Agents of Edgewatch Update

While I was excited for a campaign set entirely in Absalom, I knew none of my players would want to be cops, and I didn't really want to GM a group of cops, either. I'm heartened to hear those elements can be easily replaced, and that the option to do so is receiving support through the Player's Guide.

I actually asked my players and they said they were completely and utterly uninterested in the concept. Maybe I can sell them on the "police free" version. We'll see.

I was already planning on buying this AP and running it to my friends - we've already had a few preliminary sessions to refine the PC's and the knit the group together and talk about how law enforcement should be handled given the current situation, and what kind of a campaign we want to run and play, with the knowledge that the players guide and campaign itself may shape the current group and theme when they are published.

My main fear for the AP was that it might get delayed or changed because of the current events, so I was actually waiting to hear from Paizo to see what, if anything, happens.

While I personally don't think Paizo has anything to apologize for as a company, I have great respect for Erik Mona for admitting that he didn't listen to the concerns of other employees as much as he might have.

I had planned on buying this AP as PDF's, but after this blog post, I think I'll go for subscription instead.

The Enneagram 9 in me really, really wants to have something profound and calming to say right now, haha.

All I do have is respect for Paizo, for owning up to their own blind spot and the hurt it could cause. I'm very glad, selfishly, that this AP is not being pulled (both because I want to run it and because I don't want to see Paizo suffering financially). Plus I think the colors of these books will be a really pleasant addition to my Pathfinder shelf, but that's really not the point.

And while I respect Paizo a hell of a lot, I respect you all as well, too. Everyone I've run into here is sharp, clever, and seriously invested in this hobby. For all the warts and hangups and long-simmering feuds, this is a terrific community. I appreciate everyone here, and that includes the people I find myself dramatically disagreeing with, in this thread or about other important things like when players can shield block or that druid dedication doesn't preclude wearing metal armor.

Anyways. Few forums exist anymore, and most of the ones I took part in fifteen or twenty years ago were much bigger messes than this one. So thank you all. :)

Where exactly is the censorship? The AP is still being released, unchanged. The Player's Guide will simply include guidance on how to remove the cop elements for groups who don't want to use them. They're literally leaving the choice to the individuals running and playing the game. Paizo wasn't forced to make an apology or donate to charities, they chose to do so. They could have just as easily said nothing and allowed people to "vote with their wallets" and skip it entirely, but instead they chose to address it and add options to make the AP more appealing to their customers.

Paizo also has the "freedom of expression" to publicly support whatever charities, causes and movements they so choose. Per the blog, inclusivity and racial justice are ideals Paizo has committed to. If they feel their actions around this AP don't reflect those ideals, then they'd naturally either need to make amends or else face whatever backlash may come. Given their track record (especially as of late) this blog seemed inevitable.

(Also, what exactly is publicly declaring your intent to "vote with your dollar" if not pressuring the company? That's literally the point. I'm not saying that it's a bad thing - I was planning on skipping this AP due to the subject matter, so it would be rather hypocritical of me to suggest other people were bad for doing the same thing for different reasons. It's just that it seems odd to me to decry pressuring the company while also declaring intent to do so.)

I appreciate the statement on the blog, but honestly, I was never particularly worried. Did anyone really think Paizo would be putting out a cop-themed AP that didn't at least try to be sensitive? I'd have thought their track record bought them at least some benefit of the doubt there.

I had been thinking of canceling my AP sub, mainly because PF2 isn't really grabbing me like PF1 did and was really grappling with losing my charter subscriber status. But Paizo's statement has convinced me to stay the course, at least for a while. I don't want them thinking I'm dropping because of extremely unfortunate and unpredictable timing that interfaces with their subject matter that they have no control over. The contribution to the NAACP defense fund is unnecessary further inducement as far as I'm concerned, but serves as a nice bit of icing on the cake.

The content could be all 100% cool, it's the fact of releasing a "cop buddy story meets victorian detectives where law enforcement is cool" in a reality where people in the primary Paizo market country shift their perception of cops from "good bois that protect us" to "potential danger that needs to be filmed" is like walking into a room full of Soviet Gulag survivors to talk about the heroism of Red Army.

