|
Finally, you accuse the education system of name calling and labeling those who it finds insensitive. Let's examine then what you call "sensitive".
tigger1tom wrote:
I think we're being very sensitive, we don't stone them anymore, or burn them at the stake, do we? Be thankful you don't live under Islamic law, they still kill homosexuals, don't they?
As stated before in a previous post, though in poor taste, it was meant as a joke. The end part is true though. In ancient Israel, under Torah and the rest of the Old Testament, unruly children, adulterers, and homosexuals were stoned, as they are still today under the Koran in the Arab world, and 'witches' were burnt at the stake, and not so long ago I'll remind you.
Oh boy, you get off calling me insensitive, I never called homosexuals 'queer', you did!
By "them" you are undoubtedly referring to queers.
So your definition of sensitivity is not murdering through torture members of the GLBT community? Are you kidding me? I'm going to remind you that I'm speaking as an individual and not a representative of the education system right now and tell you that if that's what you really believe thanI think that you'll find that the word that you're looking for is 'then' mister educator.
you're worse than a bigot. If that's what you really believe, the words that you deserve to be called would sully this message board and I won't use them. Perhaps you should consider moving to one of those countries under extremist Islamic law where the murder of homosexuals is condoned. I suspect you'd be much happier there.
Excuse me, where did I say I condone anything even remotely related to murder? I condone nothing of the sort, not even on unborn children. Being the liberal 'enlightened' educator that you are, you most likely are a person that believes in the 'right to choose', which, if you do, on the other hand, would be a person that condones murder. So who should be where? As a Christian in America, where we're SUPPOSED to have freedom of religion, though so-called 'lawmakers' would love to change it, we can still teach the Bible as written, and I'm sorry, the Bible does NOT say it is okay to be gay, it says that any man that lies with man is an abomination in the eyes of God. Guess what? That means its NOT okay to be gay. You, as an 'enlightened' educator, that never teaches morals because it is the duty of the parent, would never nay say that to my child, would you? And you get off on telling me what is moral and what isn't! Excuse me, but I wouldn't let you near my child, let alone teach him anything of your corrupt point of view.
|
I think that you'll find that the word that you're looking for is 'then' mister educator.
That's Mr. English Major, thank you very much. And while I do know the difference between "then" and "than", and have taught those often, there's a reason that I have three or four people proof my documents or manuscripts before I send them out to editors or submitted them for grades. I'm a terrible editor of my own writing. I'm haunted by these things called "typos". The bane of my existence. Much more a thorn in my side than the people who have nothing else left in the form of a valid argument than* to attempt to point out my shortcomings as an educator.
As for everything else you've said, I'm pretty much finished with you. As soon as you made your first personal attack on me I marginalized your contribution to the world of public discourse.
*I used the right word. I must be learning.
|
|
If you, as a teacher, attempt to tell my child that 'it is okay to be gay', then I say you have the 'skewed perception' of right and wrong.I have told students that, and I'll continue to. I've said that to students one-on-one, and I've said it in front of entire classrooms, both high school and college. I'll tell you why I do it-
It's okay to be gay.
Period. End of story.
Intolerant and possibly homophobic, though? That's a completely different story.
And just FYI, I'm not queer. I just have the good sense to understand that people are born that way and that there's nothing wrong with it (although even if it was a choice, it would still be a fine decision). I like to think that it's the way God made them. :)
There we go with that sensitivity thing again! I will say this one more time, the Bible says homosexuality is an abomination in the eyes of God, so therefore, it is NOT OK TO BE GAY. And no, God didn't make them that way, because God would not make someone sin and separate themselves from Him for eternity, because God loves everyone, even you. Homosexuality is a sin, I don't hate gays, though you no doubt think I do. I even have gay friends, though I don't agree with them, I don't hate them. And no, I'm not perfect either, I struggle with the sin of lust all the time, we are all sinners and fall short of the glory of God, that is why the only way to the Father is through the Son, if we accept Him, all of our sins are washed away by His blood!
|
|
I think that you'll find that the word that you're looking for is 'then' mister educator.That's Mr. English Major, thank you very much. And while I do know the difference between "then" and "than", and have taught those often, there's a reason that I have three or four people proof my documents or manuscripts before I send them out to editors or submitted them for grades. I'm a terrible editor of my own writing. I'm haunted by these things called "typos". The bane of my existence. Much more a thorn in my side than the people who have nothing else left in the form of a valid argument than* to attempt to point out my shortcomings as an educator.
