Spoiler:as I mentioned above, Kharzoug (sp) is the runelord of greed, yet we see greed depicted nowhere (yet). Greed can be a very major cause of evil - the desire to acquire wealth at any cost, irrespective of the suffering caused.Yet all we seem to get is the same old entrails thrown about the room. What I'm looking for is a discussion of whether the violence is therefore necessary or gratuitous. My view is that, in some instances, especially in Hook Mountain, the context does not support the "evil" being depicted. And lets face, the PCs are doing the "save the world" thing. From who?
In Hook Mountain Massacre, a good number of potential victims are marked with the rune as they frequent a Gambling Casino. One of the major threats is to have the entire town wiped out in one fell swoop in order to send all those marked greedy souls to Kharzougs runewell.
Read at own risk as it includes information about P2 and P3.
I like peanut butter.Hey, you got your peanut butter in my torture porn!
Did it stick to the roof of their gagball?
Hey, you got your peanut butter in my torture porn!
I had to laugh in spite of myself.
Did it stick to the roof of their gagball?
Perfect example of funny (ha) line crossed into funny (strange) land. Not that I object to ball-gags, it just pushed the joke into uncomfortable territory with lightning speed.
Hey, you got your peanut butter in my torture porn!I had to laugh in spite of myself.
Did it stick to the roof of their gagball?Perfect example of funny (ha) line crossed into funny (strange) land. Not that I object to ball-gags, it just pushed the joke into uncomfortable territory with lightning speed.
Thank you.
|
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **
Read at own risk as it includes information about P2 and P3.
If I might...
Same health warning as above.
I like peanut butter.Hey, you got your peanut butter in my torture porn!
Talk about gratuitous horror elements!
-The Gneech
|
|
Edit: A lot of this reminds me of a story I heard on NPR about a U.S. soldier in Afghanistan. Apparently, packs of wild dogs were a constant nusiance to the base, and could even kill people if they were not careful. The soldier was involved in combat and even killed enemy combatants. He also killed the wild dogs.
Guess which one people got more upset about.
That's what we're talking about - the emotional punch of the acts of evil, not the level of the evil itself.
(not that I'm saying the soldier is evil, just that people were more upset by an act that...
Perhaps. The story didn't elicit a flicker of emotion from me. As a similar sort of thing, Hitler enacted all sorts of anti-animal cruelty laws when he was in power.
Spoiler:Yes, but all they say is "These people are greedy, and then they die". There is no attempt to depict their greed at all. It might be interesting, for example in the Skinsaw Murders, to depict their greed, individualise them, make it clear what relatively low specimens they were, and then have them killed off. That angle hasn't really been explored - the greedy types are completely anonymous. And as it is a key plot element, it is surprisingly under-utilised/developed.
The point of all this is that we aren't going to see any real greed aside from Kharzougs and his single and unyielding desire to return to power no matter how many persons, towns, or cities get in his way.
Again with the Surgeon Generals warning about spoilers.
|
|
** spoiler omitted **
Again with the Surgeon Generals warning about spoilers.
But this discussion has been very positive in that I'll try to tease out these aspects more in my game, now it has come to my attention.
|
|
Aubrey:
** spoiler omitted **
Spoiler:Well, I think that slightly negates the whole thing, since they are sacrificng greedy people, and it is key to their plans, yet it is barely mentioned for the PCs to pick up on. The DM knows, of course, but that doesn't help them much. I take your point that petty greed hardly shakes the world to its foundations, but they could raise the profile of it a bit, rather than the (in my view) other aspects.But this discussion has been very positive in that I'll try to tease out these aspects more in my game, now it has come to my attention.
But yeah, good discussion. Thanks for indulging me. :)
Here's a quick and easy solution guys. Everything has a rating anyway right? D is for dungeon, W is for wilderness, right? How about an M for mature. That way there's no cheesy sticker but folks who's sensibilities are hurt by this stuff will know it's coming before they are hip deep into the third chapter of the AP.
Another solution would be to keep the APs a little more general audiences in the future and to put the more mature content into the GameMastery line. That way it's a one shot deal. You like gore and horror you buy the scary, more mature adventures. You like a more straightforward TSR style game you buy other GameMastery adventures and skip the heavy ones.
As for me, it's really getting me interested in the story. The nice thing about this (as opposed to disappointments like, franky, Age of Worms) is that when the adventures are over there will still be goblins and cultists, and ogres around somewhere in the setting. It's not like defeating the Runelords is going to annihilate everything that was interesting and fun in the adventures. That way, even if I never directly run Runelords (which I won't) I can still run perfectly good games using them as backstory.