I appreciate the statement on the blog, but honestly, I was never particularly worried. Did anyone really think Paizo would be putting out a cop-themed AP that didn't at least try to be sensitive? I'd have thought their track record bought them at least some benefit of the doubt there.

I know, right?

If the circus AP can criticize circuses for animal cruelty and unsafe working conditions, then there's little reason to expect Agents of Edgewatch will be copaganda.

I'd have thought their track record bought them at least some benefit of the doubt there.

Unfortunately, it doesn’t. Outrage has no long term memory. It’s all about now and the assumption of guilt before innocence or even in spite of it.

These adventures are frames for us to tell whatever sub-stories and explore whatever angles we choose. Out actions steer all progress and the narratives we as players provide color the moral evaluations of the actions in it, as is natural with all ttrpg adventures.

The nature of a criticized media piece, what it is and how its audiences interacts with it, must be taken into account in any criticisms towards it.

This discussion has done nothing but reaffirm the need for Paizo to make the statement that they did.

I applaud the statement and am glad Paizo made it.

I'm also glad that there's re-thinking at the level of design to stop penalizing players who want to use subdued damage. When I voiced my desire to have this promoted in Extinction Curse, I got laughed at for forgetting that players incur a -2 penalty on to-hit rolls and how this factors into TPK risk etc. This certainly seems a good moment to reflect how game mechanics incentivize player behavior and how the game can be improved.

On the other hand, I must confess that the story-specific asides in Erik Mona's announcement left me confused. A poster on Enworld put the matter quite aptly...

I guess that the problem with police forces is that they are deemed [inherently] violent... and that Paizo failed its intended goal (we conceived of the adventures as a pseudo-Victorian crime drama in which a party of Sherlock Holmeses would bring a cult of sinister murderers to justice). I am in no way a Sherlock Holmes expert, but I don't think they involved killing culprits.

If they feel they made a good adventure for LEO, there should be very few fight to the death, and the crux of the conflict would be to arrest and subdue violent criminals to allow the judicial process to run its course, with NO harm to innocent (not minimal collateral damage... it's the fun of urban adventure fight, where you have to neutralize the bad guy trying to create an undead tyrannosaurus without harming the group of schoolchildren visiting the museum).
The preemptive apology makes me think that the violent option was either the intended path or at least a path they think the player will take often enough for this to be a problem.

I too am confused by the notion that Sherlock Holmes would be an inspiration for this AP. Neither Holmes nor Watson ever bore badges, as far as I recall. Both abhor physical violence and exercise considerable self-restraint towards killing others (way too crude for Holmes). More critically, their exploits are happening against the backdrop of hapless detectives who DO wear badges, sc. LeStrad and company. If the point was to model Edgewatch on Holmes, I fail to see where the badges came in in the first place.

Thread locked while in review. A break from this topic might be beneficial.

Removed posts and their replies. Reopening thread.

The removed content was done so either because it created a hostile tone within the discussion or otherwise violated forum guidelines. Personal attacks, baiting, and other forms of harassment and malicious speech are unacceptable. I hope that the time away from this discussion will help us restore a measured tone of respect, understanding, and patience.

I applaud the statement and am glad Paizo made it.

I'm also glad that there's re-thinking at the level of design to stop penalizing players who want to use subdued damage. When I voiced my desire to have this promoted in Extinction Curse, I got laughed at for forgetting that players incur a -2 penalty on to-hit rolls and how this factors into TPK risk etc. This certainly seems a good moment to reflect how game mechanics incentivize player behavior and how the game can be improved.

On the other hand, I must confess that the story-specific asides in Erik Mona's announcement left me confused. A poster on Enworld put the matter quite aptly...

Quote:

I guess that the problem with police forces is that they are deemed [inherently] violent... and that Paizo failed its intended goal (we conceived of the adventures as a pseudo-Victorian crime drama in which a party of Sherlock Holmeses would bring a cult of sinister murderers to justice). I am in no way a Sherlock Holmes expert, but I don't think they involved killing culprits.