As for everything else you've said, I'm pretty much finished with you. As soon as you made your first personal attack on me I marginalized your contribution to the world of public discourse.
*I used the right word. I must be learning.
Oh, and you didn't attack me personally first did you? I love that second part there too "I marginalized your contribution to the world of public discourse." My, aren't WE pompous, WE can do it and its okay, but if you reply, WE'LL ignore you because you're one of the little unimportant people.
I suggest this conversation end or move to another board. This is no longer a discussion about Pathfinder or roleplaying games. Consider this forewarning before we do anything more drastic.
Nothing would make me happier than if someone would get this back on track with the topic title, gushing about how "Sandpoint is Amazing."
|
|
I will say this one more time, the Bible says homosexuality is an abomination in the eyes of God, so therefore, it is NOT OK TO BE GAY.
Except, really, it probably doesn't. The English translation you're reading says that, but have you ever read the text in its original language, understanding all of the nuances of that language? I'm not sure you have.
And no, God didn't make them that way
More and more, if you keep up with the research, scientists are finding evidence to support that fact that homosexuality in humans is a biological fact and not a conscious choice. It's also a documented fact that countless animals other than humans display homosexual behaviors and lifestyles. So, as it's biology, not choice, and it happens not just to thinking man but to all kinds of animals as well, either God messed up, OR He created certain people just so they were damned, OR God wants some people that way because He doesn't care who you choose to love and express that love with physically. Or even who you just want to roll around in the sheets with for a few hours, whatever floats your boat.
This really isn't the proper forum for a religious debate, but since we're here, I'll do some more educating. See, I'm not just a teacher, and not just an English major, but I've spent a lot of time studying the Abrahamic religions. Considered the priesthood for a while before I realized that I didn't really jibe too well with the Roman Catholic church. I have more editions and translations of the Christian Bible than anyone I know for the express purpose of comparing the various translations. One of my specialties when I studied for that MA in English was the Bible in Prose and Poetry since the Renaissances. So to say I know objectively what's in the Bible is a bit of an understatement. That foundation being established, let's pretend that there's validity in the proclamation against gay sex just as it's found in the Bible (Leviticus 18:22, if I remember right, for those still paying attention). If that's unbreakable then every other thing that God prohibits in the book is equally as unbreakable. We can't just pick and choose which commandments to follow, right? Do you know how many of those commandments there are? Six hundred thirteen in the Torah alone. Check it out- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/613_mitzvot#Maimonides.27_list
Jesus said two things I like to recall when having this discussion, which I've been forced to have countless times, with people like you. The first one is that thing about not casting stones unless you're without sin. So let's see if you're without sin, and we'll do it in three easy steps.
1) Have you ever eaten pork? Thrown a football around with the children who can't be taught to be decent to people without judging them no matter who they sleep with? Then you've sinned. Says so right in Leviticus 11:7-8 ("And the pig, which does indeed have hoofs and is cloven-footed, but does not chew the cud and is therefore unclean for you. Their flesh you shall not eat, and their dead bodies you shall not touch; they are unclean for you."
2) Do you cut your hair, even once? Ever shaved your face? Trimmed your beard? Sinner. (Lev 19:27 [KJV] Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard.)
