Pathfinder Adventure Path #73: The Worldwound Incursion (Wrath of the Righteous 1 of 6) (PFRPG)

Can we get an indication of whether this AP will have a PFS-legal portion, and what level it will be at? My group is interested in playing this AP for PFS credit, and want to know what level we should keep/advance our characters to (almost all of us have a single level 3 or 4 character).

Can we get an indication of whether this AP will have a PFS-legal portion, and what level it will be at? My group is interested in playing this AP for PFS credit, and want to know what level we should keep/advance our characters to (almost all of us have a single level 3 or 4 character).

It's unknown at this point. Mike and John are the ones who will make that decision. Much of that decision will depend on how previous sanctioned Adventure Paths have been reported.

Removed post in violation of our messageboard rules, and replies. Carry on, everyone.

I see one can not say anything negative against the LBGT material found in this adventure path otherwise you will be removed. Consider this my subscription cancellation.

Yeesh, it sure would suck if this thread got locked... especially before I found out how many times Xoveron can use mythic power, and what mythic rank he is on his home plane. Yeah.

(Hopefully this is clarified in the Bestiary 4 section on Dagon/Pazuzu/Kostichitcihicece.)

I see one can not say anything negative against the LBGT material found in this adventure path otherwise you will be removed. Consider this my subscription cancellation.

Man, I love that Paizo is so inclusive of things.

I for one hope they continue this trend! :)

Those notes are basically as follows:

GLBT characters exist in Golarion, so make sure they're included.

As long as Paizo continues to have GLBT employees, we'll continue to put GLBT characters into our products. In fact, even if the employee thing changes, we'll still put GLBT characters into our products. As long as I have anything to say about it at least. There's a gay couple in the next adventure, in fact, so the inclusiveness isn't stopping with Anevia and Irabeth in this AP.

Furthermore, I'm gonna keep doing this in our APs until it's no longer an issue and folks just talk about the adventure without really pausing to discuss whether any one NPC is a sorcerer or wizard. And at that point I'll keep doing it.

Anyway... keep on topic. And since there are LBGT characters in the adventure, that part of the discussion IS on topic... but keep it civil, please!

So basically you are saying that you will use Pathfinder to push a certain point of view no matter what anyone thinks about it...

For the record, I am OK with LGBT characters as long as they aren't just stuck in with duct tape. But there is a point where it becomes more about pushing an agenda, and you cease simply telling a good story.

Sad to see that to you, it is mostly about pushing that agenda... that is the only reason to make this statement...

Furthermore, I'm gonna keep doing this in our APs until it's no longer an issue and folks just talk about the adventure without really pausing to discuss whether any one NPC is a sorcerer or wizard. And at that point I'll keep doing it.

That is why some people claim it feels forced.

BTW, forced inclusion is not real inclusion. I don't know a single LGBT person in real life that appreciates being pandered to. They would much rather the addition make sense.

That is my only qualm about the characters in this. They fell flat. Uninspired, except in the use of actual gender changing, and that was so minor it was glossed over.

I see one can not say anything negative against the LBGT material found in this adventure path otherwise you will be removed. Consider this my subscription cancellation.

Well, I think they have been fairly tolerant of other opinions... at least the employees have. The Paizo community, not so much.

It's not necessarily what you say, but how you say it.

"The most important rule: Don't be a jerk. We want our messageboards
to be a fun and friendly place."

So basically you are saying that you will use Pathfinder to push a certain point of view no matter what anyone thinks about it...

For the record, I am OK with LGBT characters as long as they aren't just stuck in with duct tape. But there is a point where it becomes more about pushing an agenda, and you cease simply telling a good story.

Sad to see that to you, it is mostly about pushing that agenda... that is the only reason to make this statement...

Quote:

Furthermore, I'm gonna keep doing this in our APs until it's no longer an issue and folks just talk about the adventure without really pausing to discuss whether any one NPC is a sorcerer or wizard. And at that point I'll keep doing it.

BTW, forced inclusion is not real inclusion.

Mead,

Let's be specific. You've expressed concern that this inclusion threatens the story. Please explain how? For a moment let us set aside everything else and square this one single point away— did you find the inclusion of LGBT characters in this Chapter to hurt the story? If so, please explain how.

That's not a trick question. I am banking on it being a very difficult question, because I can't see how that can be true, but if that is the case—I would like to hear it.

************************

Now, I am going to speak to the larger issue. You seem to think Mr. Jacobs is pushing an agenda. I don't feel that you're being terribly empathetic or even realistic about your concerns and what you expect from this.. protest?

