|
So I am not really playing D&D, unless when my character kills someone, I stop the game and put in tape of Faces of Death, so that I, the player, get a chance to try and experience what the character is?
ummm ... that's not what Planar Chicken Shepard was saying in the slightest. the point he was making was that in the course of game play, the PCs in many if not most games commit acts that, in the real world, would be deemed unacceptable. That being the case, why is there such a big deal being made of a FICTIONAL ACCOUNT of what, in real life, would be unacceptable acts?
The players are not the characters, the characters experience horrible things, does that mean the players need to be subjected to them as well in all their graphic detail?
The players are subjected to what YOU, as DM, deem to pass on to them. If you feel the descriptions are fine as written, pass them on verbatim. If not, then it is part of your duty as DM to pass on the information in a manner that you or your players would consider acceptable.
Heck, why stop there. Somebody's character gets hit, why not punch them in the face so they can have a sense of what their character is experience.
Again, not what PCS was saying. He (or she) never said that one should recreate the actions taken in game in RL.
The game is not a reality simulator, if you want that, play a video game (oh yes I did go there). Mechanics are abstract, combat is abstract, why shouldn't the messiness of the combat be abstract. I bet if players actually had to experience all of the sensations of true combat in order to play D&D,...
The game is as much a "reality simulator" as you and your players want to make it. If you want to deal with the entire game play in abstractions, then that is your prerogative. If my players and I want to add that extra level of realism to the game play, that is ours. It is all a matter of choice; telling one or the other that they are wrong in their play style is ludicrous.
|
Good conversation. Lots of different perspectives being offered up, which I think is healthy.
In my opinion, this is PG13 stuff, and I am thankful that the Paizo crew is not trying to water it down, or put a corny label on the cover.
I liked Pathfinder 1 a lot. I thought that is was a good introduction module. Yeah, one could argue that a couple of the scenes were a little over the top, but they are easily controled (or omitted) by the DM. My personal thought is that goblins are nasty little creatures. I am not interested in smurfy pathetic goblins. I want them to have a bit of a dark feel to them, otherwise they become sort of boring. I really like the flavor that Paizo has given them
I liked the gothic horror feel of Pathfinder 2. I am a big fan of Ravenloft, so this one was right up my alley. In my opinion, they should have given it have more of a gothic horror feel (less slasher stuff, more gothic). However, I can work with it. The house is great!
Patherfinder 3 was a bit different. The Grauls are a bit over the top, and have an icky feel to them. I do believe that is what Nick was trying to achieve, and he did that. But once you get past that, the rest of the module is very straight forward, and not really that bad. The fort assault and the dam battles are very kewl.
Overall, I like the dark direction that the Paizo is going in. I think that there could have been a lot more gore and other things, but that would have been a bit too cheesey. Keep it dark, but keep it in the PG13/R range and it will be fine. I don't want PG modules, as that feels too watered down. I think the art work is solid, and I have not seen anything that is too overboard. The Mammy pic is questionable, but I have seen worse in other RPG books (including WotC). I definitely do not want to see adult pics in the pages, as that takes away from the adventure path.
PS..talk about nasty little creatures...a smurf has taken over my avatar..maybe they are worse than goblins...
I find it interesting that the first Pathfinder went out of its way to point out that an event involving a goblin was rather horrific and maybe not everyones cup tea. It suggested alternatives and handled the possible impact well.
Fast forward to ogre rapists, incest, and more. Lots of warning. Everything all up front.
There's a bit of assumption there... that most readers of Pathfinder will start at "Burnt Offerings," and therefore will see the sidebar about face eating.
And my foreword in Pathfinder 3 pretty much does the same thing as that sidebar from Pathfinder 1, letting you know that there's some heavy stuff coming up.
Thank you for your response to my post, James. It was mostly a counterpoint to Steve Greer's silly post just above it in the thread.
I'm sorry, but I don't think your foreword does that same thing at all. The sidebar gives specific advice on what can be done about the heavy stuff coming up. The foreword is just you crowing about how twisted the first draft of P3 was and that you had to tone it down for publication. That's not the same thing. It's not even close.
So when you said this as one of the three reasons so many iconics were female, you were kidding?Nope! Absolutely not! Females on covers do help sell products.
That wasn't the reason I chose to have 3 of our 4 iconics women, though. If that was my intention, they would have all been dressed like Seoni.
Yes, Merisiel and kyra's cover are makes them both look totally not hot. wink.
Sounds to me like the writers and editors of this particular adventure path, now no longer having to answer to WotC, and are acting like teenagers left home for a weekend while the parents are away. Overdoing it a bit. Just my two coppers.
Bandit of LV
Its probably worth pointing out that this particular adventure path is about Sin. Therefore it launches into the extreme at points, excess and unnatural obscene twists on violence and sex.
Now I wrote Edge of Anarchy for Curse of the Crimson Throne, and it contains material faaaaaar less gorey and sexual than Hook Mountain Massacre. Why? Cause it's a different adventure, with a different story, and different themes.
Creative Director
|
My grandmother would be shocked by this, but she was born in 1910.
My grandmother is actually the woman who introduced me to Dean Koontz, Stephen King, and Clive Barker ("You should read 'The Inhuman Condition,' it's better than Stephen King!). So that might explain a few things about me (and Pathfinder), I suppose! :)
Its probably worth pointing out that this particular adventure path is about Sin. Therefore it launches into the extreme at points, excess and unnatural obscene twists on violence and sex.Now I wrote Edge of Anarchy for Curse of the Crimson Throne, and it contains material faaaaaar less gorey and sexual than Hook Mountain Massacre. Why? Cause it's a different adventure, with a different story, and different themes.
It's also probably worth pointing out that this particular adventure path is first of the series. It has to introduce the world of Golarion as well as establish the direction of the series. Therefore when it launches into the extreme, excess and unnatural obscene twists on violence and sex, it seems like an odd choice of directions for a flagship production.
It's also probably worth pointing out that this particular adventure path is first of the series. It has to introduce the world of Golarion as well as establish the direction of the series. Therefore when it launches into the extreme, excess and unnatural obscene twists on violence and sex, it seems like an odd choice of directions for a flagship production.
Its probably worth pointing out that this particular adventure path is about Sin. Therefore it launches into the extreme at points, excess and unnatural obscene twists on violence and sex.Now I wrote Edge of Anarchy for Curse of the Crimson Throne, and it contains material faaaaaar less gorey and sexual than Hook Mountain Massacre. Why? Cause it's a different adventure, with a different story, and different themes.
