good points in a polite manner. This is a discussion, not an argument.
Cheers all around :)
The Greeks were even a little tame when you compare them with the Norse... read up on the origin of Sleipnir...
I'd chime in that the examples given are a perfect extension of the slavic mythology that serves as inspiratory material to the Irriseni landscape. So kudos to Mr Groves on writing it in.
I don't think it's bestiality in any regard. A dictionary definition states bestiality as sexual relations between a human being and a lower animal - note the connotations of the lower animal. It has an inherent aspect of debasement attached to it.
Neither a huldra nor a satyr nor a nymph nor many other fae creatures could easily be described as a lower animal. They are otherwordly, they are alien, they are different.... but I don't believe they are lower.
Where can I order my Wood-Wife?
Seconding Glutton's order, can we get a reduced price on Earth shipment costs if we order together?
Thanks Jim for including these relationships in the adventure. I have a soft spot for Greta and think Sylgja's depiction was well done. NPC relationships get so little time, and 'monstrous' relationships get even less, thanks for balancing things a bit. Keep it up.
@Lord Snow, we meet again...
Piling on the bandwagon, I don't view it as bestiality. With half-elves, half-orcs, planetouched, and Lamashtu knows what else out there, sex is, perhaps, a little more complicated. My personal view is if you can reproduce with it, or if it is of roughly the same sentience level, then its kosher.
Out of curiosity, why does it make you uncomfortable?
Initial suggestions for replacing/altering these areas, make Sylgja of a different, but PC, race, perhaps snow-caster elf or gnome. This would keep some of the fey aspect, and leave room for the cultural misunderstandings, while diminishing the uncomfortable aspects, maybe.
For the Maret Truskin encounter, I'm not really sure how to change things without loosing the feel. The point is the fey objecting to human/fey relations, so changing moots the whole thing. Perhaps leave this as the only unaffected one? If alteration is required, perhaps the fey element could be replaced by a Jadwiga faction? The Jadwiga might be just as intolerant, especially if Geran shows inclinations towards witchcraft or some form of ice magic.
The encounter with Greta goes as written, until she realizes the PC isn't Winter Wolf! She might be as uncomfortable with the idea as the PC.
This thread is full of win with how absurd it is.
I'm also confused by nobody using the word "furry" here.
|
|
@Lord Snow, we meet again...
have we met before?
Anyway, some of your suggestions were excelent, including the one invloving keeping the Maret Truskin encounter unchanged, Mr. Groves convinced me it was good as it is.
I am uncomfortable with these aspects of Shackled Hut for much the same reason I am uncomfortable with them in the greek mythology (Haven't read the Norse mythology yet) - simply put, it's eeky. I mean, AS I said above, Satyrs and other mythological creatures are, in their origin, not creatures from the first world but demi humans - their animalistic aspect is a very important part of their charicharistics in mythology. They are presented as "goats who wanna rape yer wife", not as "oh look, a fey!". I can't quite shake their origin when I read about them in Pathfinder, and thus when a woman is mentioned having sex with a satyr, it disgusts me, because I remember the rapist goat men from greek mythology.
Actually, when you get down to it, there were no "fey" in Greek mythology because the Greeks didn't know about the mythology of the fey. In short, a satyr could be fey, and the Greeks (who don't deal with sprites and the like) just think "goatman!" and start hoping for amazons to come by and shoot them with their uber bowmanship skills. ;)
Though let's be honest. They were stories. Told around the campfire. As are the fey and all the rest. And Pathfinder (and D&D before it) is about weaving these old campfire stories that grew and took a life of their own and creating a world in which people exist within them.
So if this is anything, it's not bestiality. It's bibliophility.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I don't see any issue with Lord Snow (ironic considering the AP) being 'squicked' by the aspect. I myself posted how the fate of <redacted> in The Snows of Summer got my blood boiling. Heck, I played Ksenia (my own Winter Witch) this weekend, and it appears to have 'tainted' her, as she's become quite the, well, witch. IT's going to be interesting, in the context of PFS, to get her back to chaotic good.
@Lord Snow, we meet again...
have we met before?
You don't remember me? We disagreed... on the internet!
