_metz_'s page

This brings me back to some interesting observations on caricatures in real life.

I can do a range of accents: English , Scottish , Russian, Hong Kong, Japanese, Arabic, and these are all received really well. - But the moment I do an Indian or African accent people sometimes flip out - even if they are really accurate and based on actual first hand knowledge of the culture. It's bizarre. I enjoyed royally dressing down one uppity white player who told me off re: the Indian thing, not realizing I *am* Indian... (I am only half, so ambiguously brown is a more accurate description)

Sometimes I think people should take a step back and think of whether something is upsetting because it breaks Politically Correct normative assumptions, or because it is a contentious issue - and whether it truly is upsetting.

Some of the most racist responses I have seen when taking < Asian ethnicity> clients to a <different Asian ethnicity> restaurant.

It was clear to me initially that Miss Feathers was a Drag Queen. Now that has changed because it could be perceived as insulting the Transgendered community. I get where M&M are coming from. Having said that most of our local community remembers her as she was.

The fantasy world isn't more accepting than the modern world, Paizo is just more accepting in its publication - which is awesome.

I think people should just accept Paizo have chosen to portray Miss Feather's differently now, and roll with it.

Different people are offended by different things. I know at least one gay friend who would have been offended that Miss Feathers was now a 'woman' and another (straight) who would have been offended if she would have stayed 'male' as a Drag Queen. I don't know any Transgendered people, but I am sure their opinions would differ based on whether they saw Miss Feathers as a Drag Queen or Transgendered.

The best solution here is to stop over-thinking it, understand why Paizo changed the characterization, and tailor Miss Feathers to the proclivities of your party. If you try to please everyone all of the time, you will never succeed.

I found it really odd how some people view some stereotypes as Racist and others as not.

I once did a Vudrani accent, (right after great feedback for English, Scottish, Russian, Italian accents to represent local farmers, dwarves, Cheliaxians, and Taldans respectively), and the all the white people at my table took offence to it sounding 'Indian'.

- I am Indian by the way -

Weirdest thing ever... I mean if Jalmeray isn't analogous to Sri Lanka then Zarta Dralneen is a virgin.

Back on topic: Travelling helps (I do a dangerously accurate Hong Kong accent apparently), but assuming you can't do that - watch some international media.

Seriously, view some BBC programs, or watch some British or European films. You'd be surprised how international media sometimes actually cast the relevant ethnicity and accent into the roles...

Sometimes it just helps to set the mood. Talk like an NPC would talk, react to in-game things, and resist having them use modern colloquialisms.

I also try to mix things up. My Dwarf sounds Ukrainian.

I'm calling that an official Message-board clarification.

I can now say don't be a jerk is binding PFS rule :P Printing this...

I can find any monster interesting if it makes sense for why it is there. Essentially I have an issue with Gotcha Monsters. I define a Gotcha Monster as one chosen for an ability to hamper or take out the party, not because it is flavorful or a particularly interesting threat.

Here are things I think are overused:

1. Darkness at low levels as a cheap Greater Invis (Dark Stalkers, Derro, etc)
2. Black Tentacles. This has been in most of the latest scenarios. We get it. Stop that. Be creative people. Boneshatter waves of Fatigue me or some other good combo.
3. Harpies. These annoy me, I think the Captivating Lure is massively overused, and Most Harpies 'happen to be in location X' without any real justification. They are mainly used as tough or dangerous opponents not because they *should* be there.
4. Wait for the rise of the Catoblepas. This Monster is going to pop up!

I am also sick of the Aspis Consortium. They are essentially like a rubbish 'Spectre' from James Bond - always around somehow, but for some reason aren't actually competent. At least Spectre got the job done sometimes! The Aspis Consortium/Human organisations have a lot of potential, but their in-game abilities and competence are often not matching their out of game ability to seemingly rock up everywhere the Pathfinders happen to be.

The Aspis Consortium needs an 'Empire Strikes Back' module for me to take them seriously again.