If they feel they made a good adventure for LEO, there should be very few fight to the death, and the crux of the conflict would be to arrest and subdue violent criminals to allow the judicial process to run its course, with NO harm to innocent (not minimal collateral damage... it's the fun of urban adventure fight, where you have to neutralize the bad guy trying to create an undead tyrannosaurus without harming the group of schoolchildren visiting the museum).
The preemptive apology makes me think that the violent option was either the intended path or at least a path they think the player will take often enough for this to be a problem.

I too am confused by the notion that Sherlock Holmes would be an inspiration for this AP. Neither Holmes nor Watson ever bore badges, as far as I recall. Both abhor physical violence and exercise considerable self-restraint towards killing others (way too crude for Holmes). More critically, their exploits are happening against...

Nobody laughed at you in the Extinction Curse thread in general and not especially for non lethal damage penalty, (maybe I'm biased since I did agree that non lethal damage should be encouraged way more than it is in scene you were talking of) I think at time we were missing the point of your criticism at sheriff shrugging off police brutality(well "civilians deputized to do civilian arrest but okay to kill in self defense when target resists violently brutality") since you compared it to violence aimed at minorities which wasn't what was happening in EC and we focused too much on "Hey, those two things aren't comparable".

Definitely agreeing that Sherlock Holmes story where Sherlock personally fights off culprits in deadly combat whenever they are discovered really doesn't feel like a detective story of same genre.

I get feeling that idea started as investigator/Sherlock Holmes idea, turned into "Hey what if pcs are city guard?" and then evolved into police procedural ap

So... the plsyer’s guide will allow you to remove the “watch” element and instead allow the players to be violent lawless vigilantes with no oversight or rules... and that’s better?

I appreciate the problematic issue of police brutality, excessive force, systematic racism, and militarization. The problems with a lack of accountability. And applaud Paizo for employing a sensitivity reader to make sure none of that is portrayed in their product.

That said... it’s odd that in the past the game has allowed to be a colonizing foreign conquered (Kingmaker), White saviour (Jade Regent), grave robber and cultural looter (most APs but especially Mummy’s Mask), literal pirate (Skull & Shackles), and even violent enforcers for a fascist state (Hell’s Vengeance). And the line is “cop”. That requires an apology and second guessing publication.

The game can do anything... except apparently imagine a world where police aren’t the bad guys.

So... the plsyer’s guide will allow you to remove the “watch” element and instead allow the players to be violent lawless vigilantes with no oversight or rules... and that’s better?

I appreciate the problematic issue of police brutality, excessive force, systematic racism, and militarization. The problems with a lack of accountability. And applaud Paizo for employing a sensitivity reader to make sure none of that is portrayed in their product.

That said... it’s odd that in the past the game has allowed to be a colonizing foreign conquered (Kingmaker), White saviour (Jade Regent), grave robber and cultural looter (most APs but especially Mummy’s Mask), literal pirate (Skull & Shackles), and even violent enforcers for a fascist state (Hell’s Vengeance). And the line is “cop”. That requires an apology and second guessing publication.

The game can do anything... except apparently imagine a world where police aren’t the bad guys.

I'm one of the louder voices for accountability here, but even I will say that there's been a distinct shift away from Pathfinder's earlier comfort with gross colonial stuff, given the significant changes in how the Mwangi Expanse has been handled in 2e. And Hell's Vengeance is a moot point here; it never said those people weren't Evil, whereas the whole snarl is Good-aligned police brutality.

I would hope Jade Regent wouldn't happen with modern Paizo.

I would list more of Serpent's Skulls as colonial ap since one of factions you can ally with optionally ARE the colonialists.