{snip}If RotRL was presented as Stat-Block Goblins, Stat-Block "cultists", Stat-Block Ogres, without any flavor, then the characters end up as Stat-Block heroes. {snip}
Thanks, Stedd. You inspired my new alias. Like it? Like it?
For the record, I do think it's frustrating that when dealing with the seven deadly sins, things like greed always get shorted. It never seems to deal with the sin itself or it's consequences. It's like: this guy was greedy so he gets mauled to death. Couldn't someone get mauled to death without being greedy? Isn't the point then the mauling and not the greed?
I haven't read any of the AP thus far other than what's been mentioned, but it seems like there's runes of the sins that when they activate are releasing emmissions that strengthen the particular sin in people who have the prediliction for it. Already an interesting idea--has a very Th13teen Ghosts vibe that I like, plus the idea of rulers who rule their populace by exploiting their weaknesses has a nice historical "bread and circuses" feel. But I'd explore how the greed rune is affecting people rather than just killing them Friday the 13th style for being bad people.
I think Paizo could marginalize most of my concerns with the simple addition of a “modules intended for ages X and up” sticker blurb.In our solicitations to Diamond and the book trade, we do indeed indicate that Pathfinder is for mature audiences (ages 16 and up). We don't use that wordage on the books themselves, because that smacks to me of sensationalism and sorta cheesy.
The cynic in me says that you didn't use the wordage on the books themselves because it would impact sales. After all, you're the guy who made most of the pregens female so their appearance on the cover would boost sales.
|
I think Paizo could marginalize most of my concerns with the simple addition of a “modules intended for ages X and up” sticker blurb....
In any event, Pathfinder 4's adventure is a lot less gruesome than the Skinsaw and Hook were. Pathfinder 5 is pretty tame in the gore too... there's a section that, as it stands now, gets probably TOO racy in the sex department though... not sure if that'll get trimmed back yet or not, but there IS a set of rooms themed to all seven sins, after all, including Lust...Pathfinder 6 is looking to be pretty standard on the gore as well.
But that said... now and then, Pathfinder will indeed tread close to the R-rating when it comes to gore, sex, and adult situations. The vast majority of our customers, according to our research, prefer the gritty side of gaming and are closer to 30 years old than anything else.
bravo. I get tired of simple cutesy boring adventures designed for preteens. I have run some rather mature adventures and my players loved them just because they were different.
Besides, this allows you the opportunity to explore a lot more interesting topics than the G rated adventures.
|
We're all mature people in our late 20's. We all enjoy this kind of thing. Its sickening and horrifying, and yet it fun and keeps us moving wanting to know what happens next.
Nah... we don't all enjoy this kind of thing.
Skinsaw Murders was well written, and very Ravenloftian in feel. I doubt my players will enjoy it much, and so I'm probably going to scrap the AP after finishing Burnt Offerings.
I just finished my first read of Hook Mountain, and I found it offensive, but then I've found inbred hillbilly movies to be offensive for a long time, and this is obviously based on that genre. I'm sure it's well written too, but I can't get past my feelings of offense to see that.
The sad thing is, as far as I can tell, the whole inbred halfogre scene is entirely gratuitous and could have been handled without "going there."
I don't expect a light-hearted romp through fields of poppies, but this stuff is just gratuitous.
I've heard people applaud the fact that we're getting shown "true evil," but what we're actually getting shown "true crazy." There have been plenty of really evil villains in adventures since the beginning of DnD, and we didn't need the gore-soaked details.
I'm glad to hear that after Hook Mountain, things move away from the creepy, disgusting and plain disturbing, since I'll finish buying the AP (I want to support Paizo as they get moving in a new direction, and I hate having incomplete sets of anything). However, if this pop-culture approach is what I have to look forward to from future APs, I'll probably stop buying them.
I know... I can modify them to suit my own, and my players' tastes, removing the offensive stuff and replacing it with whatever I want.
If I wanted to go to that much effort on an adventure, I'd just write my own.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
Actually, my chief problem with the picture is not the obesity nor is it what she is eating. It is the nudity. I can't use that picture in a game with kids. I would prefer the editors to aim for a PG-13 with the artwork.
