thejeff wrote:
Because as we all know, relationships, romance and even message have nothing to do with story. Are in fact all best avoided if you want good stories.
Not if they are a distraction. Who the hell cares about these NPCs and why do these Mary Sue’s need to be front and center in every AP holding the players hands?
And also - the players should be setting the message or the message (if the module infers one) should be somewhat interpreted by all associated vs. spoon fed to the players and DM. You know, much like what occurs in a memorable movie or book?
thejeff wrote:
I appreciate that you want less focus on controversial issues (Not that LGBTQ issues should be controversial, but it's true that in reality they are), but the idea that you could avoid any kind of controversy is ridiculous. No matter what they do and how hard they tried to stay with safe non-controversial topics, someone would carp. This is the Internet after all. Take the controversial BGLTQ characters out and there will be complaints about that. Put them in and there are obviously complaints about that. Cheesecake on the covers - Complaints. No cheesecake - complaints. Etc. Romance options - complaints. No romance options - complaints.
And considering that judging by some of the posts in the other thread romance options include pretty much every friendly non-paired off NPC (and those aren't strict limits), I'm not sure how you'd keep them out.
I don't care about controversial issues - your lefto-radar must have misdirected you thejeff. I don't want the focus of modern sensibilities to be the distraction: the gender role crusade and diverse representation is a current social issue in Western Society - yet the APs gloss over things like institutional racism, slavery and genocide since those are less prevalent in western society yet they are ugly things that would exist in a world where might makes right. The ugly things that make conflict which in turn sends out the call for Heroes.
So it isn't controversy that's an issue - bring on the Child Brides (LOL, they won't touch that with a 10 foot pole)! Their focus is very Pacific Northwest progressive - the fact that they telegraph that in their fantasy content is a little sad and limiting actually.
thejeff wrote:
More importantly, if you don't find the adventures challenging, unique and memorable, isn't that the problem? Not the presence of controversial issues or interesting NPCs. Making them harder, which you seem to want, isn't for everyone. Some find them challenging enough already.
I believe (and I am apparently wrong on this subject) that the meta aspects (harder/easier) should trump concerns about making sure that there are suitable relationship NPC content in each module. Considering that this game has a very heavy mechanical bent and focus on beating most threats via violent combat I think most people buying this content are expecting the mechanical aspect to be criteria No#1.
thejeff wrote:
Do you think they've gotten worse? In terms of challenge or uniqueness?
I'd say that RoW and Iron Gods at least had uniqueness, though it may not be the kind of uniqueness you're looking for.
RoW was bland - sans Rasputin and that just felt gimmicky, better than last several APs. I was (and still am) looking forward to see how they play Iron Gods - 5 bucks says there will be an Android love interest or some other claptrap filler - but who knows?
Challenge wise, I find that most if not all the encounters are a bit of a cake-walk or are poorly designed from a challenge perspective.