Sometimes I wonder if we Forum Posters fail to cut through to heart of these matters. Or perhaps we're so emotionally invested that we can't speak candidly without aggression.

I am going to try to be candid without being hostile.

Lots of LGBT people work at Paizo. Many were involved with the creation of this product. Their art and craft went into this book.

Many LGBT people are loyal customers of Paizo, and the revenue they provide pays salaries and benefits for everyone in the company.

I believe many of Mr. Jacobs's friends and loved ones belong to the LGBT community.

Mead, aren't you expecting a lot of this man? More than is reasonable? What you consider to be advancing an agenda, many feel to be honoring and respecting another community as equals—as friends. Deserving of love and respect like any person does.

I'm afraid you come across like you're thinking of LGBT folks like questionable ingredients on a pizza. "Oh, okay.. if you have to have anchovies this time, I "guess" it is alright. This one time. But let's just do it this one time, because there's a plot element attached to it. Let's not get in the habit of making this a regular thing."

I would never want to be a special exception that someone needed a special excuse to have around. Good god, Mead, that would break my heart.

So how can you ask James to do that? And how can you be surprised and disappointed when he says no?

That is my only qualm about the characters in this. They fell flat. Uninspired, except in the use of actual gender changing, and that was so minor it was glossed over.

I cannot reconcile this. Many adventures have heterosexual characters or characters where the sexual orientation is never brought up. Does their sexual orientation seem inspiring in comparison? Or just as commonplace and boring as these LGBT characters?

Mead,

Let's be specific. You've expressed concern that this inclusion threatens the story. Please explain how? For a moment let us set aside everything else and square this one single point away— did you find the inclusion of LGBT characters in this Chapter to hurt the story? If so, please explain how.

That's not a trick question. I am banking on it being a very difficult question, because I can't see how that can be true, but if that is the case—I would like to hear it.

************************

Now, I am going to speak to the larger issue. You seem to think Mr. Jacobs is pushing an agenda. I don't feel that you're being terribly empathetic or even realistic about your concerns, and what you expect from this.. protest?

Sometimes I wonder if we Forum Posters fail to cut through to heart of these matters. Or perhaps we're so emotionally invested that we can't speak candidly without aggression.

I am going to try to be candid without being hostile.

Lots of LGBT people work at Paizo. Many were involved with the creation of this product.

Many LGBT people are loyal customers of Paizo, and the revenue they provide pays salaries and benefits for everyone in the company.

I believe many of Mr. Jacobs's...

Did it hurt the story? No. Did it help the story? No. Did it feel like a natural part of the story? No. I actually said all 3 of those in earlier posts.

The story itself was pretty good. I liked the ending. But that doesn't mean that I think everything meshed.

I'm not protesting, I am pointing out what I felt wasn't up to standards. There have been LGBT characters in the past that worked. These ones did not. Or, I should be specific... the former man did not.

However, I felt it was better to discuss my issues with this issue in the thread, rather than in a review...

But the bigger issue in hitting every single one of your customers over the head with the LGBT hammer is that you alienate others. The key is to find a balance. Making LGBT characters "until it is no longer an issue" is a poor way to do that. The reason, because then you are making them for that goal, instead of for the story.

Rather than discuss/argue/debate - I'm just going to put up that in my opinion the characters in question were personable and very well done. It's heartening and feels right to have the positive role-models within the AP be wide and varied.

I really don't see how people can have any problems with this... as all it takes for you to redact it for your home game is to cross out Anevia and write Anvenn instead and the rest of the entire AP volume does not need to be changed in any manner!

Seriously, it is that easy.

As James said, gay people exist in Golarion. So do trans people.

With lesbian/gay/bi folks at roughly 5% of the human population in the real world (and having no reason to assume it's different in Golarion), given that most APs have 20 or more NPCs, it would be more unrepresentative not to include at least one LGBT character in each AP. Including them isn't "forcing" anything or "pushing an agenda," any more than it's "forcing" things to acknowledge that, like the real world, Golarion has a roughly 1:1 ratio of female to male humans. Or that babies exist. Or that people are of different heights.

LGBT characters exist in Golarion, the same as they do in the real world. It seems like more of an agenda to hide the existence of people than to simply acknowledge the fact that they're around, doing stuff, same as everyone else.

But that doesn't mean that I think everything meshed.

But how do heterosexual characters or those who are never defined by sexual orientation mesh?

I'm not protesting, I am pointing out what I felt wasn't up to standards. There have been LGBT characters in the past that worked. These ones did not. Or, I should be specific... the former man did not.