3) Ever done any work on a Sunday? Cleaned up around the apartment that day? Folded clothes? Washed dishes? That's the Lord's Day, not yours, and the Bible says you should be killed for it as you are a sinful man. (Exodus 35:2 [KJV] Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you an holy day, a sabbath of rest to the LORD: whosoever doeth work therein shall be put to death. )
The list goes on. You've sinned if you've been near any woman when she had her period, if you've eaten shellfish, gone to Church wearing glasses or contact lens, wore cotton blends, or not made slaves of Canadians. Look at that list, I'm not kidding. According to it, I don't know how any man, woman, or child who ever lived hasn't been repugnant and sinful in the eyes of God. And yet you, and people who want to quote that one passage from Leviticus as if it was the only line in the Bible, so have your pulse on the intent of the Almighty as to pass judgment based on the one thing that meshed with your personal philosophies. Shame on you.
They asked Jesus on the hill that day which one of those commandments was most important. Remember what He said? It's the other thing I like to recall Him saying in this sort of dialogue. It wasn't don't love someone if they have the same plumbing as you. It wasn't hate them, and remind the world at all times how awful they are in the eyes of God.
He said, "And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise." Luke 6:31
He was trying to tell us that the most important thing there is in life and in Heaven is to just be cool with one another, no matter what. Just do that. And if you can't, maybe you should question your faith rather than pass judgment on mine.
My apologies to everyone for rambling. I really am finished with this now.
|
|
I suggest this conversation end or move to another board. This is no longer a discussion about Pathfinder or roleplaying games. Consider this forewarning before we do anything more drastic.
Nothing would make me happier than if someone would get this back on track with the topic title, gushing about how "Sandpoint is Amazing."
I'm sorry about that. For the record, Sandpoint is amazing, and I can't wait to get a group together to run RotRL.
|
I'm glad that here in Belgium we left the thinking of tigger1tom in the dark ages where they belong and schools HAVE to teach that it is OK to be GAY! I went to a catholic school and they tought us tolerance, I'm sad to see that in some places in the US there is still this much bigotry. It's kinda sad that such people like him destroy your reputation in Europe.
Back to sandpoint, thank you for the gay paladin and I applaud you, Paizo, to dare to be different!
I have told students that, and I'll continue to. I've said that to students one-on-one, and I've said it in front of entire classrooms, both high school and college. I'll tell you why I do it-
It's okay to be gay.
Period. End of story.
Intolerant and possibly homophobic, though? That's a completely different story.
And just FYI, I'm not queer. I just have the good sense to understand that people are born that way and that there's nothing wrong with it (although even if it was a choice, it would still be a fine decision). I like to think that it's the way God made them. :)
Do you ever play devil's advocate? Or do you only push your own personal views on those that are in your class, unable to fully express dissent due to your power to effect their grades? Frankly the worst kind of teachers are those that use their position to promote what they view is appropriate morality on their students.
As an example, my wife is taking a class at a local community college. The teacher gave them cards with the start of a statement that they were suppose to finish. My wife's card said, "I am against the war because ..." The teacher did not even consider the fact that the person might not be against the war. My wife, who is a moderate like myself, fears pulling out because a huge ethnic cleansing might occur (you may call her stance cowardly for that), had to get creative in responding so as to be true to herself but also so as not to antagonize the instructor.
I am also a teacher, as you claim to be, and I have challenged students on both sides. Dogmatically making one claim merely because it is the "progressive" viewpoint is nor more valid than dogmatically making a claim for the "conservative" viewpoint. Reason and justification must be used, not just blindly following others (even if those others are instuctors that we respect).
This is flawed greatly. If you don't think gays are ok, put your kids in a religious private school
Discrimination? Children of those parents shouldn't be allowed to mix with other children?
Gay children and children of gay parents have the right to go school without being harassed. And the only way to keep them from getting beaten up constantly is to teach all the kids that there's nothing wrong with it. If they're constantly being told it's wrong and evil without an opposing viewpoint the gay children (and straight children of gay couples) are not going to be able to get their education in the safe environment they deserve.
How about we just teach kids that violence should not be used against anyone else just because you disagree with them? Why is it necessary to force acceptance when you could just force appropriate behaviour?