Oh, its not like I think Paizo should avoid the kind of content in Pathfinder AT ALL, dopple, just letting you know now that all paths or adventures will be as gory or push-the-PG13-rating as Hook.
I think Rise of the Runelords is a pretty kickass flagship for a product line, and I think most people will agree with me (maybe not you and pres man though and that's your perogative). I was just letting you and others who found Hook "too extreme" that this isn't necessarily a trend that is going to continue to upswing, it just suits the themes of the wildly excellent storyline of Rise of the Runelords that James and the staff dreamed up.
Adventures set in ancient time need to have gore. It is a part of life for the adventurers.
What do you think happens when your fighter hits an enemy with his sword, there is going to be blood, there is going to be entrails, snd there is going to be agonising screams.
What do you think happens when you wizard casts fireball, there is going to be burning flesh, fat sizziling, and horrendous screams of pain form those not killed by the blast.
When your theif stabbs someone in the back, slides his blade deep into the kidney of an enemy, without his knowledge, taking the advantage of an unaware victim.
This list could go on. You characters are not playing with flowers. They are striking people/things with swords.
In a world that is overrun with demons, undead walk the lands to feast on the living and devils fornicate with mortals, why do you fret at something that actually "describes" what is going on. Seriously, if you dont like the idea of gore, you should really be playing "How the care bears saved christmas".
All these adventures are doing in actually realising the evil and depravity missing from villians.
So I am not really playing D&D, unless when my character kills someone, I stop the game and put in tape of Faces of Death, so that I, the player, get a chance to try and experience what the character is? That is ridiculous. The players are not the characters, the characters experience horrible things, does that mean the players need to be subjected to them as well in all their graphic detail? Heck, why stop there. Somebody's character gets hit, why not punch them in the face so they can have a sense of what their character is experience.
The game is not a reality simulator, if you want that, play a video game (oh yes I did go there). Mechanics are abstract, combat is abstract, why shouldn't the messiness of the combat be abstract. I bet if players actually had to experience all of the sensations of true combat in order to play D&D,...
And then your games would be?
Player #1: I rolled a 22.
DM: Hit
Player #1: I rolled 6 damage
DM: <eraser marks on NPC hit points> OK next.
Player #1: Is the creature still standing?
DM: <checks hit points> Yes.
Player #1: How does the creature look?
DM: Like an Ogre.
When I play my video games, I see heads explode, you can see guts burst out of their bodies, and their charred corpses collapsing onto the ground. They give off a gasp or a groan that sounds phlegmatic from the gore that pours into their throats. In some games, you can shoot the corpse on the ground again and see the corpse become more *desecrated*.
Video games where the villains harmlessly *poof* into non-existence are not enough for me.
When people face off in combat, just rolling die and saying "hit," "miss," "roll damage," "swings sword," etc. and then saying "dead" over and over again as the only means of description of the battle is anti-climactic and unimaginative. I need dash and splash and heroic actions as well as nefarious dirty deeds spilled out and spelled between me and players. Otherwise, might as well play online pool.
I think it's a far cry to say that wanting more description into the game thereby means that we want to enact live-action roleplaying with real weapons and actual, drunken, mud-wrestling and orgies. To describe how the villain backstabs someone does not mean that it's necessary to actually pull out a dagger and stab someone for an inept DM who fails to manage how to describe the scene in any way except real-life and literal.
|
|
Would the next yes-man who steps to Paizo's defense please explain how the picture of Mammy and the 2-3 pages (cumulative) of OTT...
So long as you want to be insulting I don't think anyone should even answer that request. EDIT: But Nick did a darn good job.
Let me, instead, express my thoughts on how you should go from here. They produced a product that a good many people obviously enjoy. You have expressed your concerns quite vocally now please vote with your money if you are really so insulted. Everyone has different levels of what is comfortable. Understand that and be comfortable with it. If RotRL does not make you happy I can confidently say Paizo produces a great deal of material that might be more to your liking. Quality material that might not offend you. They have such a diverse line you should find something you like. Perhaps even future installments will be more to your liking?
For my part, I cancelled my subscription not because of the content but because I had to re-evaluate my gaming budget. I had promised to review each installment seperately and purchase based on what I saw. I think, based on what I am reading here, that I will buy #2 and #3 to show Paizo that there are those of us that don't think edgy material = equals puerile thought.
Oh, I just have to know. This is a question to every parent I have seen complain that they can't bring product "x" into their home because they can't let their children see it. When does the desires of a parent overwhelm the desires of those who don't have children? I don't have to worry about what I have laying around my house. So please, explain to me why your opinion matters more? For that matter, don't you already have things in the house that you have to hide from the kids?
Oh, its not like I think Paizo should avoid the kind of content in Pathfinder AT ALL, dopple, just letting you know now that all paths or adventures will be as gory or push-the-PG13-rating as Hook.
I think Rise of the Runelords is a pretty kickass flagship for a product line, and I think most people will agree with me (maybe not you and pres man though and that's your perogative). I was just letting you and others who found Hook "too extreme" that this isn't necessarily a trend that is going to continue to upswing, it just suits the themes of the wildly excellent storyline of Rise of the Runelords that James and the staff dreamed up.
Nick, I think Rise of the Runelords is a pretty kickass flagship, too. I just think it could be better in spots and that the first part of the third book has a "giggling juvenile" approach to its subject matter. The first book was much more adult in how it presented its evil opponents. I subscribed to the series after buying and reading the first book. I even purchased the pdf so I could sneak read it on my work computer. The second was creepy as hell without being silly in its presentation. The third book is great in spots, and if you ignore the "immature mature" tone of the descriptions and backstory, it is quite a good romp all around. The teenage gross out factor seriously drains the credibility of the adventure when reading it. I will be able to filter it to non silly levels for my players when they get to it, but the whole section is like encountering stick figure flip-book animation in the middle of an expensive cgi movie. It may be good on its own and tell a great story, but it doesn't mesh well with the other high quality components and is lacking in substance when compared to them.
I've seen some of your other work (Library of Last Resort, especially), I know you can do great exposition in adventures. I just think you and your editor just really dropped the ball here. I realize that it's already published and you guys can't say anything other than that it's great work and exactly what you wanted to do all along (because you're selling it now), but I really wonder if two or three years from now we'll start seeing posts from you guys about how you wish that you had done things just a little bit differently.