However, I felt it was better to discuss my issues with this issue in the thread, rather than in a review...

But the bigger issue in hitting every single one of your customers over the head with the LGBT hammer is that you alienate others. The key is to find a balance. Making LGBT characters "until it is no longer an issue" is a poor way to do that. The reason, because then you are making them for that goal, instead of for the story.

I don't agree with you, but I think not addressing it in the review was a decent thing to do.

I'm going to try again.

Why does there need to be a compelling and engaging story for there to be an LGBT character? Can't such characters just exist, because they do? Because in real life LGBT people exist, just because they do.

I guess I just don't understand how they "don't feel like a natural part of the story."

They are NPCs with background write-ups just like any other NPC from volumes past. I draw just as much inspirational and useful information from these as I did from say, Goti Runecaster or Ameiko Kaijitsu in Jade Regent. These are people who have experienced interesting stuff, and are going to experience further interesting stuff with my PCs.

All of that aside, I have never been this excited about starting up a new campaign. Wrath of the Righteous seems like it has the potential to be a truly unforgettable game!

EDIT: Wow, a bunch of good posts happened in the time I was slowly composing mine! :-)

I liked the adventure, but have a few qualms. When the PCs emerge from the pit to discover Kenebras is now a smoking ruin, why exactly would they immediately set off to investigate human cultists? If I were a player and told I was going to start a campaign about fighting demons, my first thought would be "help survivors and slay any demons that remain." Not to be deliberately difficult, mind you: I would just assume that the cultist thing was something for further down the road. After all, who cares about some demon cultists when actual demons are pillaging and plundering your city? That seems like a far more immediate concern.

Other than that, I have to say that this is probably the most over-the-top start to an AP yet, and in a good way. Surviving a mini demonacalypse, discovering multiple artifacts (even if most are minor), and getting to test run mythic power while smacking down foes that would otherwise result in a TPK were great touches. The ominous realization that the Wardstones are dead at the adventure's conclusion is a brutal cliffhanger.

Good stuff for a first time AP author.

As an aside, a direct result of this thread is that one of my players is planning on having his character in our eventual WotR campaign be the child of two women. His character was literally wished into existence. It'll be fun!

(He also wants to become besties with Irabeth, because who wouldn't? She's awesome.)

I still fail to understand why being LGBT has to have some kind of magical plot reason behind it.

----

I was wondering - I haven't finished reading the module yet, but I saw some people up thread saying this module seems to be quite challenging. Would you say, then, that a 3-person party might be a bit of a stretch? Maybe if I gave them some bonus feats and so forth...?

I believe many of Mr. Jacobs's friends and loved ones belong to the LGBT community.

Mead, aren't you expecting a lot of this man? More than is reasonable? What you consider to be advancing an agenda, many feel to be honoring and respecting another community as equals—as friends. Deserving of love and respect like any person does.

I'm afraid you come across like you're thinking of LGBT folks like questionable ingredients on a pizza. "Oh, okay.. if you have to have anchovies this time, I "guess" it is alright. This one time. But let's just do it this one time, because there's a plot element attached to it. Let's not get in the habit of making this a regular thing."

I would never want to be a special exception that someone needed a special excuse to have around. Good god, Mead, that would break my heart.

So how can you ask James to do that? And how can you be surprised and disappointed when he says no?
.
I cannot reconcile this. Many adventures have heterosexual characters or characters where the sexual orientation is never brought up. Does their sexual orientation seem inspiring in comparison? Or just as commonplace and boring as these LGBT characters?
...

Am I asking a lot? No. I am simply voicing my opinion based on what I see, and what I read from him in that post.

I respect his decision to include whomever he wants. But it just feels like he is beating others over the head with it.

That anchovy stuff was odd... I actually am having trouble trying think of a reply to it. Because I never said it couldn't be a regular thing, as long as it doesn't feel forced. Using your analogy though, it would be like the pizza place putting anchovies on every pizza they can... because they don't understand moderation. Considering the low percentage of "hetero" characters that actually get their sexuality spelled out, the fact that the major defining characteristic of those characters being whom they like to have sex with.. just falls flat.

Well, if a hetero character's sexual preference isn't brought up... does he or she really have a sexual preference?

You keep focusing my dislike of these characters as me being against all LGBT characters.

While it is true, I do have a preference IRL regarding anything LGBT... which also doesn't mean I hate them, ordon't know any... to my knowledge I haven't said all of the LGBT characters done were bad characters. I just felt like this was forced.