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
There we go with that sensitivity thing again! I will say this one more time, the Bible says homosexuality is an abomination in the eyes of God, so therefore, it is NOT OK TO BE GAY.
I don't remember the Bible being one of my textbooks in public school, though.
And for the record, like Larry Craig, I am NOT GAY, and I've NEVER BEEN GAY.*
--Erik
* I do, however, have a "wide stance."
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
Well, after just getting back from vacation, I found my Pathfinder waiting for me. As hard (read: painful) as it was to avoid downloading it before so I could read it in harcopy, I finally read through it today.
Getting back to the original topic of this thread, Sandpoint IS amazing. The whole damn thing is just so beautiful and well put together.
I could not be happier that I signed on for Pathfinder. Just f!%+ing brilliant you guys.
Really looking forward to more.
Wow...
...I can't wait to see what happens when "Hook Mountain Massacre" comes out. ;-)
Seriously though, to get back on topic...so long ago we were talking about Sandpoint being amazing, which is undoubtedly is. I love the details and genius James put into this city. It really comes alive.
I also find the diversity of the NPCs (many non-whites) to be truly awesome and I love their personalities and descriptions. A very refreshing city to kick off a campaign. Great stuff.
I'm so dejected, Mike.
:|
I had a gay cat once! Have you ever had a gay cat? I think cats like that gay thing, but without all that "agenda" stuff.
:)
I'm gonna go sing show tunes and have breakfast with my wife.
(confused?)
Wow...
I also find the diversity of the NPCs (many non-whites) to be truly awesome and I love their personalities and descriptions. A very refreshing city to kick off a campaign. Great stuff.
You know, one of the things I really regret about WOTC art is that there is a higher priority on making sure that red dragons look like the official 3.5 version of the creature than in trying to vary the humans and other races in the picture.
I wish once in a while some of the Forgotten Realms artwork reflected the descriptions of the various ethnicities. If you read through Races of Faerun, the place should look a lot more diverse than the artwork ever makes them look . . . I guess the pictures always depict Illuskans, Ffolk, or the like.
In other words, its not really the fault of the setting. The details are there. Its the fault of those that make the decision to not focus on those particular details, which is kind of sad.
Sorry, rant over. I definitely want to read through this thing now, but my FLGS didn't get any in.
The end part is true though. In ancient Israel, under Torah and the rest of the Old Testament, unruly children, adulterers, and homosexuals were stoned, as they are still today under the Koran in the Arab world, and 'witches' were burnt at the stake, and not so long ago I'll remind you.
Gee, we've never heard that before. What a lucid insight into this argument. You do know that neither the word (or a fair translation) of the word homosexual existed? Men who committed sodomy were stoned... they didn't have queers, then.
You are a real work, dude. What makes you think we want to listen to this crap, and when is this thread going to be locked? For heavens sake, Gary! You locked that thread when the guy wanted to start a protest again WotC after I suggested he immolate himself (come on, it WAS funny), but not this? Other than the ninja pirate stuff, nothing in this insane threadjack is anything even close to a reasonable or fair discussion, there is nothing to be learned here by anyone, just harmful self-righteousness.
Oh, and by the way, Sandpoint is fantastic!
And Mike, I still have a few friends I met studying English literature if you want to check out the Gay thing. Don't be afraid buddy!
|
|
I'm having fun there. In Sandpoint. I'm playing Hudak the Shoanti fighter, and I'm racking up goblin heads.
There's this grumpy dwarf I just met. He thinks he can whup me. Yeah, we'll see. I don't sweat that grisly grumpy bastich. With his "ogre hook." What even the hell is that? I got somethin' for his punk self.
He thinks he's bad cos he got a high initiative, and got the first kill of the campaign. I wish I was as proud of myself when I graduated from college as he was of hisself when he killed a measley goblin. A singing goblin. I hate goblins, and their nasty rat headed mutant dogs. And their putrid falsetto stupid dorky Barney the Dinosaur songs on crystal meth.
|
|
There we go with that sensitivity thing again! I will say this one more time, the Bible says homosexuality is an abomination in the eyes of God, so therefore, it is NOT OK TO BE GAY.I don't remember the Bible being one of my textbooks in public school, though.
