CPEvilref's page

167 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.



1 person marked this as a favorite.
knightnday wrote:

I've seen a large number of the posts, CPEvilref. A good many seem to be the same people in a large number of places saying the same thing, which doesn't exactly convince me that it is as wide spread a problem as it is being made out to be.

If you don't think Paizo publishing mechanical benefits for child abuse is a problem, then I really don't know what to say.

As you say, hopefully this will see a turning point for paizo on this and other issues, as indicated by Mr Mona's posts.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
knightnday wrote:


I'd like to say that disagreeing about if something is a problem is not "noise" and that those people -- hey, I am one! -- should also be allowed a say rather than sitting quietly.

The 'noise' as you seem to have missed the point, was many people, both here and elsewhere, calling Paizo to account on publishing 'child abuse gives you magic powers' rules and the whole expansion of Folca. Which, thankfully, they've admitted was a mistake and commited to never doing again.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thank you for that response, and especially for the reasoning given. Genuinely appreciate it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Shaudius wrote:


The one specifically about this on rpg.net went on for a few pages and then quietly died and people seemed generally satisfied that James Jacobs and Erik Mona had apologized

The specific thread on the issue didn't touch on the personal apoligies, as it happened weeks before they made them...

And, as said, it had extensive discussion on rpg.net, enworld, reddit, twitter, facebook. You might want to dismiss that, you might want to dismiss all the people who have expressed their concerns with paizo, but broadly speaking, the original post wasn't aimed at you, it was aimed at Paizo, as a company, calling them to account. And sure they can look at all the people who just don't care, but they get the consequences of that.

Shaudius wrote:


I'm actually generally surprised its being brought up now as it seemed like the general community had moved on to much bigger general issues with harassment in gaming generally.

If you'd read the links in the OP, you'd have seen that Robert Brookes did a long thread on twitter about the problems with Folca yesterday. I saw it today and it reminded me that it's been 7 weeks since these were called out to Paizo, with no response, and then 3 weeks since this went viral, with Erik Mona and james Jacobs personally admitting the mistake, but without any official comment.

Here's Robert's thread again in case you missed it:

https://twitter.com/Sphynxian/status/930465923588386816

I was reminded, on reading his posts, how long it's been since Paizo were called out on this, how long it's been since they ignored emails and posts about this and how long it's been since individuals in the company admittred the mistake, but without an official comment on it.

So, that's why it's being brought up now.

Also, to be frank, there is no timetable on wrongdoing, it's the same thing that gets said to victims of abuse 'why did you wait to bring it up'. As the OP, I decided to reiterate it now, today (well, yesterday for me), It's not gone away, it's still there, and Paizo, as a company, have still not addressed it. Whatever individuals at the company have said in private has no bearing on what they, as a company, say and express as to their corporate values and beliefs.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Malefactor wrote:


So? This is for EVIL people, who do EVIL things. I mean, yeah someone is going to go "well, you can be a neutral worshipper of Folca" and yeah, RAW says you can, but that runs into the same problems as being a Chaotic Neutral worshipper of Socothbenoth, who's pretty much demon lord of rape, which is RAW says you can, but basic human decency says you can't. I mean, I would understand this uproar if this obedience was for a good or even neutral deity, but not only is Folca a neutral evil deity, but he is a Daemon, a fiend so evil that devils and demons team up with celestials to combat. No reasonable person is going to look at Folca and come to the conclusion that Paizo supports child abuse. And as for unreasonable people, do you really think someone who is legitimately okay with pedophilia is going to go "Gee wiz, I wish their was a mechanical benefit for abusing kids, because otherwise, I just won't bother." I still have not heard a compelling reason why we must remove all mentions of Folca, even though using the same logic we shouldn't let any villains kill people because someone who is okay with murder might think that the game encourages killing random innocents. Bad guys are supposed to BAD things so that the players realize they are BAD...

Would you be rolling the saving throw for the 8 year old child that the abuser has cast unnatural lust on?

Will your players be rolling a saving throw for the unnatural lust cast on them?

Will you be detailing the magic aura for the modify memory cast on an abuse victim after one of your players casts detect magic when they arrive at the aftermath just too late to catch the abuser but see the abused child there?

Will you be describing how the child has been turned into a perfect representation of the abusers ideal victim, so they can follow those down and hope to track down that abuser?

Will you be stopping with your slippery slope arguments and straw man fallacies anytime soon?

Please show me where I have said that any mention of folca should be removed.

The issue is how, not what, it's the deliberately chosen mechanical incentives for child abuse, and the benefits that directly replicate real world abuse.