That's the thing, people always have that kneejerk reaction. People do not have to be happy with every aspect of a product.

I guess I just don't understand how they "don't feel like a natural part of the story."

They are NPCs with background write-ups just like any other NPC from volumes past. I draw just as much inspirational and useful information from these as I did from say, Goti Runecaster or Ameiko Kaijitsu in Jade Regent. These are people who have experienced interesting stuff, and are going to experience further interesting stuff with my PCs.

All of that aside, I have never been this excited about starting up a new campaign. Wrath of the Righteous seems like it has the potential to be a truly unforgettable game!

EDIT: Wow, a bunch of good posts happened in the time I was slowly composing mine! :-)

I should point out I am voicing an opinion. If people disagree, and find them to both be good characters... that is OK and not tacked on. It's no different than voicing an opinion about a character in any other AP volume or module. Not everyone finds everything to be perfect.

You keep focusing my dislike of these characters as me being against all LGBT characters.

While it is true, I do have a preference IRL regarding anything LGBT... which also doesn't mean I hate them, ordon't know any... to my knowledge I haven't said all of the LGBT characters done were bad characters. I just felt like this was forced.

Without trying to put words in your mouth - I'd suggest that perhaps your preference IRL is coloring the fact that you see them as forced where others do not.

(He also wants to become besties with Irabeth, because who wouldn't? She's awesome.)

I had a similar reaction. We may or may not have gone on several adventures together in my head.

Mead Gregorisson wrote:

You keep focusing my dislike of these characters as me being against all LGBT characters.

While it is true, I do have a preference IRL regarding anything LGBT... which also doesn't mean I hate them, ordon't know any... to my knowledge I haven't said all of the LGBT characters done were bad characters. I just felt like this was forced.

Without trying to put words in your mouth - I'd suggest that perhaps your preference IRL is coloring the fact that you see them as forced where others do not.

I have lived with LGBT folks. My preference IRL means nothing. I know how to look at the individual.

But even assuming that is true.. would it not be my right? And if it is my right, would I not be allowed to voice an opinion about a product I purchased?

Let's say I believe that all dwarves should have beards.. even females.. if a product had clean-shaven dwarf females, I am sure my opinion would be welcome... even if it was that shaving the dwarf females just seemed forced... to put them on par with the real life view of beauty.

BTW, I do like clean-shaven dwarf females.

Mark Sweetman wrote:

Mead Gregorisson wrote:

You keep focusing my dislike of these characters as me being against all LGBT characters.

While it is true, I do have a preference IRL regarding anything LGBT... which also doesn't mean I hate them, ordon't know any... to my knowledge I haven't said all of the LGBT characters done were bad characters. I just felt like this was forced.

Without trying to put words in your mouth - I'd suggest that perhaps your preference IRL is coloring the fact that you see them as forced where others do not.

I have lived with LGBT folks. My preference IRL means nothing. I know how to look at the individual.

But even assuming that is true.. would it not be my right? And if it is my right, would I not be allowed to voice an opinion about a product I purchased?

That works two ways. If you want to have the right to voice your opinion, others want their right to tell what they think of your opinion. Which they, including the guy in charge of Golarion and what goes into an AP, have done, so it's the point where you either tag it or bag it, because you ain't gonna turn the bear around with that stick you're carrying.

Mead:

You are right to have an opinion - as is everyone else posting here. Of which I'd suggest a fair proportion of those opinions have between zero and no issues with the characters.

But...

But the bigger issue in hitting every single one of your customers over the head with the LGBT hammer is that you alienate others. The key is to find a balance. Making LGBT characters "until it is no longer an issue" is a poor way to do that. The reason, because then you are making them for that goal, instead of for the story.

You are laying it on very strong that somehow this is Paizo forcing an agenda or hitting people over the head with the issue.... Which they aren't... in my opinion... which I'm entitled to :)

Mead,

I regret if the "special ingredient" metaphor didn't work for you. Maybe it was a bit odd. <shrug> Then again, I wonder how we can have true inclusion with 'moderation'.

You keep focusing my dislike of these characters as me being against all LGBT characters.

While it is true, I do have a preference IRL regarding anything LGBT... which also doesn't mean I hate them, or don't know any... to my knowledge I haven't said all of the LGBT characters done were bad characters. I just felt like this was forced.

This will come to a point where it may seem that I am badgering you. You posted and I responded. I will step back now and let your remarks stand without further comment.