And for the record, like Larry Craig, I am NOT GAY, and I've NEVER BEEN GAY.*
--Erik
* I do, however, have a "wide stance."
I have a "wide shadow", as in bow to stern, and not port to starboard, is that ok? :)
My lips are sealed on those other verboten statements.
Sandpoint IS awesome!!
|
|
he Bible does NOT say it is okay to be gay, it says that any man that lies with man is an abomination in the eyes of God.
Leviticus (from which you are paraphrasing) is part of the Mosaic Law--Gentiles (that is, non-Jews) are not bound by the Mosaic Law. Furthermore, it is hypocritical to suggest that people should be bound to a particular instance of Mosaic Law and ignore many others (like the Kashrut or keeping the Sabbath).
Yet again I am being teased by all these Pathfinder subscribers! It's not my fault that my FLGS needs my support to stay open (as I am constantly told by the grateful manager).
Stop the Sandpoint teasing (or try to say something negative to quieten my nerves).
Now I'll get a hoard of people telling me pointedly how brilliant it is ;-)
Well hopefully we will see more people of various "life styles" in various roles (good, bad, somewhere in between). It would be disappointing to only see some described in only one fashion or another.
I don't see a problem, if you don't like a particular idea, don't use it, simple.Quoted for truth.
Rune Scryber, you get a cookie.
Cookie, mmmm...
|
|
Man Paizo, you guys ARE awesome too, just like Sandpoint is.
Want me to tell you why? Huh? Huh? Becuz I've been a baaad, baaad, booyyy, and you guys just let me run with it!! Sorry if I pissed anyone off, but I was having sooooooo much fun;-) You see, I'm not gay either, BUT, I am bisexual ;-)
NOT!!! In all truth, I am a straight man that has been happily married to the same wonderful woman for 13 years next month. I have 31 wonderful children of the furry four legged variety that go meow, and yes, some of them are gay kitties:) Therefore any REAL opinion I have on the 'education system':), is moot, it doesn't affect me in the least way, (sorry about that IconoclasticScream, I WAS a bad boy for yanking your chain that way, I do give heartfelt apologies if I truly offended you)
Point being, why does everyone get so fired up about something someone says. A person can say anything, and it doesn't really matter in the big picture. Someone called someone disingenuous the other day, anyone and everyone can be that way on a board, and everyone is at one time or another in the real world. We say things to appease people that we don't wish to offend sometimes, and sometimes we nail them to the proverbial cross if we care nothing for them. Part, and I mean PART of what I said here, I believe is true, whether it is or not, in the end, is between me and God and no one else, and which parts I believe is my business and no one else's, you can guess if you wish, I don't care about that, we're all allowed our fantasies. If anyone ever actually READ ALL of my posts, they would note that I thought a gay Paladin is fine, after all, this is a fantasy world, if it is lawful in that fantasy world, which it is here, and the man is good, as Jasper most assuredly must be, so he would be LG! To compare real world morality to fantasy is a farce and should not be tried, after all, do you REALLY pray to Desna? I do actually have gay friends, and Wiccan friends as well, so those inclusions by Paizo into their AP were a brave bold statement that do not bother me in the least. THIS IS ONE AWESOME COMPANY WITH ONE AWESOME PRODUCT!!
I jumped in on this for 2 reasons, first, because absolutely everyone was jumping on pres-man and I didn't feel he should take ALL of that himself, though the way he stood by his principals, he could have handled that. Second, to remind everyone this is a FANTASY ROLEPLAYING GAME AND NOT REAL!!! Oh, there is a third, it was FUUUUUUNNNN!
BRING ON THE NINJAS WITH MOLTEN GLASS THONGS!!!
If anyone ever actually READ ALL of my posts, they would note that I thought a gay Paladin is fine, after all, this is a fantasy world, if it is lawful in that fantasy world, which it is here, and the man is good, as Jasper most assuredly must be, so he would be LG!