I agree Nick! I am not just being a Paizo, or Nick Logue puppet in this either, before anyone detracts and starts giving me a hard time.
I like what has been published so far and will continue to do so I believe. Paizo has increased my respect for them in essentially jumping out and pushing the envelope in a way that usually isn't done in RPG. I could also direct any detractors to thinking that things like this has never been done before...well I direct you to look at White Wolf Publishing. The Vampire line in specific is (last edition mind you) filled with some books that were 18+ only sealed books. Namely 'Ghouls: Fatal addiction' and 'Clanbook: Tzimsce'. Both of these books are far far more disturbing than HMM. Don't believe me, check them out. Are they decryed as being horrible, by some folks I imagine in their time. However, since these books were designed for the people who played those sorts of characters there was a need to expand upon the intricacies of the Tzimisce practice of 'Fleshcrafting' and the extremes (huge extremes) that Ghouls will go to for continuing their existence (requiring amounts of vampiric vitae to continue their 'lives').
The context is all important in determining whether something is gratuitous or appropriate. This is, as Nick stated above, an AP about Sin and the extremes the Runelords and their minions operate for their Greed in this case. Saying that the disclaimers and warnings in the forewords were not enough is a poor excuse for not expecting what Paizo has given us. Would any of us really had been satisfied if an AP about Sin had been rated PG or even a strict PG-13? I think a loose PG-13 with some R involved is perfectly acceptable for a general audience of players in this case, especially knowing what this is about going into it.
Mature audiences are seeking usable, well written, well storied adventures. We don't need to have every imaginable atrocity spelled out to us because, unlike the teenagers, we read the newspapers, learned history in school, and are well aware of the pain and suffering men (or ogres) can inflict on their fellows.
Hmmm...sorry you didn't find Hook well written, well storied or usable. For the record though the atrocities of Hook are far from spelled out. Find one description of an "on screen" sex act or instance of violence (beyond the D&D norm) and show it to me. There is nothing in boxed text, in fact, NOTHING at all intended for player consumption that is R rated. The "atrocities" are implied in most cases. No where is written "as you open the door Mammy Graul is riding her undead son like a fat jubbly jockey in the race of her disgusting life."
I'd like to make a stronger point here though: The beautiful thing of a roleplaying game as a medium is that atrocities presented are not lumped on a passive viewer like so much garbage (as in newspapers, a text book, or for gods sake the nightly news) but rather the players as heroes, act against these atrocities. They can stop them. They can be sure they never happen again by punishing the monsters responsible. The ogres in Hook aren't there to make teenagers titter, they are there to be appalling so that when you take action against them and defeat them, you feel empowered and righteous as an individual. Because we can take action against a sea of troubles and end them. Not by killing ourselves like Hamlet was talking about, but by doing what we can to stop the horror of the modern world, by opposing war, child and domestic abuse, and other ills on society. To me that's what D&D is all about. That's why villains need to be villainous to inspire us to crush them, not just for more xp, but to save the world.
I feel that I was taken advantage of in two ways via HMM. First, the objectionable content. I can skim over and forget about that easily enough, however. Second, the *lack* of other useful content that could have been provided in its place.Would the next yes-man who steps to Paizo's defense please explain how the picture of Mammy and the 2-3 pages (cumulative) of OTT descriptive text is *better* than additional new monsters, more info about Varisia, a Hellknight PrC, suggestions for relating this adventure more closely to the overall story arc, relevant sidequests, NPCs in the town, or any of a number of other things the publishers could have put in its place.
You got all the awesome content you asked for, in fact you got the same amount of it or more in Hook than in the two Pathfinders before it. Bestiary: Six new monsters, just like last time. Information on Varisia, how about TWELVE full pages of it, and a Pathfinder Journal to boot to give more info on Golarion, relevant side quests: How about Skulls Crossing or the Flooding of Turtleback Ferry.
Sorry you found some of the material in Hook objectionable for your tastes but lets not pretend the entire edition was wasted on Mammy Graul post-snuff porn. Hope you find future installments more to your liking, my guess is you won't see anything as extreme as Hook Mountain anytime soon.
Hmmm...sorry you didn't find Hook well written, well storied or usable. For the record though the atrocities of Hook are far from spelled out. Find one description of an "on screen" sex act or instance of violence (beyond the D&D norm) and show it to me. There is nothing in boxed text, in fact, NOTHING at all intended for player consumption that is R rated. The "atrocities" are implied in most cases. No where is written "as you open the door Mammy Graul is riding her undead son like a fat jubbly jockey in the race of her disgusting life."
I think you're being disingenuous here. The DM is a player of the game, too, and has to read through all the stuff in there.
I am somewhat dismayed that the folks at Paizo are so disillusioned to think that the way to target a product towards "mature gamers" is to fill it with stuff that us older folks with kids don't want in our houses.
...Would you prefer a product targeted at "mature gamers" instead be filled with the exciting adventures of the PCs as they deal with exciting, mature themes like mortgage and refinancing? To put it simply, if you would feel comfortable leaving a product around your kids, then virtually by definition it's not intended solely for mature audiences. The way to target mature audiences is to use mature content, which is historically a list of sex and violence. Given that the Book of Erotic Fantasy had some really unbalanced material, I think it's perfectly reasonable for a product for mature gamers to have a bit of the old ultra-violence.
Frankly, I am insulted by this assumption that pandering to teenagers who sneak into R-rated movies demonstrates "maturity".
Frankly, I am insulted by this assumption that teenagers sneak into R-rated movies because they want to see t$+@ and explosions, and not a good movie which happens to be rated R.
I was seeking that before I qualified as a mature audience.
Mature audiences are seeking usable, well written, well storied adventures.
We don't need to have every imaginable atrocity spelled out to us because, unlike the teenagers, we read the newspapers, learned history in school, and are well aware of the pain and suffering men (or ogres) can inflict on their fellows.
I'm really beginning to question what you mean when you say "teenagers". You're really sounding not unlike a stereotypical cranky old man, and I fully expect your next post to talk about how when you were our age you had to walk ten miles uphill in the snow to play D&D and you liked it that way.
To add something positive to the discussion I suggest the following. The next time Paizo wants an adventure that makes people squeamish, take all the tasteless descriptions and put them in one sidebar on the last page as "DM suggestions". Then use the space saved elsewhere in the module to provide more useful information.
Better idea: the next time Paizo wants an adventure that doesn't make people squeamish, they won't say it's intended for mature audiences.