Just posted on some of the same threads here. I can see where you're coming on the uncomfortable issue. Glad the suggestions were helpful.
Just think, 60 years ago sex with black people (unless you were black of course) was thought to be unthinkable...not that it didnt happen, just that people would get all up in arms about mixed race relationships.... now a days it's really only the die hards that have anything to say about it.... maybe sexy chipmunks will have their day some time soon!
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just think, 60 years ago sex with black people (unless you were black of course) was thought to be unthinkable...not that it didnt happen, just that people would get all up in arms about mixed race relationships.... now a days it's really only the die hards that have anything to say about it.... maybe sexy chipmunks will have their day some time soon!
Actualy sex with black people was quite acceptable... as long as you yourself was on of 'em ;)
That awkward moment when your arch-nemisis doesn't remember you. You don't remember me? We disagreed... on the internet!Just posted on some of the same threads here. I can see where you're coming on the uncomfortable issue. Glad the suggestions were helpful.
Ah yes, I went over my posting history a bit, I know who you are now. I don't know, I disagree with a lot of people, and among them you are one of the most intelligent and pleasent, so it was a little hard to remember you as anything negative.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
You don't remember me? We disagreed... on the internet!
For you it was the defining moment of your life. For him... it was Tuesday.
;)
You don't remember me? We disagreed... on the internet!For you it was the defining moment of your life. For him... it was Tuesday.
;)
I almost snorted my drink at this one. Nicely quoted magnuskin.
Considering some of the sentient humanoid species live at most 50 years? I realized that one of my PCs who has an orcish mother (I went the whole "Order of the Stick" routine with a happy marriage between a human and orc for the PC's backstory and she agreed with it) is nearly 20 now. The character's mom, if she had him when she was 10? Is pushing 30... and is an old lady now. A fierce old lady, mind you! =^-^=
No mingling with elves below 100 years!
Here's another thing about Greta to make people uncomfortable: According to the ecology of the winter wolf article in the same book, winter wolves have a lifespan of about fifty years, or two-thirds that of a human.
So consider that Greta looks like a pulchritudinous lady in her mid-twenties; while that's no doubt the degree to which she's mentally and physically developed, she's probably only about sixteen years old in terms of how long she's been alive.
Does Irrisen have age of consent laws?
That's without even getting into how the article states that winter wolf females who become pregnant by humanoids, even while in humanoid form themselves, give birth to winter wolf pups.
One hopes that in such cases that the wife would have told her hubby about her little secret before the kids are born.
And they 'always' are born as winter wolves? What, no normal-seeming humans who turn out to be boreal bloodline sorcerers?
Can you just imagine what a typically day for a mixed-species family like that would be like?
"DAD! Jimmy keeps using his breath weapon on me and it's messing up my fur! Make him stop!"
"It was her fault! She gave me a peanut butter cracker and I was just trying to get it off the roof of my mouth!"
I now so want to see a sitcom/webcomic use this idea.
With that out of the way -- dumb question time, but what about her side of the family? How do winter wolves react to a human shagging one of their womenfolk? Let me guess -- "No! Please! I'm a part of the family!" "No, two-legger, you'll be a 'part of the family' after you pass through our assorted digestive tracts."
And do similar rules apply to other sentient magical beasts? Wait, do I even want to know?
Man I have to get the book that has this article just to find the answers to these questions.
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's not bestiality, it's xenophilia. I'm going to change the thread title and post and EDIT comment in the original post explaining the change.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
While true, I think half the OP's problem is that he can't divorce himself from the idea that it is bestiality in his eyes - he sees the animal-like fey/demihuman species as too much "intelligent animal" and not enough "nonhuman intelligent creature" and that's the core of his problem:
fae creatures, who originate from pagan folklore, are much more akin to the animals they resemble than angles or demons ever were. Let's examine the "Satyr seduces young woman" storyline - as I mentioned before, I read my greek mythology, and I know that's the origin of this storyline. And as the 8th dwarf mentioned, bestiality was common in greek mythology and Satrys weren't percieved as "ousiders from the First World"... They were goat-men. Thier "goatness" was an important aspect of them, while the bat wings of a devil are just there to make it look more hideous and scary.