I think you are making a slight mistake here.. I think you mean it is legal, not lawful, something can be lawful and not be legal, just as it can legal but not lawful. What it means to be lawful is:
Lawful characters tell the truth, keep their word, respect authority, honor tradition, and judge those who fall short of their duties.
“Law” implies honor, trustworthiness, obedience to authority, and reliability. On the downside, lawfulness can include close-mindedness, reactionary adherence to tradition, judgmentalness, and a lack of adaptability.
Being a homosexual has nothing to do with any of those by default, either way. Though it is possible that it could in theory. For example homosexual behaviour could be thought of as disregardling traditional relational structure, thus it would not surprising to learn the most "conservative" family (LN) had problems with it. On the other hand it might be very traditional for paladins from a particular faith to be called who are homosexual, in that case it would be consistent with a lawful alignment.
|
|
If anyone ever actually READ ALL of my posts, they would note that I thought a gay Paladin is fine, after all, this is a fantasy world, if it is lawful in that fantasy world, which it is here, and the man is good, as Jasper most assuredly must be, so he would be LG!I think you are making a slight mistake here.. I think you mean it is legal, not lawful, something can be lawful and not be legal, just as it can legal but not lawful. What it means to be lawful is:
Being a homosexual has nothing to do with any of those by default, either way. Though it is possible that it could in theory. For example homosexual behaviour could be thought of as disregardling traditional relational structure, thus it would not surprising to learn the most "conservative" family (LN) had problems with it. On the other hand it might be very traditional for paladins from a particular faith to be called who are homosexual, in that case it would be consistent with a lawful alignment.Lawful characters tell the truth, keep their word, respect authority, honor tradition, and judge those who fall short of their duties.
“Law” implies honor, trustworthiness, obedience to authority, and reliability. On the downside, lawfulness can include close-mindedness, reactionary adherence to tradition, judgmentalness, and a lack of adaptability.
You are correct, there is a difference between legal and lawful. A prime example, don't get excited everyone, is gun control in this country. Congress passes laws to make it legal or illegal to own a gun. That is legal, but those very laws are not lawful because they violate the Constitution.
Oooo! Oooo! Let me start another flame war. Pathfinder totally blows Game Mastery modules out of the water.
I do find it a little odd that Sandpoint has an abortionist and a homosexual, but the continent itself has no humans that look like Asians or Africans. There are three races of Humans that look European, but none that look like the humans of other places. Maybe Paizo has an abortionist and a gay person on the payroll, but not an Asian or African-American?Actually... the sheriff of Sandpoint is black. And several of the characters in Burnt Offerings are Asian (the Kaijitsus, although in the art for Ameiko and Tsuto is kinda not easy to tell that). In fact, at current count, there's about 20 different ethnicities of humans in Golarion. So far, in Varisia, we've focused on three (Cheliaxian, Varisain, and Shoanti) but there's obviously more of them.
I've looked through the Player's Guide and was quite surprised to see that the Sheriff is black. I don't know how I missed that on the first pass through. The description of the Shoanti made me think that they were a sort of reddish color. Why are they described as ruddy complected if they're black?
|
|
I've looked through the Player's Guide and was quite surprised to see that the Sheriff is black. I don't know how I missed that on the first pass through. The description of the Shoanti made me think that they were a sort of reddish color. Why are they described as ruddy complected if they're black?
Could be (as I'm not in the know) that the Shoanti have a broader range of skin color. Sort of like the people of India (some are extremely dark, while others are much fairer). Say, Shoanti range from dark-skinned (like Hemlock) to possibly olive-skinned (like the Varisians--who are descended from the same stock), with "ruddy" in between and most common. Again, I just pulling possibilities out of my rear orifice so your guess is as good as mine.
Sandpoint is awesome. I loved the inlcusion of all the social variety available to a DM to use or ignore, as they wish. I think this is a great start to an excellent setting. Keep it up.
Oh great! Here we go again.