I feel that I was taken advantage of in two ways via HMM. First, the objectionable content. I can skim over and forget about that easily enough, however. Second, the *lack* of other useful content that could have been provided in its place.
Is this like the lack of content in each volume of Pathfinder being fewer than 200 pages? Perhaps you would also enjoy a study of the tax law of Varisia, the farming industry in the Velashu Uplands, and the bunion on James Jacobs's foot?
Would the next yes-man who steps to Paizo's defense please explain how the picture of Mammy and the 2-3 pages (cumulative) of OTT descriptive text is *better* than additional new monsters, more info about Varisia, a Hellknight PrC, suggestions for relating this adventure more closely to the overall story arc, relevant sidequests, NPCs in the town, or any of a number of other things the publishers could have put in its place.
Well, hate to tell you this, but that's not actually that much page space you're talking about there to begin with, and you're also chopping out most of the flavor text that gives the module its unique flavor. I'm sure you could cram a side quest in that space if you cut all the flavor out if it, too; of course, if you'd like your modules to be free of objectionable fluff, there's this module called "Monster Manual" you might be interested in.
I'm well aware that somewhere along the line there I just devolved into ad hominem arguments. I regret nothing; this is a situation where the rebuttal is more of a catharsis than an real attempt to convince anybody of anything.
On the subject of "Mature Content" stickers, I remind everybody of the Book of Vile Darkness and (for some reason) the Book of Exalted Deeds. These had such stickers. Also, please recall that when the BOVD came out there was a "sealed" section in an issue of Dragon. The content in both of these "Vile Darkness" sections never really struck me as all that mature; I remember there were "vile spells" which, in some cases, weren't vile at all. They were as evil as saying "Wooo! I'm a snake!" to somebody with a phobia of snakes. (The label on the BOED is still inexplicable.) My point is this: if you put a "mature content" sticker on something, you're setting a fairly high bar for how mature your content is. How high is that bar? Well, none of the "Saw" or "Hostel" movies are rated NC-17, so that might be an indication.
Just another point real quick: Shakespeare's plays are filled with gratuitous and often obscene violations of women and men, both sexual and otherwise. Do you really not want kids reading Shakespeare.
BTW: Not likening myself to Shakespeare by the way...I'd never do that. Just saying the content is the same level of "extreme" in Titus or Macbeth as it is Hook Mountain Massacre...and Shakespeare its all shown on stage.
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Some uptight comments and attacks at people who disagreed with him, dissmissing them as fanboys (except not using that phrase, probably because the post was apparently written in 1953 by Ward Cleaver, prior to the invention of that term, and left for someone to discover and post on the internet later).
Think of the children! Won't somebody think of the children!
I think you're being disingenuous here. The DM is a player of the game, too, and has to read through all the stuff in there.Hmmm...sorry you didn't find Hook well written, well storied or usable. For the record though the atrocities of Hook are far from spelled out. Find one description of an "on screen" sex act or instance of violence (beyond the D&D norm) and show it to me. There is nothing in boxed text, in fact, NOTHING at all intended for player consumption that is R rated. The "atrocities" are implied in most cases. No where is written "as you open the door Mammy Graul is riding her undead son like a fat jubbly jockey in the race of her disgusting life."
Wow, being disingenuous wasn't my goal doppleganger, sorry about that. Maybe it would help if you provided me with some examples of what you find objectionable, cause frankly I don't see what the big deal is. Where are all these specific instances of rape described in ghastly detail. I can't find them.
(James got all of them) ;-)
My grandmother would be shocked by this, but she was born in 1910.
My grandmother is actually the woman who introduced me to Dean Koontz, Stephen King, and Clive Barker ("You should read 'The Inhuman Condition,' it's better than Stephen King!). So that might explain a few things about me (and Pathfinder), I suppose! :)
Cool, I haven't cracked Barker since I read Imajica--I'll check that out. As for King and Koontz, I think I've read it all.
(James got all of them) ;-)
You sick puppy.
[later, in private]
Pssst! Nick! More, we want more dude!
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
What we need here is government action. That way, someone will protect me from that terrible man, Nick Logue, and all his dirty evil thoughts. I can't handle the responsibility of choosing the type of entertainment products I like, won't someone do it for me!
Or, everyone should just admit that my opinion is correct, and that anyone who thinks otherwise has a deviant/immature mind. For shame, you sickos, for shame.
What we need here is government action. That way, someone will protect me from that terrible man, Nick Logue, and all his dirty evil thoughts. I can't handle the responsibility of choosing the type of entertainment products I like, won't someone do it for me!
Or, everyone should just dmit that my opinion is correct, and that anyone who thinks otherwise has a deviant/immature mind. For shame, you sickos, for shame.
Think of the children, Sebastian! Won't you think of the children!
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Think of the children, Sebastian! Won't you think of the children!
Get an avatar you deviant.
Just in case:
Meant as a joke.
Edit:
But seriously, only the trolls don't have avatars. You don't want to be mistaken for a troll do you?
Edit 2:
Dear god, wtf is that avatar. I changed my mind. Go back to no avatar.
Sounds to me like the writers and editors of this particular adventure path, now no longer having to answer to WotC, and are acting like teenagers left home for a weekend while the parents are away. Overdoing it a bit. Just my two coppers.
Bandit of LV
Funny you should say that. I cancelled my subscription to Dragon Magazine soon after the "Warriors Kick Ass" cover. Was I offended at the word "ass"? No not really. But the presence of that statement on the cover illustrated beyond any shadow of doubt that the publishers were targeting teenage Beavises and Buttheads trying to decide whether to spend their $5 allowance on Dragon or Playboy.
I am somewhat dismayed that the folks at Paizo are so disillusioned to think that the way to target a product towards "mature gamers" is to fill it with stuff that us older folks with kids don't want in our houses. Frankly, I am insulted by this assumption that pandering to teenagers who sneak into R-rated movies demonstrates "maturity".
Mature audiences are seeking usable, well written, well storied adventures. We don't need to have every imaginable atrocity spelled out to us because, unlike the teenagers, we read the newspapers, learned history in school, and are well aware of the pain and suffering men (or ogres) can inflict on their fellows.
To add something positive to the discussion I suggest the following. The next time Paizo wants an adventure that makes people squeamish, take all the tasteless descriptions and put them in one sidebar on the last page as "DM suggestions". Then use the space saved elsewhere in the module to provide more useful information.