I am not sick of Haunts when used correctly. Haunting of Hinojai - these were awesome! But in some Mods they are clearly just traps that are designed to be difficult to notice. When the Haunt is part of the story or plot exposition, it is cool. I am not in the Haunts are bad camp, I am in the Haunts aren't being used properly camp.

Monsters I really like/would like to see more of:

1. Lissala Cult has a LOT of opportunities. As long as they aren't overusing Black Tentacles, they could be really cool.
2. Giants. We are in Varisia, organised impressive Giants are cool, iconic, and if built right deadly for normal reasons.
3. Organised Devils. Devils are thinkers and Strategists. These guys could be part of more plots.

I really like an organised and consistent Baddy. For example, a Mod in Orc lands where every monster is an ORc or Orc realted beast? AWESOME.

I really appreciate the Lissala angle Mike et Al are taking.. I think if executed nicely, and as long as Lissala doesn't jsut use gotcha monsters, but thematic stuff for the Cult, it could work really well.

My favorite monsters:

1. Human Organisations whose competence match their flavour as being deadly: For Example, Skinsaw Cultists are cool. Statswise in mods they almost always suck. (The Cult of the Ebon Destroyers is a great example of this, a death cult that can actually kill people, refreshing)

2. Giants. Rise of the Runelords sold me on this. They are always fun.

3. Undead as LONG as they are there as part of the flavour of the mod. (Everyone remember a certain Opera House? or the Haunting of Hinjai? both were excellent examples)

4. Wacky Stuff when Wacky stuff is called for. E.g: King Xeros

5. REGIONALLY APPROPRIATE STUFF. Midnight Mirror anyone? Cult of the Ebon Destroyers anyone? Having Monsters that match the region is awesome.

5. Fey that have the real oldschool dark scary Fey flavour. Faire Dragons and Pixies etc annoy me. I want more Skinstealers and Redcaps and real old fashioned Brothers Grimm Fey. (Or even just the Grimm TV series lol)

6. Orcs and Hobgoblins can be awesome. I loved the Red Hand of Doom. But they need to be more than just a bit player and actually ahve the WHOLE mod about them, not just be there for funsies.

I should have posted this here:

Hi all,

We just came back out of the biggest Con/Pathfinder event run in Australia (Ruby Phoenix) - Which was a great success (more stats to follow), and whilst Pathfinder Society is increasingly growing here there is also an increasing disenfranchisement with Faction missions - specifically how they are written and what has happened to them – I normally don’t weigh in too much with this stuff, but I had enough comments/complaints that I felt that I needed to bring some attention to it.

1.The first issue is that of the innate nature of Faction missions as a flavorful plot hook.
In Season 0, these seemed to be geopolitical. Players enjoyed their singular Faction mission as a ‘hook’ into the world of Golarion, with ties to nations, political issues and what was going on. One of the Key benefits is that missions had clear goals and reasons as to why you were doing your mission. The ‘macguffin’ mission wasn’t that common (unless you were Osiriani, in which case that is all you did). A great example of this is the Cheliaxian Faction mission in Slave Pits of Absalom.

This seems to have changed. Faction heads now seem to send people on arbitrary missions for personal or random reasons. Stereotypes have developed. It has literally got to the point where one player was saying to me ‘what random sexual toy does my supposedly powerful fascist nation wish for me to collect now’ – which is the increasing feel for Paracountess Dralneen. The Faction interplay is something that was initially very well received, but now seems to be just a random task that you have to do with little to no serious explanation. That isn’t that fun, as if it is meant to be a Golarion roleplaying hook – then it should be!

2.The second issue is the PROPHETIC nature of Faction missions.
How is your Faction leader able to know exactly that you will have to veer off course in a storm, arrive at a small island and find a small item for them? Or that you will manage to end up somewhere the venture Captain or you aren't intending on going? Faction missions should be related to the plot of the briefing, and should come in AFTER said plothook to allow PCs to maintain suspension of disbelief. These Faction missions seem lazy and arbitrary, and I had several players refuse to do them at the con out of irritation.