Could be (as I'm not in the know) that the Shoanti have a broader range of skin color. Sort of like the people of India (some are extremely dark, while others are much fairer). Say, Shoanti range from dark-skinned (like Hemlock) to possibly olive-skinned (like the Varisians--who are descended from the same stock), with "ruddy" in between and most common.
This is actually exactly the case. We'll talk a lot more about the Shoanti in Curse of the Crimson Throne, but what you're starting to see is that the Shoanti are not one cohesive race, but the different tribes have wide racial variations.
Weird, huh. I wonder why that might be. Keep tuning in to find out.
|
|
This is actually exactly the case. We'll talk a lot more about the Shoanti in Curse of the Crimson Throne, but what you're starting to see is that the Shoanti are not one cohesive race, but the different tribes have wide racial variations.Weird, huh. I wonder why that might be. Keep tuning in to find out.
well it seems somewhat obvious that if the shoanti are the descendants of the army for the Runemasters empire, they would have drawn troops from all over the continent and possibly farther afield, leading to their racial diversity. As the RMs were described they definitely seem the type that would be happy to import foreign mercenaries, for example. perhaps each tribe maps to an ancient unit of the army.
That all appears obvious, of course, unless I'm dead wrong. :)
Weird, huh. I wonder why that might be. Keep tuning in to find out.
“Hey Chavez, was it a mexican puttin' it to an injun or an injun puttin' it to a mexican?”
I'd always thought of classic adult themes as love, betrayal, revenge, difficult choices in a difficult situation, etc but what can you say, its their money.
If that is the definition, then Disney has been making classic adult themed animated films for years.
If that is the definition, then Disney has been making classic adult themed animated films for years.
Why should that be surprising to you, I know lots of adults that enjoy disney films.
|
Creative Director
|
I guess I disagree with Erik and James about where they ought to go in terms of what our society views as "adult" themes. I'd always thought of classic adult themes as love, betrayal, revenge, difficult choices in a difficult situation, etc but what can you say, its their money.
Actually... love, betrayal, revenge, and difficult choices in difficult situations are very much present in Pathfinder and in Rise of the Runelords.
|
|
Actually... love, betrayal, revenge, and difficult choices in difficult situations are very much present in Pathfinder and in Rise of the Runelords.
Nualia and Tsuto's stories are both very much good examples of that. Just gotta find ways to get those stories out to the players so they know why what happened happened.
You know.. if it were girl on girl action.. there wouldn't be so much talking about it right now... on second thought.. When will there be some girl on girl action in Pathfinder? :)
See, this is what I don't understand. Why do people NEED the editors and folks to tell them they can have characters act in certain fashions (girl-on-girl if you want)? Heck there are 40 named NPCs without any indication as to their "preferences" to the 20 named NPCs whose "preferences" could be reasonably derived (this includes married individuals, but as we all know being married doesn't really prove anything). If you want the dwarf locksmith to be a bit of a "bear", go for it. If you want a lady to also get to pet the Pixie's Kitten besides just the sheriff, who is stopping you.
There is a lot of wonderful stuff here, alot of it doesn't even need to be "changed" because the details are not defined to begin with, the details only need to be expanded. Unless there is a plot reason, that is probably best.
This is actually exactly the case. We'll talk a lot more about the Shoanti in Curse of the Crimson Throne, but what you're starting to see is that the Shoanti are not one cohesive race, but the different tribes have wide racial variations.Weird, huh. I wonder why that might be. Keep tuning in to find out.
well it seems somewhat obvious that if the shoanti are the descendants of the army for the Runemasters empire, they would have drawn troops from all over the continent and possibly farther afield, leading to their racial diversity. As the RMs were described they definitely seem the type that would be happy to import foreign mercenaries, for example. perhaps each tribe maps to an ancient unit of the army.
That all appears obvious, of course, unless I'm dead wrong. :)
A point of order, if you'll forgive my killing catgirls?