Like with Kingmaker its building towns in wilderness frontier, but there aren't really lot of locals(besides bandits) inhabiting area already, just lot of ruins of previous attempts.(and what locals are there aren't hard to ally with)

Wouldn't call Jade Regent white saviour ap either since its more of "PCs are supporting characters in 'return to your family's homeland' story arc" where Ameiko is main character out of the spot light, however early PFS Mwangi Expanse scenarios definitely are white savious trope examples... (not to mention they tend to use words like primitive or savage when referring to tribes :P )

(though I can see how Jade Regent can be seen as white saviour narrative easily)

Ire of the Storm is weird kind of colonial story, most of the colonists seems to be from native people from Sargava, but its still colonists vs locals story and it definitely has lot of colonial tropes.

Companies, like people, change. 2020 Paizo is very different from 2015 Paizo.

With the unlock on commenting here again, I do want to reiterate the desire me and others have to hear how Paizo hopes to avoid dismissing the concerns (especially of marginalized staff) in the future?

With the unlock on commenting here again, I do want to reiterate the desire me and others have to hear how Paizo hopes to avoid dismissing the concerns (especially of marginalized staff) in the future?

I'd only take a moment to warn you that crusades inevitably consume the crusaders.

I see the "white" savior point as a moot point of complaint since PCs can be any race or ethnicity.
If what disturbs you is PCs help the locals that is a narrative necessity for the wandering adventurer to occur in other ways than dungeon crawler.

Humbly,
Yawar

keftiu wrote:

With the unlock on commenting here again, I do want to reiterate the desire me and others have to hear how Paizo hopes to avoid dismissing the concerns (especially of marginalized staff) in the future?

I'd only take a moment to warn you that crusades inevitably consume the crusaders.

"You've admitted some voices were not heard and I'd like to hear how that won't happen again" is hardly a crusade you need to act as a moral guardian against.

I see the "white" savior point as a moot point of complaint since PCs can be any race or ethnicity.

If what disturbs you is PCs help the locals that is a narrative necessity for the wandering adventurer to occur in other ways than dungeon crawler.

Humbly,
Yawar

The Jade Regent Player's Guide assumes all of the PCs are living in Varisia, a nation in Avistan, which is Golarion's Europe-equivalent. Can you absolutely play it with an Ekujae elf, Vudran ascetic, Razatlani jaguar-priestess, and a Tian-Sing pirate? Of course, but it's firmly assuming the players are from a place meant to be familiar to a Western reader and journeying to the exotic East.

I see the "white" savior point as a moot point of complaint since PCs can be any race or ethnicity.

If what disturbs you is PCs help the locals that is a narrative necessity for the wandering adventurer to occur in other ways than dungeon crawler.

"Wandering adventurer" is not a necessity, especially at starting levels. In most APs, at least some characters could be locals.

I for one, would unironically love a Disney Princess kind of AP.

I would pounce* like a snow leopard upon this thing. Triply so if I had the opportunity to contribute to it. ^_^

*Daintily, of course.

The Jade Regent Player's Guide assumes all of the PCs are living in Varisia, a nation in Avistan, which is Golarion's Europe-equivalent. Can you absolutely play it with an Ekujae elf, Vudran ascetic, Razatlani jaguar-priestess, and a Tian-Sing pirate? Of course, but it's firmly assuming the players are from a place meant to be familiar to a Western reader and journeying to the exotic East.

Sorry, but is the AP assuming that or are you making the assumptions yourself? I just gave a brief reading of the Jade Regent Player's Guide and it doesn't asume anything about the PCs place of origin other than being established in the case of most campaign traits. The guide even gives suggestions for playing first generation immigrants from Tian-Xian in the case of players wanting to play a Samurai or Ninja. I would even go so far to asume that Sandpoint was design as port town to facilite a diversity of backgrounds for PCs.

Now in regards with the setting, Varisia, being European-lite, what wrong with that? There are other APs in another settings. Cultural osmosis is a thing and having to read to much extra material to understand the setting can be a blessing as a player (not all my plyers speaks English so I have to translate the material for them) and as GM.

Humbly,
Yawar

"Wandering adventurer" is not a necessity, especially at starting levels. In most APs, at least some characters could be locals.

Being a local and having roots doesn't mean that you can trace all your ancestors back to the original to the colonizers of the land. As a Peruvian this argument seems looks utterly bizarre.

Humbly,
Yawar