I said it in the OP, I've said it repeatedly. Paizo has published mechanically incentivised child abuse. Not the 'hint but don't reveal' which horror works best at, but outright 'here are your benefits for being an abuser'...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Malefactor wrote:
Really you're getting awfully offended over something that isn't even the worst thing Paizo has "encouraged" people to do by mechanical benefits being able to be drawn from it. Do you think Paizo promotes cannibalism because of the Cook People hex? That they encourage drug use because of the Psychedelic Psychic Discipline? That they promote self harm because of Abraxus's Obedience? That they support skinning humans to use their skin for drums like for Angazhan? That they support torture because Andirifkhu requires you to torture something smaller than you to death? Of using a child's bones to carve incantation's to your flesh? Burning things alive for Flauros? Drowning someone in swamp water and impaling it's corpse for Gogunta? Gyronna's is just making ANYONE's life worse, no age required? Do you really think Paizo wants you to do these things? If not, why do you think that Paizo specifically wants you to torment children?

Yes, I am awfully offended by mechanically.incentivised.child abuse. You're right.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
TOZ wrote:
What would you have them do?

Officially take ownership of the mistake in what was published, with a company statement about it, and why it was wrong. Explaining the decisions behind it and how they came about, not least because there's a definite difference between the material submitted by the freelancer who worked on it and what was finally published. Why did that happen, how did it happen?

Remove the material from the PDF (this is not a big job).

Make a public statement about their standards with regard to child abuse and child endangement, making clear the company's standpoint and attitude to this.

And never publish anything anything like it again.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

What's going on Paizo?

You published mechanically incentivised rules for child abuse.

You have spells which specifically replicate real world methods of child abuse, and give them to followers of the daemon/deity Folca.

You were called out for this at the time of release, you were called out for this in a previous thread. Two senior members of staff have admitted, elsewhere, that this was a mistake (Erik Mona and James Jacobs) but there's no official statement on it.

You've had several weeks to craft something, several weeks to make something public.

If, as said, you intended to remove that text, it would have taken me a day to rework that page of the indesign document, splash in some filler text and recreate it. If needed i'll do it for you.

For those just joining the party, here are some links that you might want to review:

https://twitter.com/Sphynxian/status/930465923588386816

Here's the description of Folca in the Book of the Damned:

https://i.imgur.com/HdpCNLU.png

Here's Erik Mona saying it was a mistake:

https://twitter.com/erikmona/status/923645136579452928

And here's James Jacobs saying the same:

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?594081-Harassment-At-PaizoCon-2 017/page11&p=7261191&viewfull=1#post7261191

It's 3 weeks since those statements on twitter and enworld. It's nearly 2 months since the book was released and the first questions of what the hell are you doing were being asked.

To make clear, again, the book includes mechanically incentivised child abuse.

+2 charisma bonus for abusing a child
Other benefits:

Unnatural lust
Your target is filled with lust and desire for a single creature or object as designated by you at the time of casting. That creature or object must be within the spell’s range and perceivable by the target of the spell. The target is filled with the compulsion to rush to the subject of its lust and passionately kiss or caress that subject on its next turn, taking no other actions. If the target would not normally have lustful feelings toward the designated creature or object, it receives a +4 bonus on its saving throw.

Modify Memory
You reach into the subject's mind and modify as many as 5 minutes of its memories in one of the following ways.

*Eliminate all memory of an event the subject actually experienced. This spell cannot negate charm, geas/quest, suggestion, or similar spells.
*Allow the subject to recall with perfect clarity an event it actually experienced.
*Change the details of an event the subject actually experienced.
*Implant a memory of an event the subject never experienced.

Veil
You instantly change the appearance of the subjects and then maintain that appearance for the spell's duration. You can make the subjects appear to be anything you wish. The subjects look, feel, and smell just like the creatures the spell makes them resemble. Affected creatures resume their normal appearances if slain. You must succeed on a Disguise check to duplicate the appearance of a specific individual. This spell gives you a +10 bonus on the check.

These spells specifically, exactly, replicate real world, actual abuse. They make the victim 'want it', they make the victim forget it, and they make the victim perfect for them. As I said previously, in email and posts, as the victim of abuse who suffered the above 'spells' in real life, I find their inclusion disgusting and disgraceful.

Why was this published?
Who made the decisions to include this material?
What are you specifically going to do about this?
How can anyone trust that you won't continue to promote this again?

You've had 7 weeks to address this, and there is no public, official statement on it. Yes, two members of staff have said it was a mistake, but neither were speaking on behalf of the company, and you shut down the forum thread here, on your forums, where you could have spoken about it, and the related public statement didn't touch on this at all.

You ignored emails about it, you ignored threads about it, only when it went viral across the net, in connection to a number of other issues, was anything said, and yet there's still no official public statement from you.

Does Paizo want to be the child abuse company, or not?


5 people marked this as a favorite.
taks wrote:
I'm curious how this Frank Mentzer thing is applicable to Paizo. He's not an employee, is he? He held no power over Jessica Price, as far as I can tell. Regardless of what he did, I'm not seeing the relevance.