[

That works two ways. If you want to have the right to voice your opinion, others want their right to tell what they think of your opinion. Which they, including the guy in charge of Golarion and what goes into an AP, have done, so its' the point where you either tag it or bag it, because you ain't gonna turn the bear around with that stick you're carrying.

Yep, and then I can voice my opinion about your opinion.

I wasn't aware I was trying to erase LGBT from the face of Golarion. Having concerns about being smacked upside the head by the LGBT stick don't mean that the should be none of those characters.

I respect his decision to include whomever he wants. But it just feels like he is beating others over the head with it.

I cringe even typing this, but to a very slight extent, I sort of agree. Just for wholly different reasons I suspect. I initially posted at my annoyance at the ratio of lesbians to gay men, noting there are far more of the former than latter. This frustration is borne from a real-world issue in which gay women are, for whatever reason*, considered more acceptable than gay men. Including a lesbian character can be interpreted as edgy and cool, while gay men are more controversial and potentially alienating.

I am accutely aware of this stereotype, and thus likely hyper sensitive to it, but when I see lesbians represented without a comparable number of gay male characters, I cringe. At that point the effort of inclusion seems disingenuous and, as Mead would put it, "beating others over the head with it." Am I being unfair? Dunno, but there it is.

*You know darn well what the reason is, don't make me spell it out.

BTW, this is all a moot point. As has been stated earlier.. all a GM has to do is change a minor character to whatever they prefer... and otherwise... Ms. Scott made a pretty good adventure with a neat ending.

I stated in the thread about the Player's Guide that it made me want to play this AP... and I stand by that.

My issue with the character aside.. I do feel bad if I made anyone feel bad, alienated or unwelcome, or if I hurt Ms. Scott's feelings. Not my intention. My intention was only to voice my concern.

I am acutely aware of this stereotype, and thus likely hyper sensitive to it, but when I see lesbians represented without a comparable number of gay male characters, I cringe. At that point the effort of inclusion seems disingenuous and, as Mead would put it, "beating others over the head with it." Am I being unfair? Dunno, but there it is.

Generic,

Honestly, sometimes there is a real life lag between feedback and when you see a shift. Especially in the AP line.

I'll give you a relevant example, I received this same gay/lesbian lack of parity feedback after The Shackled Hut came out. It wasn't from you, but another poster who shall remain anonymous. I was happy to take that feedback into account—but by the time I got the feedback I was literally weeks away from turning in Chapter Three of Wrath. It was close.

I'll take it a step further. I wrote Chapter One of Mummy's Mask. I turned it in one week after it was announced at PaizoCon. One week after anyone publicly knew it existed.

There can be a lag between the time the authors and developers get feedback from the forums and when we can actually implement it.

That may not make you feel better, but trust me, at least one author has heard you and I'm sure the developers have as well.

Mead,

I regret if the "special ingredient" metaphor didn't work for you. Maybe it was a bit odd. <shrug> Then again, I wonder how we can have true inclusion with 'moderation'.

Mead Gregorisson wrote:

You keep focusing my dislike of these characters as me being against all LGBT characters.

While it is true, I do have a preference IRL regarding anything LGBT... which also doesn't mean I hate them, or don't know any... to my knowledge I haven't said all of the LGBT characters done were bad characters. I just felt like this was forced.

This will come to a point where it may seem that I am badgering you. You posted and I responded. I will step back now and let your remarks stand without further comment.

It's fine. You are a good author, so the badgering is OK. My main issues were with a lot of the earlier folks that would get hysterical at any deviation from the PC party line. But I even include them in my above apology.

Oh, and I also do realize I was a bit harsher in my reply to Mr. Jacobs than I intended to be. I really have no issues with how he does things. I just felt the way he phrased his post was a bit disrespectful to some customers. But I do respect him for standing up for what he believes.

Aaaaannndd we're back to this again. Fine, I'll bite this time.

I, for one, enjoyed Jim Groves' pizza analogy, but if that doesn't work for some people let's try something a little different.

For some people, they seem to think the concept of "Paizo presenting LGBT characters as part of a larger trend is too pushy" is an okay stance to take. Some people don't seem to see anything wrong with the notion of being "put off" by LGBT.

But take that concept for a moment, and change "LGBT" to Black/Hispanic/Native and try that same concept again. At what point do people who view a couple of characters out of dozens as "excessive" or "pushy" realize that this train of thought is discriminatory regardless of whether it's about race or gender or sex.

LGBT are people too. Human beings are human beings. It shouldn't be a difficult concept to get behind.

My main issues were with a lot of the earlier folks that would get hysterical at any deviation from the PC party line.