I feel that I was taken advantage of in two ways via HMM. First, the objectionable content. I can skim over and forget about that easily enough, however. Second, the *lack* of other useful content that could have been provided in its place.
Would the next yes-man who steps to Paizo's defense please explain how the picture of Mammy and the 2-3 pages (cumulative) of OTT...
Before I was a teenager, I've been keenly interested in current events, history, and lived in a family that shared pain and suffering along with the love. I think it's ignorant to assume that magically by 18 and ready to join the military and vote, that teenagers are, by definition, wearing blinders about all else in the world except for their Disneyland perfect lives. IF they are pure, chaste, and innocent . . . good for them, but I doubt they can balance a checkbook when mommy and daddy kick them out of the house when they hit adulthood.
I dare ask you to point out where Pathfinder #3 actually spells out *all* atrocities. It suggests, but what we do see is par for the course for any D&D game I've ever been in since I was 17 (EDIT: Damn, Nick beat me to it. Maybe if I typed faster than 47 wpm!). It's certainly tamer than any poem I've written or image drawn before then. At school, we learned about reading books such as Crime and Punishment, in history, we were given excerpts from the book Bloods: An Oral History of the Vietnam War by Black Veterans, we learned how King Richard the Lionhearted had slaughtered every man, woman, and child who was Christian but looked Muslim since they had dark skin and didn't speak English, we could see the Berlin wall fall, we saw how the tanks poured through Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 and I learned how the man who stood up to the tanks was later abducted and *disappeared*, I read about graphic scenes in Where the Red Fern Grows and family strife in Across Five Aprils, I studied Aztec sacrifices in National Geographic. I must have seen se7en too many times to count. As I hit 12, I watched the Excorcist. I knew that Vlad the Impaler, impaled people alive. The Zulus did likewise as well as open dying corpses bodies with their spears to release dead spirits. The scalping by Native Americans merely mirrored the practice from Europeans. The Bible alone has incest, murder, genocide, infidelity, war, rape, spilling out the bellies of pregnant women by invaders, child sacrifice, and I bet you'll find that book in homes with children.
I don't see how the image of Mammy could be seen as controversial. When facing down the BBEG of the area, I think it's an excellent choice to include a handy picture for the players. If it was all text and no pictures, I'd find the AP's boring. It would be dreadfully dry otherwise.
|
Damn. This thread's getting ugly.
I just want to make sure the editors and authors don't get the feeling that everyone was offended by HMM. I may well change parts of the adventure for my players to suit their tolerance level for gore. That's really the DMs job - to know their audience and adapt the story to the crowd - right? If the gore is dialed up too high for you or your group - don't put it on the table. It's really that easy. This adventure path is about sin magic at it's core. You have to expect an exploration into dark themes.
The picture of Mammy Graul was revolting, and not because of a nasty nipple profile. There's nothing inherently wrong with nipples. Two of my best friends are nipples.
Huge obese canabilistic pale-grey gap-toothed hillbilly women are disgusting. The picture conveys that. And because of the picture, I will keep this volume up on my shelf, out of the reach of my children, just like the past two volumes - Burnt Offerings pg.29 and Skinsaw pg.39 are just as bad in my mind as far as young children are concerned. It'll be right next to the LOTR movies, Band of Brothers, Dungeon Magazine, Bull Durham, my Metallica collection, and everything else I can think of that my kids shouldn't see or hear yet.
I dare ask you to point out where Pathfinder #3 actually spells out *all* atrocities. It suggests, but what we do see is par for the course for any D&D game I've ever been in since I was 17.
The adventure is specific on some atrocities. The female ogrekin's lovers for one, the lead ogre's method of maintaining discipline for another. I won't quote actual portions of the book, but the Beavis and Butthead level stuff is in there. Just because women f*&+ing their children and men raping their siblings are par for the course in the D&D games you've played since you were 17 is not reason enough for me to find such things okay in a product for which I'm paying good money.
I don't see how the image of Mammy could be seen as controversial. When facing down the BBEG of the area, I think it's an excellent choice to include a handy picture for the players. If it was all text and no pictures, I'd find the AP's boring. It would be dreadfully dry otherwise.
It's controversial because it has a bare boob in it. For some people that's a big deal. Just like for some people eating pork is a big deal or getting the biggest slice of cake is a big deal or whatever. Just because that bare boob doesn't bother you in the least, and you can see a whole lot more than a single, unsightly bare boob on cable or the internet doesn't mean that that bare boob is not upsetting to other people. Game art is commissioned ahead of time. It's pretty easy to tell the artist "no nipple slips". That's far from the same thing as all text and no pictures. It doesn't make an AP boring or dreadfully dry to not have exposed female nipples on display in it.
It's controversial because it has a bare boob in it. For some people that's a big deal. Just like for some people eating pork is a big deal or getting the biggest slice of cake is a big deal or whatever. Just because that bare boob doesn't bother you in the least, and you can see a whole lot more than a single, unsightly bare boob on cable or the internet doesn't mean that that bare boob is not upsetting to other people. Game art is commissioned ahead of time. It's pretty easy to tell the artist "no nipple slips". That's far from the same thing as all text and no pictures. It doesn't make an AP boring or dreadfully dry to not have exposed female nipples on display in it.
I don't see how the image of Mammy could be seen as controversial. When facing down the BBEG of the area, I think it's an excellent choice to include a handy picture for the players. If it was all text and no pictures, I'd find the AP's boring. It would be dreadfully dry otherwise.
I adore your new avatar!!
If they find a boob controversial, I assume they didn't bathe with their children, then?? I assume that when walking around that when they see a mother breastfeeding her child, or a father changing diapers, that parents scream and cover their children' eyes? When going to the museum, they stay clear of the Italian masters? If parents give the impression that the human body is vile, then the children grow up thinking they are vile.
Personally, I find amusing how people will find nudity controversial but not obesity.
It may bear mentioning that Mamma Graul being exposed very specifically implies a complete lack of shame. That seems to be exactly within context considering her reprihensible actions, doesn't it?
She just plain doesn't care what other folks think of her, her actions, what she does, her sadism, etc. Why should she give a single damn about herself being exposed? Its merely another tool to impress the nature of this creature on the players and PCs.
Oh...and well said DarkArt.
It may bear mentioning that Mamma Graul being exposed very specifically implies a complete lack of shame. That seems to be exactly within context considering her reprehensible actions, doesn't it?
She just plain doesn't care what other folks think of her, her actions, what she does, her sadism, etc. Why should she give a single damn about herself being exposed? Its merely another tool to impress the nature of this creature on the players and PCs.