Sorry to step on a soapbox here, but why do you objectg to Mama Graul, and not to the numerous depictions of Seoni? She shows about as much skin on the average illustration.
Sure, Seoni's a hottie, while Mama is... well, lets just "disgusting" without going into too much detail. But shouldn't that endanger our precious youths even more? Not that i think if it as endangering youths at all...
|
If I might be permitted to enter the spoilery discussion...
Spoiler:Yeah, I know it took my PCs until just last session to finally piece it together. They didn't seem to take notice when they found out the youngman killed in the sawmill was killed and his coworker stated he had been skimming from the funds. Then again they kinda missed the point that Aldren killed his first victims by luring them to the barn with promises of wealth and then killed them. They had two additional murders. The Senior Scarnetti who is well known to be a greedy sonuva gun, and also the farmer who made good profits but lived in poverty. But during their investigation of The Misgivings one of my PCs finally pieced it together. Which will be interesting when we get to Pathfinder#3. So I think if we just make it a point to detail those kinds of things, then it shouldn't be long before they see a pattern.
|
|
Sorry to step on a soapbox here, but why do you objectg to Mama Graul, and not to the numerous depictions of Seoni? She shows about as much skin on the average illustration.
There's scantily clad, and then there's nude. The difference is Seoni isn't showing off her nipples. Add to that "grotesquely fat and eating a human arm, and *poof!* Mama Graul is objectionable.
Creative Director
|
The cynic in me says that you didn't use the wordage on the books themselves because it would impact sales. After all, you're the guy who made most of the pregens female so their appearance on the cover would boost sales.
Not quite.
I made most of the pregens female because I was tired of seeing adventuring parties that were mostly male. Of the three female characters, only Seoni's really what you could call a "cover girl." Merisiel's got a lot of clothes on, and Kyra's VERY covered up.
The choice of three female iconics was very much a "Why NOT have a mostly female adventuring group?" decision rather than a "who would look cool on the cover" decision, especailly since Pathfinder, being a book, doesn't have to use the same tricks that a more transitory venue like magazines need to use.
<snip>It probably should contain a content warning on the cover.This is getting to the crux of the issue. Most of the competition in official D20 adventures still caters to the "Narnia" fans; there's plenty of material still being produced for those who want their D&D more Disney-like rather than Brothers Grimm <snip> People preferring a G/PG rating would be better off sticking with Hasbro/WotC adventures, or some of the excellent 3rd party efforts by Goodman Games, Necromancer Games, et al.<snip>
I think if a "Mature Content/ Parental Advisery" label gets put on, then I absolutely would demand much more graphic pictures and text. I recall that as one of the best reasons I had switched to White Wolf games was that TSR's D&D had become what Kirth alludes to: Disney-esque vanilla gaming. I was watching Excorcist, Alien, Nightmare on Elm Street, and was listening to Prince before I was a teenager. D&D in the early 90's was mostly overshadowed by the gratuity of the indecency of the Bible. D&D was watered down. People fought critters because the DM said so, "Their alignment is Chaotic Evil, so you have to kill them."
When I switched to the World of Darkness games, I appreciated the stark themes. When I went to a convention and came across "Freak Legion," I thought I was getting a prize. It was made by White Wolf, had the "Mature Content" label, and so I was expecting a tome of graphic ideas. Instead, it was filled with elements such as multi-phallused mutations and stomache pumping feats (a la Excorcist). I felt let down and disappointed.
I too have really enjoyed Pathfinder, but while I don't agree completely with the OP, I'm glad to hear that the rest of series pulls back from the gore/horror angle. After we finish Hook Mountain, I'll be ready for my players to step out into the wild world and face adventure on a grander scale. Horror adventures are somewhat claustrophobic, "inward" adventures - small, hidden locales, haunted houses, narrow passageways, dark secret rooms, murky hollows where evil lurks, etc. I'll be ready to run an "outward" adventure - fighting giants, taking on a dragon on the snows of a mountaintop, racing across the wide Storval Plateau, that kind of thing.<snip>In our roleplaying, we play heroes (even ones with dark sides) that fight evil. Would our characters enjoy watching someone being tortured merely for the sake of their personal entertainment? I would dare say that the vast majority of D&D'ers characters would not. What's the difference between a depraved fictional Pathfinder ogre dancing the skull-jig on the body of his victim and the real-life fools clapping with diseased, sick glee while watching the depiction of a fellow human being slowly murdered in movies like Saw or Hostel? Not much. And yes, I realize I'm making a value judgment here.