3.The third issue is the instruction clarity and occasional rigidity of the missions.
Quest for Perfection Part III is the most obvious example of this, where the players genuinely don’t know how to achieve their Faction goals, and regardless of how smart, clever, or well they roleplay/work together can only achieve them through sheer luck. (See Shadow Lodge Faction mission)

Ideally, it would be nice to reconcile Factions back into golarion, rather than as a mechanical process for item access, and moreover, TIE THE FACTION MISSIONS TO THE PLOT EXPOSITION. There is a lot of opportunity being missed here, and it is obvious Factions are being created as afterthoughts, rather than though being put into how each mission affects each faction, how much each Faction head should know about the mission, and what realistically is a cool plothook to be followed.

I understand this is already being brought up by my VC, Alistair Rigg – but I felt I should have my feedback provided – as we all want to improve this great game we got going here!

Any insight if other people are getting similar feedback would be interesting.

Regards

Dave Metcalfe (Metz)

Hi all,

We just came back out of the biggest Con/Pathfinder event run in Australia (Ruby Phoenix) - Which was a great success (more stats to follow), and whilst Pathfinder Society is increasingly growing here there is also an increasing disenfranchisement with Faction missions - specifically how they are written and what has happened to them – I normally don’t weigh in too much with this stuff, but I had enough comments/complaints that I felt that I needed to bring some attention to it.

1.The first issue is that of the innate nature of Faction missions as a flavorful plot hook.
In Season 0, these seemed to be geopolitical. Players enjoyed their singular Faction mission as a ‘hook’ into the world of Golarion, with ties to nations, political issues and what was going on. One of the Key benefits is that missions had clear goals and reasons as to why you were doing your mission. The ‘macguffin’ mission wasn’t that common (unless you were Osiriani, in which case that is all you did). A great example of this is the Cheliaxian Faction mission in Slave Pits of Absalom.

This seems to have changed. Faction heads now seem to send people on arbitrary missions for personal or random reasons. Stereotypes have developed. It has literally got to the point where one player was saying to me ‘what random sexual toy does my supposedly powerful fascist nation wish for me to collect now’ – which is the increasing feel for Paracountess Dralneen. The Faction interplay is something that was initially very well received, but now seems to be just a random task that you have to do with little to no serious explanation. That isn’t that fun, as if it is meant to be a Golarion roleplaying hook – then it should be!

2.The second issue is the PROPHETIC nature of Faction missions.
How is your Faction leader able to know exactly that you will have to veer off course in a storm, arrive at a small island and find a small item for them? Or that you will manage to end up somewhere the venture Captain or you aren't intending on going? Faction missions should be related to the plot of the briefing, and should come in AFTER said plothook to allow PCs to maintain suspension of disbelief. These Faction missions seem lazy and arbitrary, and I had several players refuse to do them at the con out of irritation.

3.The third issue is the instruction clarity and occasional rigidity of the missions.
Quest for Perfection Part III is the most obvious example of this, where the players genuinely don’t know how to achieve their Faction goals, and regardless of how smart, clever, or well they roleplay/work together can only achieve them through sheer luck. (See Shadow Lodge Faction mission)

Ideally, it would be nice to reconcile Factions back into golarion, rather than as a mechanical process for item access, and moreover, TIE THE FACTION MISSIONS TO THE PLOT EXPOSITION. There is a lot of opportunity being missed here, and it is obvious Factions are being created as afterthoughts, rather than though being put into how each mission affects each faction, how much each Faction head should know about the mission, and what realistically is a cool plothook to be followed.

I understand this is already being brought up by my VC, Alistair Rigg – but I felt I should have my feedback provided – as we all want to improve this great game we got going here!

Any insight if other people are getting similar feedback would be interesting.

Regards

Dave Metcalfe (Metz)