Oh...and well said DarkArt.
Your comment and Mammy's image reminds me of a co-worker I once had the utmost displeasure in working with. (shudders) I don't think she knew about the concept of running water combined with soap. She took the Atkins diet to an extreme of really eating *all the fat* she could.
Oh, and Thank You, Yasha.
I adore your new avatar!!
Thanks! Sebastian pointed out that I didn't have one. I hadn't noticed.
If they find a boob controversial, I assume they didn't bathe with their children, then?? I assume that when walking around that when they see a mother breastfeeding her child, or a father changing diapers, that parents scream and cover their children' eyes? When going to the museum, they stay clear of the Italian masters? If parents give the impression that the human body is vile, then the children grow up thinking they are vile.Personally, I find that nudity being controversial while obesity is not rather amusing.
That's my exact point. Just because you don't agree with something being upsetting to people doesn't mean it is not upsetting to people. and for what it's worth, I know people who:
1) Refuse to let fathers bath their infant children or change girls diapers.
2) Literally do run red faced and sweating from mothers breastfeeding in public, complete with covering childrens faces and lifting them up and running with them.
3) Stay away from possible nude statues and/or petitioning the museum in question to either cover up exposed genitalia on statues or place the statues in such a way that the exposed genitalia cannot be seen without walking around the room to an exact angle.
They're normal looking people, too. You couldn't pick them out of a crowd without showing the crowd a nude photo and checking to see who runs.
One specific person from this category LOVED the movie 300. He raved about it for hours. Every now and then he would point out that the only bad part of the movie was the oracle scene. The bare nipples were so offensive to him that he almost left the theater. He was talked into staying by the other people in his party, who promised him that they would leave with him if another bare nipple was seen. He had no problem with bare man butts or a clothed sex scene. It was the actual nipple being shown that set him off.
|
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
It's controversial because it has a bare boob in it. For some people that's a big deal. Just like for some people eating pork is a big deal or getting the biggest slice of cake is a big deal or whatever. Just because that bare boob doesn't bother you in the least, and you can see a whole lot more than a single, unsightly bare boob on cable or the internet doesn't mean that that bare boob is not upsetting to other people. Game art is commissioned ahead of time. It's pretty easy to tell the artist "no nipple slips". That's far from the same thing as all text and no pictures. It doesn't make an AP boring or dreadfully dry to not have exposed female nipples on display in it.
I don't see how the image of Mammy could be seen as controversial. When facing down the BBEG of the area, I think it's an excellent choice to include a handy picture for the players. If it was all text and no pictures, I'd find the AP's boring. It would be dreadfully dry otherwise.
I adore your new avatar!!
If they find a boob controversial, I assume they didn't bathe with their children, then?? I assume that when walking around that when they see a mother breastfeeding her child, or a father changing diapers, that parents scream and cover their children' eyes? When going to the museum, they stay clear of the Italian masters? If parents give the impression that the human body is vile, then the children grow up thinking they are vile.
Personally, I find amusing how people will find nudity controversial but not obesity.
Plus they don't have a problem with Peter Griffin, who is pretty much a small scale Mammy in terms of body form.
That's my exact point. Just because you don't agree with something being upsetting to people doesn't mean it is not upsetting to people. and for what it's worth, I know people who:
1) Refuse to let fathers bath their infant children or change girls diapers.
2) Literally do run red faced and sweating from mothers breastfeeding in public, complete with covering childrens faces and lifting them up and running with them.
3) Staying away from possible nude statues and/or petitioning the museum in question to either cover up exposed genitalia on statues or place the statues in such a way that the exposed genitalia cannot be seen without walking around the room to an exact angle.They're normal looking people, too. You couldn't pick them out of a crowd without showing the crowd a nude photo and checking to see who runs.
I never met anyone who fits to the above three descriptions. I must live a sheltered life.
That's my exact point. Just because you don't agree with something being upsetting to people doesn't mean it is not upsetting to people. and for what it's worth, I know people who:
1) Refuse to let father bath their infant children or change girls diapers.
2) Literally do run red faced and sweating from mothers breastfeeding in public, complete with covering childrens faces and lifting them up and running with them.
3) Staying away from possible nude statues and/or petitioning the museum in question to either cover up exposed genitalia on statues or place the statues in such a way that the exposed genitalia cannot be seen without walking around the room to an exact angle.They're normal looking people, too. You couldn't pick them out of a crowd without showing the crowd a nude photo and checking to see who runs.
Well, yes, I understand your point. I can absolutely imagine such people, and I've met a few. I have a liberal bent.
I just wonder when they think the right time is for their children to see nudity. I'm sure their answer lies somewhere between *40 years old* and *never.* Knowing up front that Pathfinder is not Peter Pan, this is why I can't picture these same people liking the AP's. If they don't like it, why would they buy it? There's plenty of Hasbro toys out there with lots of parent labels all over them about appropriate age groups.
Damn. This thread's getting ugly.
I just want to make sure the editors and authors don't get the feeling that everyone was offended by HMM. I may well change parts of the adventure for my players to suit their tolerance level for gore. That's really the DMs job - to know their audience and adapt the story to the crowd - right? If the gore is dialed up too high for you or your group - don't put it on the table. It's really that easy. This adventure path is about sin magic at it's core. You have to expect an exploration into dark themes.
The picture of Mammy Graul was revolting, and not because of a nasty nipple profile. There's nothing inherently wrong with nipples. Two of my best friends are nipples.
Huge obese canabilistic pale-grey gap-toothed hillbilly women are disgusting. The picture conveys that. And because of the picture, I will keep this volume up on my shelf, out of the reach of my children, just like the past two volumes - Burnt Offerings pg.29 and Skinsaw pg.39 are just as bad in my mind as far as young children are concerned. It'll be right next to the LOTR movies, Band of Brothers, Dungeon Magazine, Bull Durham, my Metallica collection, and everything else I can think of that my kids shouldn't see or hear yet.
Amen, Luke, amen.
I think possibly this hullabaloo started with James' forward to HMM, in which he stated that he had toned the adventure down from what was originally written. I think that the evil described in the previous adventures and then in this one (especially with the Grauls) already had pushed the envelope of some people's comfort zone. Then between the forward and the discussion here on the boards of a "Director's Cut" of HMM, I think that might have pushed the issue of the gore/violence level to the forefront in people's minds: "Wait...you mean it gets worse???" Combined that with today's trend of sick twisted "torture porn" movies, I think it was a valid question to raise. Unfortunately the thread has devolved into almost personal attacks against Nicholas, which I'm sorry to see.