<snip>
I would only agree with the notion of the thirst for variety in that I can indulge all of my desires from reading all of the Paizo contributor's works and not out of "liking-this-but-disliking-that"/ or a "phew, I'm glad *that's* over" attitude. I would expect and hope to always see variety, and that such elements as presented in the first three AP's make a cyclical return. I disagree that the first three adventures are small scale and claustrophobic. The players are experiencing the Lost Coast from Thistletop on South to Magnimar, and then all the way to Hook Mountain. (And then the subsequent AP's take them even more places) By contrast, the Curse of the Crimson Throne is intended to stick within Korvosa for the first three AP's. I think just in the travel alone, RotRL's defy claustrophobia and lead the game in an exploration of Varisia. Any dungeon crawl can have small hallways and evil undead creatures. I think I enjoy watching the accoutrements come to life when fighting ghouls and Ogres than merely coming across empty rooms that turn into a die-rolling hack-N-slash affair.
What I fear, is that when fighting the stone giants and the white dragon, that it isn't reduced to bland "you see a white dragon so your party wants to kill it because it's a white dragon" scenario. If all I want to have is bland creature massacres, I'll just have my player go against the baddies in the monster manual from cover to cover until she gets tired of rolling dice. In other words, it might as well be a string of completely random encounters without rhyme or reason. Should Paiso kneel before that kind of pressure, I might as well stick to Hasbro games where players get to ride the Unicorn and save the princess from evil pixies that like throwing cakes at people.
As far as witnessing torture, brutality. The PC's will be witnessing the aftermath. I would hope that if a Lawful Good Paladin comes across Sugar Graul doing evil, carnal acts to Jakardros' body, that the Pally doesn't just stand there and watch, but actually gets off of his duff and stops it from continuing. I remember watching a movie where the protagonist actually stands outside a window and watches on as thugs electroshock some guy's genitals, and then after-the-fact barges in and rescues him. In the AP, the brutality is already over and done with. The PC's won't be seeing anything en media res unless a DM modifies the original content.
Pathfinder 5 is pretty tame in the gore too... there's a section that, as it stands now, gets probably TOO racy in the sex department though... not sure if that'll get trimmed back yet or not, but there IS a set of rooms themed to all seven sins, after all, including Lust...Please please please please don't tone it down. This is the story of the seven deadlies. I have bought and run these exactly because these elements are in them. We are adult. we can cope. I tone these things up in my own games, and I can do that because you provide the info I need to build on.
give it to us as it is, and we'll repay you. I promise.
I agree. If we're talking 7 sins, here, I want to see the debauchery. I don't need my parents to hold my hand when I cross the street anymore. Otherwise I picture the scene in "Ten Commandments" where the director's interpretation of the fornication going on at the base of Mt. Sinai was that they performed an impromptu musical. . . they weren't even so much as dirty dancing either!
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.<snip>
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.
I am a huge fan of a lot of incredibly gory films (and I'm not talking of Saw or Hostel,) and I've even seen a decent smattering of real torture porn ( dead locust blow-jobs, for example.) But, I do think scaling back on the WTF-ness is a good idea, mainly for overexposure purposes. The players will become numb to the imagery, and I like such things to stay nice and sharp. Less can be more. (I'm trying to remember this in all aspects of my campaign, as well.)
FWIW, I don't like the take on the Grauls. Comes off as just a little too comedic for my tastes.
My own artistic style has changed over the years. I used to be very graphic when I was younger, and then I came across classic films, literature, and art where the sublime and subtlety has its own impact. I think both have merit, and both can be appreciated. I enjoy Psycho and the Haunting just as much as Hannibal and Hellraiser. I can enjoy scrambled eggs with pepper and enjoy fried rice and appreciate both.
I also saw the Grauls as more comedic than brutal. I couldn't help abstaining from laughter when running the various combat scenes with my wife. We enjoyed it immensely.
Being an artist myself, I'm never offended by the human body be it something from Mapplethorpe or Michaelangelo. I did not see Mammy Graul's nipple as disgusting or gratuitous. I figured it as a matter of practicality. For someone that large, she must have horrific insulation, and the less she wears the better. I would imagine that Summertime at the Graul homestead would be brutal for her. (Especially without Air Conditioners back then, hee hee).
The cynic in me says that you didn't use the wordage on the books themselves because it would impact sales. After all, you're the guy who made most of the pregens female so their appearance on the cover would boost sales.Not quite.