It has nothing to do with "PC". It has everything to do with common human decency.

And, Mead, just be clear, I'm not attacking you. As you said, you're only voicing your concerns, which is completely fair. I'm just using your quotes because you've been willing to be part of the discussion. Which brings me to my real sticking point:

But the bigger issue in hitting every single one of your customers over the head with the LGBT hammer is that you alienate others. The key is to find a balance. Making LGBT characters "until it is no longer an issue" is a poor way to do that. The reason, because then you are making them for that goal, instead of for the story.

Some might consider this insensitive but I'll say it anyway - some people are worth alienating. In my opinion, the minute someone doesn't want to approach all other human being in an equal fashion is the minute I no longer have to do the same to them. If someone wants to be discriminatory then they open themselves up to discrimination. Sure, it may be the lower road instead of the higher, kinder, path to walk but I feel it's a low road worth taking.

I wish bigotry and prejudice could be approached with kindness and understanding without the gentler party being walked over, I do, but 10,000 years of human history has proven that's not the case. It never works out well for the gentler party. People who show disrespect to others shouldn't be surprised when they're met with disrespect in turn.

So if Paizo decides to "heartlessly" ignore a sub-set of customers in order to push their "horrible" agenda of tolerance, I'm completely okay with that. Though I am in no way claiming that this is what Paizo is doing. I would not dare speak for them, only me.

LGBT are people too. Human beings are human beings. It shouldn't be a difficult concept to get behind.

......

Some might consider this insensitive but I'll say it anyway - some people are worth alienating.

No argument there.

.......

I could point out that everyone that alienates someone believes that some people deserve alienating, no matter who it is.

The fact remains that no one will be happy no matter how anything goes. But people should be able to express themselves without being jumped on. As you said, you are not jumping on me... but people in this thread have been jumped on. Just as people get jumped on in threads on other topics.. such as guns and self-defense.

That is why I disagree with your statement about PC not having anything to do with it. While the company itself has shown a high tolerance for opinions of all sorts... the community has not.

I got attacked in a thread once because I pointed out how bad a scenerio of spraying bear spray in a school classroom would be.... which considering I am in bear country, have 3 cans.. and have actually used the stuff.. is pretty bad.

The reason? Because anti-gun types in the thread where so anti-gun, that if you were pro-gun... you should be shouted down. They were so anti-gun, they were willing to push something that could really damage a child's health. Every child in the school.

Look at that LGBT thread that has been ongoing... you have the same issue. If you are not on a certain side of the issue... it is OK to drown you out.

Now, this thread has been a little calmer... which is good... especially since it is a product thread.

Maybe it is just me, but I tend to welcome all views on a subject.. even if I disagree with it. Not only can it make for good discussion, but it is possible for everyone reading to learn something... on both sides of the discussion.

I liked the adventure, but have a few qualms. When the PCs emerge from the pit to discover Kenebras is now a smoking ruin, why exactly would they immediately set off to investigate human cultists? If I were a player and told I was going to start a campaign about fighting demons, my first thought would be "help survivors and slay any demons that remain." Not to be deliberately difficult, mind you: I would just assume that the cultist thing was something for further down the road. After all, who cares about some demon cultists when actual demons are pillaging and plundering your city? That seems like a far more immediate concern.

Other than that, I have to say that this is probably the most over-the-top start to an AP yet, and in a good way. Surviving a mini demonacalypse, discovering multiple artifacts (even if most are minor), and getting to test run mythic power while smacking down foes that would otherwise result in a TPK were great touches. The ominous realization that the Wardstones are dead at the adventure's conclusion is a brutal cliffhanger.

Good stuff for a first time AP author.

About your concerns with hunting down human cultists while actual demons are on the prowl:

It is a main theme of this adventure that Kenabres fell was because the demon horde had help from within. The PCs should know, by the time they emerge from the underground tunnels, that cultists have been spreading chaos and sabotaging the efforts of crusaders for quite some time. The fact that the crusaders can easily bland in a crowed makes them in some aspects every bit as dangerous as demons.
Besides, the adventure actually doesn't make assumptions about what the PCs do, or at least not about the order they do those things. There are 3 NPC related missions, any number of PC missions could be inserted by the GM as well (and PC who had some ties to the city might want to look for his family/friends/property/whatever to see what happened). Also, there's joining Irabreth and her small army. When they join Irabreth, if they havn't yet dealt with the cultists, she will ask them to do it. So I don't think you need to be concerned about this issue.