Its like the famous definition of regular (sexual) porn - "I can't define it, but I know it when I see it". Torture porn is the same way, I can't necessarily define it, but I know it when I see it. The Pathfinder adventures aren't it.
Plus they don't have a problem with Peter Griffin, who is pretty much a small scale Mammy in terms of body form.
The people I'm talking about don't watch Family Guy.
I never met anyone who fits to the above three descriptions. I must live a sheltered life.
Come to Louisiana. I'll show you whole subdivisions of them.
Well, yes, I understand your point. I can absolutely imagine such people, and I've met a few. I have a liberal bent.I just wonder when they think the right time is for their children to see nudity. I'm sure their answer lies somewhere between *40 years old* and *never.* Knowing up front that Pathfinder is not Peter Pan, this is why I can't picture these same people liking the AP's. If they don't like it, why would they buy it? There's plenty of Hasbro toys out there with lots of parent labels all over them about appropriate age groups.
The more of them that do buy Pathfinder, the more successful it will be and the longer it will last. And the more quality cool adventures I will have in my collection (greed is my sin). If I have to forgo nipple shots and necrophilic incestuous ogres to get that to happen, well, I don't really see a loss in quality there. I'm not saying water it down to nothing or strip all mention of sex or violence from it, just be a little more discerning of where and how they are used.
|
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
The people I'm talking about don't watch Family Guy.
Plus they don't have a problem with Peter Griffin, who is pretty much a small scale Mammy in terms of body form.
Yeah, I figured that. I was just saying that Peter pretty much has the boob thing going on, and on public television, no less. Plus he's been shown completely naked several times.
Granted, he's so fat that you can't see anything aside from manboob, gut, and ass, but STILL...
NINJA EDIT!: Actually, now that I think of it, this helps not at all. Huh.
Come to Louisiana. I'll show you whole subdivisions of them.
I've been to New Orleans several times. Lovely place.
The more of them that do buy Pathfinder, the more successful it will be and the longer it will last. And the more quality cool adventures I will have in my collection (greed is my sin). If I have to forgo nipple shots and necrophilic incestuous ogres to get that to happen, well, I don't really see a loss in quality there.
You let the incredibly competent and all-around-dazzling Josh Frost worry about selling Pathfinder my friend. From what I understand he's doing an amazing job...course I think the book also goes a long way to selling itself. I think you have nothing to worry about doppelganger.
I've been to New Orleans several times. Lovely place.
Researching sin, no doubt! I'd hesitate to call it a lovely place, depending on your definition of lovely, of course.
You let the incredibly competent and all-around-dazzling Josh Frost worry about selling Pathfinder my friend. From what I understand he's doing an amazing job...course I think the book also goes a long way to selling itself. I think you have nothing to worry about doppelganger.
Needlessly antagonizing members of an already small market is (almost) never a good thing. I have to say that I was quite heartened by the release of the Pathfinder schedule so far into the future.
Being over 18, I don't need someone else telling me what to buy or not, or presume to let me know what I find offensive.
True, but it would be nice to know there might be something you'd find disconcerting (or in someone else’s case, captivating) inside before grabbing it off the shelf in a B&N.
The titles of the Pathfinder modules do a fair job of indicating the subject matter might be more mature, but I think a little more as far as “fair warning” might not be unreasonable.
Even a little black text line on the bottom of the cover that says, “Intended for 13 and up” says to me, “Hey, I ought to read this thing through first, so I can see if there are any parts we need to talk about before or after the fact.” It doesn’t say, no way in heck am I going to buy my kid this product as much as, “This might be an eye opening experience, and it would be good to read it together, so they don’t get the idea that cutting people apart is sweet!”
Someone else in the household can say, “Hey, you left your Pathfinder lying around, can you shelve it so Dave’s kid doesn’t pick it up?” without even knowing what’s inside.
I’m fine with including material in Pathfinder that pushes against the barriers of contemporary social mores, but if you do design a product for more emotionally mature players, don’t equivocate.
Needlessly antagonizing members of an already small market is (almost) never a good thing. I have to say that I was quite heartened by the release of the Pathfinder schedule so far into the future.
You let the incredibly competent and all-around-dazzling Josh Frost worry about selling Pathfinder my friend. From what I understand he's doing an amazing job...course I think the book also goes a long way to selling itself. I think you have nothing to worry about doppelganger.
No one is antagonizing anyone, as said, these elements you claim people find distasteful, were not put there to piss people off, they were put there because they were the content James and I and the Pathfinder creative team wanted to best tell the story, and judging by the immense positive response from most fans, James didn't steer wrong here.
A small group of dissatisfied people do not command the power of censorship doppelganger, but thanks for trying. Its nice you care so much about Paizo's sales, but you may not have access to the same data the company does (I know I don't have access to it, so I wouldn't presume to explain to them how to make sure their sales don't plummet). Unless you personally find the "atrocities" in Hook offensive, I am not sure why you are continuing this line of discussion.
You let the incredibly competent and all-around-dazzling Josh Frost worry about selling Pathfinder my friend. From what I understand he's doing an amazing job...course I think the book also goes a long way to selling itself. I think you have nothing to worry about doppelganger.
Invoking the name of my scheming doppleganger are you Nick? Josh Frost not you 'Doppelganger'. Tell Josh to start updating his running of Runelords too! I'd absolutely love to see how he runs this adventure. Him being my evil/good (I'm not sure who is who really...) doppleganger aside, he runs an incredibly awesome game and I for one would love to see everything he can bring to the table with it. Totally off-topic threadjack here I suppose at this point, but oh well.
Nick, perhaps we could do a banjo duet while he runs this adventure...if I actually could play banjo that is...
I like peanut butter.Hey, you got your peanut butter in my torture porn!
Niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiice. ;)
Make that a T-shirt and I'll buy it.
Tell Josh to start updating his running of Runelords too! I'd absolutely love to see how he runs this adventure. Him being my evil/good (I'm not sure who is who really...) doppleganger aside, he runs an incredibly awesome game and I for one would love to see everything he can bring to the table with it. Totally off-topic threadjack here I suppose at this point, but oh well.
Nick, perhaps we could do a banjo duet while he runs this adventure...if I actually could play banjo that is...