It's worth remembering that Thassilon fell TEN THOUSAND YEARS AGO. Magic is the only reason any trace of the empire survives at all.
Ten thousand years is more than enough time for a people to evolve entirely new "racial" traits. There's no reason at all that Shoanti or Varisians should look remotely like their Thassilonian ancestors, and many reasons why they shouldn't. In fact, across ten thousand years, there's no particular reason why the people living in Varisia now should be more than tangientially related to the old Thassilonians -- how many migrations could have swept the region, in more time than all of human civilization on Earth?
So, attempting to get back on topic, I think that Paizo did a great job of creating a realistic town that PCs are likely to enjoy hanging out in and making their base of operations. And hopefully, the PCs won't feel "rail-roaded" into defending the town - they will do it out of a mixture of affection for the town itself as well as genuine self interest.
I almost feel bad that I didn't post all weekend after helping to "instigate" the discussion somewhat. Took a while to skim the 150+ new posts that showed up!
I have not read the new pathfinder. However I think it is good to have complex characters in the game. Any DM Worth his/her salt would know what topics he/she can cover with the group. Furthermore any Christian should be able to look at these characters and see a great opportunity for roleplay and art reflecting the world in which we live. Finally any christian DM would be able to use these characters to teach about the situations.
No one likes abortion, especially those that perform them. Imagine a quest that leads to a "rod of womb moving." When there is an at risk pregnancy that could threaten the life of the mother, rather than terminating the life of the child the rod moves it to another willing surrogate. This is fantasy after all. Why should the choice even have to be made? It is a magic item that would not have much use in combat and so could be fairly easy to get.
As for a gay couple, a christian group under a good DM should have no problem with this. The PCs are probably not perfect flowers either and so it could provide a good lesson about looking at your own faults before calling attention to others. In the real world no sin is worse than any other, so this presents lots of space for RP.
In this I think that as a christian I would be more interested in Pathfinder adventures than I was previously.
Go Paizo!
In the real world no sin is worse than any other, so this presents lots of space for RP.
I might as well go out and commit the others then.
No one likes abortion, especially those that perform them. Imagine a quest that leads to a "rod of womb moving."
Wow, a magic item solution. Now that's thinking "outside the box." You don't even need a willing participant. Just geas a healthy gal with sturdy hips. (oops, sorry, that wouldn't be nice) Better to build a magic portable womb.
I agree that most people would describe abortion as distasteful (at a minimum). The best solution to an unplanned pregnancy is to not have one in the first place. But people do jerky and irresponsible things to and with each other all the time. Over the years I've known some real world people who faced the issue, and they made different choices. It's a bad situation for anyone to be in.
But I don't personally think it's bad enough to push someone's alignment (either the provider or patient), because I think that there are worse things going on in the world. So I personally thought folks were being a bit harsh on the herbalist (and Paizo). I think someone who habitually breaks traffic laws by speeding and running red lights in their big SUV is more deserving of an alignment shove towards neutral. There's not much of a D&D equivalent for that, but whatever.
I don't really agree when you say "no sin is worse than any other." I'm guessing you mean that from a "theological" point of view, which is fine. But I think most people internally order trasgressions from bad to worse, and everyone is probably a little bit different in how they look at it.
So anyway, Sandpoint is amazing because they have an extra healer type who isn't directly associated with the temple and the major religions of the town. Someone who is discreet and non-judgemental. When someone is in pain, she tries to help. Nothing wrong with that, in my opinion.
But obviously, any time you see something that makes you uncomfortable, it's easy enough to take it out. I think it's more important that the town have an extra NG healer "downtown", than having her provide a servicer you disagree with.
There's a bit of a theme going in Sandpoint and Pathfinder that too much "passion" can get you into trouble. I mean passion in a very general sense. If you start getting worked up about something, you're more likely to start heading towards one of the "seven deadly sins". And then things have a tendancy to go badly for you in a dramatic fashion.
Sandpoint is also amazing because Hannah's is right across Hook Street (ha ha!) from the Pixie's Kitten. It's so convenient!