Anyway, I am leaving the thread again so that it can eventually move on to more of the volume that just LGBT, and I realize that if I stay in this thread that is less likely to happen. Though I know I am not the only one with the same concerns.

Still, while discussing the LGBT thing is part of the product discussion.. I admit a debate on much of the stuff we are debating is not... and if the mods want to clean up the thread, feel free to delete my posts.

I'll just have to see how future LGBT characters turn out.

Besides, I need to continue catching up on White Collar Season 3, which I might add has a prominant lesbian character,a nd the main character is played by a gay man that dresses a lot better than me.

Edit: oh wait, I am on Season 4.

About the claims brought by Mead Gregorisson that the transgender NPC shouldn't have been a transgender in this AP, because it has nothing to do with the story, at all...

Yeah, the gender and sexuality of the NPC with the unusual gender and sexuality had nothing to do with the AP. It wasn't really a part of the story, and not related to any theme (except maybe to show Irabreth as a truly good, accepting person, which is certainly part of the "pure good" theme in the AP). As a matter of fact, it had no reason to be there.

Which makes it excellent that it WAS there, in my opinion. People's sexuality is just that - sexuality. It shouldn't have anything to do with the story, and it's just a detail about the character. The transgender NPC might or might not be an interesting person (that's a matter of opinion - I find her to be a decent character, though her role seems to be as a friend, so mostly she's just pleasant. Nothing wrong with that). She's also a transgender who was attracted to a woman.

It is obvious Paizo had made a conscious decision to include LGBT characters in Golarion. So, logically, they also appear in APs. Any attempt to tie the sexuality of those NPCs to the story would have made their presence feel MORE forced, since not a ton of fantasy stories are about sexuality and attempting to make the sexuality of a person relevant could have warped the story in any number of ways.

Instead we get exactly what Paizo was aiming for: inclusion. Those NPCs are there, they are not going anywhere, and their sexuality is nothing special (rare does not equal special). And it has nothing to do with anything, doesn't have a purpose behind it.In other words, exactly like in real life. Anyone who has a problem with how the matter of LGBTs is handled in the APs probably has the same issues in real life.

Generic,

Honestly, sometimes there is a real life lag between feedback and when you see a shift. Especially in the AP line.

I appreciate the reply, and looking back on my post, I should have worded it much differently. It was not initially intended to sound like a complaint. My original point was that I could empathize with Mead to a degree, but ended up muddying the waters further with my own social commentary. I know full well that you, James Jacobs, and a slew of others have heard what I had to say, and again, did not mean to sound like I was re-mounting a soap box. My bad.

Instead we get exactly what Paizo was aiming for: inclusion. Those NPCs are there, they are not going anywhere, and their sexuality is nothing special (rare does not equal special). And it has nothing to do with anything, doesn't have a purpose behind it.In other words, exactly like in real life. Anyone who has a problem with how the matter of LGBTs is handled in the APs probably has the same issues in real life.

What he said.

There are two arms to erasure, both of which end in spiked fists: The first is the insistence that the inclusion of minority characters should be limited to being "appropriate to the plot." The second is that the inclusion of characters of that minority is never "appropriate to the plot."

I would challenge anyone to say what's so inappropriate about having a trans woman character as a major NPC. Mead took a swing at it. He said that he thought Anevia's inclusion was "forced" and that made it inappropriate. But on a fundamental level, no fictional character is ever present in a story unless they are written there, so it is EXACTLY as forced for a transgender secondary protagonist to be present as for her to not be present.

Hey Paizo - thanks for including me in your products. It really means a lot to me :)

Me too, for what it matters, though I think I've communicated this to James Jacobs at some point in the recent past. :)

Mead said it right, the problem was moderation.

There is no problem with a L,B,G or T character. The problem with this story is there is a LBG&T character (with a bi-racial relationship to boot).

In my opinion, the back story seems overboard with this character. Sure, there are gay, lesbian and trans people in the world, but how many individuals are every lifestyle at once?

That gives the feeling that the story is being driven by the agenda of inclusion. It would have just fine to leave it as the two characters being lesbian (or gay), it would have felt more natural.

If that was the case, then I think there would not be so many people be focused on this.

Just my 2cp.

Mead said it right, the problem was moderation.

There is no problem with a L,B,G or T character. The problem with this story is there is a LBG&T character (with a bi-racial relationship to boot).

In my opinion, the back story seems overboard with this character. Sure, there are gay, lesbian and trans people in the world, but how many individuals are every lifestyle at once?

That gives the feeling that the story is being driven by the agenda of inclusion. It would have just fine to leave it as the two characters being lesbian (or gay), it would have felt more natural.