Ha! Awesome! Josh is THE man. I love that guy. He's a true friend and a wonderful soul. I'll tell him to get back to running Runelords!!! :-)
Dueling Banjos anyone?
Make that a T-shirt and I'll buy it.
I have to say, I'm sorely tempted as well. Odd passerby in the mall head cocking to the side ensues...
Something I find odd about this thread by the way is the "I've seen worse" defense. I sure have too. I'm not a professional soldier, but I've certainly seen terrible things: Children chained to beds crapping in a bucket (if they're lucky enough to get a bucket), drivers with steering wheels inside of them dying of traumatic asphyxia, people who put their heads on train tracks because they don't want to live anymore, but don't get found for days because no one cares. I've seen sick, and I've seen evil. That doesn't make bringing more of it to the party totally ok.
Don't take this as an argument for censoring any of the material; I just wanted to say the "I've seen worse" argument doesn't hold water.
Make that a T-shirt and I'll buy it.I have to say, I'm sorely tempted as well. Odd passerby in the mall head cocking to the side ensues...
Something I find odd about this thread by the way is the "I've seen worse" defense. I sure have too. I'm not a professional soldier, but I've certainly seen terrible things: Children chained to beds crapping in a bucket (if they're lucky enough to get a bucket), drivers with steering wheels inside of them dying of traumatic asphyxia, people who put their heads on train tracks because they don't want to live anymore, but don't get found for days because no one cares. I've seen sick, and I've seen evil. That doesn't make bringing more of it to the party totally ok.
Don't take this as an argument for censoring any of the material; I just wanted to say the "I've seen worse" argument doesn't hold water.
I'm with you on that mwbeeler, but check my earlier post on D&D as a medium. D&D is a great way to teach people that horrors in society aren't necessarily inevitable trains running us over as we stand on the tracks, but that we can and should take action to oppose and stop them. For me, that's the best argument for extreme villains in D&D, and at least some attempts at realistically dealing with their terrible atrocities.
Being over 18, I don't need someone else telling me what to buy or not, or presume to let me know what I find offensive.True, but it would be nice to know there might be something you'd find disconcerting (or in someone else’s case, captivating) inside before grabbing it off the shelf in a B&N....
I'd just like to point out that in a B&N (or any bigbox bookstore), you'll find far worse (and more explicit) content than what is in Pathfinder. You just have to take a stroll over to the Horror section, or even some of the fantasy/sci-fi books.
*Which actually makes me think for a minute. I personally wasn't offended by the content (I posted to that effect earlier) but aside from my previous DnD experience, I'm pretty sure I've read worse or more explicit content in fantasy novels. Or at least the material in Pathfinder 1-3 hasn't stood out in that regard.
Is that maybe a barometer we should consider? If you could put a novel on a shelf in B&N with more explicit and graphic descriptions, without a PG-13 or R warning on the cover, shouldn't you be able to do so with Pathfinder? Afterall, RPG book or hardcover novel or short story collection, etc.... its all just words on a page, in a book, on the shelf in a bookstore. (Unless its the picture element, but I think the Peter Griffin argument is enough said on that ;-) )
Edit: I just though of a scene that would be more graphic and explicit than what is in Pathfinder. And it isn't in a fantasy or horror novel either. (I could pull Silence of the Lambs or Red Dragon or some Koonz of the shelf, but I'll go mainstream for this example)
Everyone has heard of Tom Clancy, right? (Although he has kinda dropped off the face of the earth with new novels the last 4-5 years)
Patriot Games. A best-selling book, which ended up being made into a Harrison Ford movie, and has been in print (I'm assuming, since its always in store when I walk past the "C" section)
Early on in the book, there is a description
And while you may think this is offensive with good reason... it is a mainstream book, by a mainstream author, that has been in print for ~20 years.
And there isn't a warning label on the copy I have.
However, reading the back of the book and knowing the genre/author, I'm pretty sure that there are going to be scenes of violence.
Likewise, reading up about Pathfinder #3, I see descriptions like Deliverance mixed with Saving Private Ryan, but with ogres. And nothing I saw in my first read through the issue (I'm still waiting for the physical copy, but I've gone through the PDF) is out of line with what I expected. Especially not if I read the foreword first. (I didn't, I skipped to the new monsters, then on to the adventure itself)
|
|
Aubrey the Malformed wrote:
Given that the sin in question is actually greed, on the whole, I question whether sadistic violence is actually wholly in keeping. After all, we haven't actually seen too many depictions of gratuitous greed at all. Not sexy enough, and too difficult to make interesting? <snip> Not all of us are that big into horror, and the action is the key, so the depictions are window-dressing at best and possibly distracting from otherwise very solid adventures. I presume (having not read the original) that Ravenloft didn't need all of this to be effective.
According to speculation, Karzoug massacred an entire city over a few silver pieces short during tax time. Did you miss Yoda's lecture to a young, impressionable Anakin Skywalker?? Greed leads to suffering. Greed makes you want what someone else has. Greed may be argued as among the chief causes for most wars past and present. I think, therefore, that Greed does not disassociate itself from murder and carnage in lieu of a few nights at the casino.
Obviously. But it isn't depicted. Yes, we have violence. Nowhere do we see the result of greed. Of course the PCs can infer it in an abstract sort of way. But it is hardly immediate to the to say, "Hey, think of that scene with Yoda. No, not the one one where he fights Christopher Lee, that one where he lectures Anakin. What, you didn't see that movie after the travesty of the first one? OK, er..."
The point is that the consequences of greed are not depicted. And sadistic violence, actually, is probably fairly low on the list of likely outcomes. In a sense, I don't object to violence (or suffering) if it is in context - I can take it, I even write sometimes in my PbP (in the fight scenes, which I think is sufficient context). The issue is that some of the stuff in Hook Mountain seemed gratuitous to some of us.
However, reading the back of the book and knowing the genre/author, I'm pretty sure that there are going to be scenes of violence.
Bingo.
I think the issue at hand is that the modules break expectations. I think that's terrific, but because it isn't something you expect when you grab a D20 module off the rack, is why you would label it even if related written works aren't labeled. You pick up a Dean Koontz in the horror section, you know what to expect, i.e. it doesn't need a warning. You grab Pathfinder, you get a "holy crap, did that dude just sodomize his mom? What did I buy? This is awesome, but...uh...I sure hope no one sees me with it."
Yeah, like, give me a Hustler, 6 packs of smokes, two unusually small condoms....psstt..and a copy of "Pathfinder."