He was a guest at Paizocon, during which he attended an industry dinner with Jessica Price. After the con he sent her a creepy, harassing PM.

She has said she was pressured not to make this public, and at that time it wasn't a hill she wanted to die on. She's now in a different industry and has made it public.

The specific quotes that make it relevant to Paizo are:

Quote:


And I don't work for Paizo anymore. I was warned, when I did, that there were limits to how much of this sort of thing they'd tolerate.
So when I told them what had happened, in this particular instance, while I was still deciding whether to talk publicly...
...they "thanked" me for not going public with it. I decided this wasn't the particular hill I was willing to die on.
...there are a lot of those hills.
But that was then, and this is now.

https://twitter.com/Delafina777/status/920879215301476352


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wrath wrote:

That's a very important clarification, and speaks to their decision.

If charges weren't laid, the company would need to be careful in how they handled further interactions for legal reasons.

Imagine the repercussions if a major publishing company blacklisted someone who's business relies on the same community circles. Especially if no reported offence had occurred.

The person not reporting this may well have tied the hands of Paizo as a company.

The offences (plural) were witnessed. Whether criminal charges are pressed or not, in no way prevents Paizo from banning the attacker.

Here's Gen Con's policy
http://www.gencon.com/attend/policies

Here's the Pax (West policy
http://west.paxsite.com/safety-accessibility

Neither require that charges be brought in order to ban the harasser.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Andy Brown wrote:
CPEvilref wrote:

https://twitter.com/Sphynxian/status/918577166190895106

Quote:
The victim was politely informed that all of their interactions should be considered under the volunteer NDA and that they are not permitted to discuss the abuse.
If this is true, and is company policy rather than somebody misinterpreting what the NDA should cover, I'll be seriously rethinking my involvement with organised play specifically, and Paizo in general.

I'd like to think it's that, but given the other actions in the complaint, I have no hope of it.

It's undoubtledly been incredibly badly handled. Just as it was with Jessica Price, just as it was with the convention harassment and assault. Add in other not great things, and to my perception Paizo's been getting worse, not better at being on the right side.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:


I claim no expertise on the local 'trees' in this matter - however, as a student of history and psychology, and as a lifelong observer of Humanity from the perspective of an outsider, I do have enough familiarity with the 'forest' to be concerned by this very sudden flip from something that's somehow gone from an issue nobody particularly worries about to an issue that's outright monopolizing public discourse.

You're genuinely saying that sexual harassment, abuse and assault was something 'nobody particularly worries about' and you're concerned that people are now worried about it?

Err...what?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Wrath wrote:

So far I'm seeing only two incidents. Lots of talk about just two.

https://twitter.com/Sphynxian/status/918577166190895106

Quote:


So someone came forward to me today about something I really can't even begin to fathom. Yes, it's about Paizo again, and it's about abuse.

A volunteer organizer for Pathfinder Societt, under a volunteer NDA, co fidentially disclosed to me that they submitted a well-documented case of abuse from another PFS volunteer. The result of that filing was allowing the abuser to remain working, but also promoting the victim which in turn forced them to WORK WITH THEIR ABUSER. If that doesn't set your hair on fire, I'm sort of only just getting started.

So this UNPAID VOLUNTEER continued to be abused by the same person. Reports to PFS Organized Play Coordination went nowhere and then...

The victim was politely informed that all of their interactions should be considered under the volunteer NDA and that they are not permitted to discuss the abuse. So not only is the abuse an unresolved issue, the abuser remained unpunished and the victim silenced.

<snipped swearing comment>

Worse is that this (obviously) isn't an isolated issue. I've heard reports of similar situations from players and volunteers in the past.

But no one is willing to discuss the problem or properly address it.

And just by bringing this up and showing my disappointment in the organizational shortcomings, I risk my own career by "rocking th boat."

Before anyone asks, I will not identify the parties involved because I am concerned for the victim's identity and safety and any backlash.


8 people marked this as a favorite.
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:

So no, this isn't a "witchhunt" or a "moral panic" or a new "McCathyism."

The lone incident? No, doesn't seem like it - but it's very unfortunately-timed, as it is appearing against the backdrop of a vastly larger hivemind manifestation that appears to be just that.

Are you seriously suggesting that men and women coming forwards to report assault, harassment and abuse in varied industries is a 'hivemind manifestation' And that it's somehow unfortunately-timed with regard to RPGs and Paizo?

I mean, Robert reported the harassment and assault incident back in July.

He reported the harassment in the Pathfinder Society on the 12th of October.

It's only now, when added to Jessica Price's revelation, that this is getting traction.

Almost as if these things happen all the time, but it takes some light being shone to make people take notice of them.