If that was the case, then I think there would not be so many people be focused on this.

Just my 2cp.

Anevia's backstory could well be mine (except my wife's not half-orc. Going by her stats she's clearly a dwarf).

Hi. I'm transgender, AND lesbian, AND married. We exist.

I'm following this discussion like many others, I suspect, but don't have much more to say on this subject as things seem to be settling down a bit. I will be interested, however, in seeing how folks react to the next chapter, Sword of Valor, which includes another set of LGBT characters in it. For those who talked about the ratio of lesbians to gays, take heart. The storyline for Sword of Valor is about to balance that equation (for this AP, at least).

And, more importantly...I think the most germane points in the discussion of including such characters in these adventures is the notion of how "plot relevant" their sexuality needs to be. Typically, I'd say a character's orientation isn't something that has to be called out all that often. You could just as easily assume Ameiko is a lesbian (or even a bisexual) in Rise of the Runelords and Jade Regent. It's always the GM's choice in how he chooses to present the NPCs. However, where it does become relevant to examine a character's sexuality is when you need to talk about the relationships between NPCs...and even the potential relationship between an NPC and a PC, if romance is a possibility over the course of the campaign.

For instance, in The Worldwound Incursion, there's obviously a fast friendship which initially developed between Anevia/Anvenn and Irabeth. In time, their interaction turned to love. That means there's a history to their relationship which can help widen the characterization of both NPCs...to better understand them, how they think, and how they relate to one another and the world around them. To me, that's when it's vitally important to raise the subject of each character's sexual orientation. Outwardly, Anevia now appears as a woman (following Irabeth funding her transformation). Irabeth is also obviously a female half-orc. So, to anyone viewing them externally (as in the PCs who meet them during the adventure), it's important for the GM to have a detailed, intricate explanation for how the two women came to be in a relationship (which should be obvious to anyone observing them). Thus, in my opinion, the backstory to both of these NPCs is a very artful, credible, in-game way to explain it and carry it forward as those NPCs are depicted by the GM over the course of the campaign. That's what these character backgrounds are meant to provide.

Next up, in the Sword of Valor, you're going to see another LGBT couple, which is hopefully just as equally defined by their past and current relationship. That relationship should be evident as the PCs interact with them. Thus, it's important to know the specifics behind it. It gives you great insight into each of them as characters in the overall story...i.e., there's a secondary thread of their own woven throughout the greater story of the campaign. How the GM chooses to portray and shape that story is up to him or her. But the threads are there (just like any other character element) to be used if he or she wishes.

With regards to the larger idea of anything being "forced" by Paizo, I think it's clear (for many of the reasons others have given already) that Paizo is attempting to demonstrate a greater sense of inclusion by taking the time to create, explain, and involve such characters in their products, because there's an entire segment (no matter how small) of their customer base who can more readily identify with them. If you haven't attended or read about Wes Schneider's efforts to hold the ongoing panels for "Queer as a Three-Sided Die" wherein he and others among the LGBT community in the gaming industry take the time to discuss this topic at length, you probably should. Up until now, there had been no character (not a single one) in any gaming product whatsoever that anyone on that panel could recall which depicted a transgendered NPC. I think Anevia/Anvenn was purposefully crafted to reconcile that oversight. Is that "forcing" the inclusion or finally addressing an extreme deficiency? To me, it's more the latter. And, what's more, I'm appreciative of how Paizo took the time and effort to layer it into the NPC backgrounds in a way that better serves their characterization and their individual stories. Meanwhile, if it seems forced...or like a token effort...hopefully, another dose of LGBT characters in Sword of Valor will demonstrate it was no fluke.

Now, does that mean every adventure or every product has to call out an LGBT character or relationship? No. But it doesn't have to be hidden away either. Such people exist and it's a disservice to ignore them. As Jessica mentioned, it's already an assumption that Golarion has at least 5% of its population as LGBT individuals. That means one out of twenty NPCs appearing in any given product has a sexual orientation of that kind. Does it need to be called out? No. Not unless it serves to better understand the character's relationship to someone else in the adventure or campaign setting. That's when it's most worthy of examining. Because it's certainly relevant to what defines that character, just as much as their race, in-game profession, religion, and so on.

But that's just my two cents,
--Neil

P.S. This is a great adventure. These are great NPCs. And this is going to be a great campaign. Don't allow the examination of LGBT opinions and concerns to detract from that. If you do, you're missing out...not just on the Wrath of the Righteous AP, but a lot of things in life, too.