I made most of the pregens female because I was tired of seeing adventuring parties that were mostly male. Of the three female characters, only Seoni's really what you could call a "cover girl." Merisiel's got a lot of clothes on, and Kyra's VERY covered up.
The choice of three female iconics was very much a "Why NOT have a mostly female adventuring group?" decision rather than a "who would look cool on the cover" decision, especailly since Pathfinder, being a book, doesn't have to use the same tricks that a more transitory venue like magazines need to use.
And I for one applaud this. This industry is so dominated with men, and most women depicted ALL look like Seoni. I think it's awesome that Kyra and Mersiel are in the mix. Having a mostly female adventuring party is progressive and gets my female friends on the fringe of playing D&D a LOT more interested. Now they can identify with these strong saavy women in the books. F@&@ing awesome.
I really wasn't trying just to be objectionable with Hook Mountain. Just trying to make the monsters really monsters. The kind of horrific stuff written about in the module is the SAME stuff you'll find in Grimm's Fairy Tales. It's awful, and scary, and monstrous.
The cynic in me says that you didn't use the wordage on the books themselves because it would impact sales. After all, you're the guy who made most of the pregens female so their appearance on the cover would boost sales.I think Paizo could marginalize most of my concerns with the simple addition of a “modules intended for ages X and up” sticker blurb.In our solicitations to Diamond and the book trade, we do indeed indicate that Pathfinder is for mature audiences (ages 16 and up). We don't use that wordage on the books themselves, because that smacks to me of sensationalism and sorta cheesy.
Actually, it's almost a proven fact that anything with a "Mature Content" sticker on it sells better than not. Look at how well R-rated movies do compared to PG-13 ones on average. I think James has a solid point. It does smack of a ridiculous sensationalism to be like "LOOK OUT NUDEY PICS AND BLOOD BLOOD BLOOD IN HERE!" I'd roll my eyes if I saw "Mature Content" on the cover of Pathfinder.
Actually, it's almost a proven fact that anything with a "Mature Content" sticker on it sells better than not. Look at how well R-rated movies do compared to PG-13 ones on average. I think James has a solid point. It does smack of a ridiculous sensationalism to be like "LOOK OUT NUDEY PICS AND BLOOD BLOOD BLOOD IN HERE!" I'd roll my eyes if I saw "Mature Content" on the cover of Pathfinder.
So then you would expect NC-17 do a heck lot better than ... oops, nope, NC-17 rating is the kiss of death for a movie. Actually looking at the top grossing movies of all time, PG and PG-13 dominate the list. Rated R movies are far in between.
Actually, it's almost a proven fact that anything with a "Mature Content" sticker on it sells better than not. Look at how well R-rated movies do compared to PG-13 ones on average. I think James has a solid point. It does smack of a ridiculous sensationalism to be like "LOOK OUT NUDEY PICS AND BLOOD BLOOD BLOOD IN HERE!" I'd roll my eyes if I saw "Mature Content" on the cover of Pathfinder.So then you would expect NC-17 do a heck lot better than ... oops, nope, NC-17 rating is the kiss of death for a movie. Actually looking at the top grossing movies of all time, PG and PG-13 dominate the list. Rated R movies are far in between.
Let me start out by saying thank you for using spoiler buttons!
Pres man you beat me to it. The phrase "an almost proven fact" is synonymous, I think, for "a debatable fact". Here is a (deleted linky) [url=http://hollywoodreporter.com/hr/search/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000947222 - 36k] [/url] to one of many studies on the subject.
Edit: Link was broken so took it out. :-(
Google "r rated vs. g rated revenues" for many references.
Actually, it's almost a proven fact that anything with a "Mature Content" sticker on it sells better than not. Look at how well R-rated movies do compared to PG-13 ones on average. I think James has a solid point. It does smack of a ridiculous sensationalism to be like "LOOK OUT NUDEY PICS AND BLOOD BLOOD BLOOD IN HERE!" I'd roll my eyes if I saw "Mature Content" on the cover of Pathfinder.So then you would expect NC-17 do a heck lot better than ... oops, nope, NC-17 rating is the kiss of death for a movie. Actually looking at the top grossing movies of all time, PG and PG-13 dominate the list. Rated R movies are far in between.
That's a fair point, and my original connection was a bad one. Likening an niche industry like RPG publishing to multi-billion dollar cinema is facile, so I shouldn't have done so. Look at the music industry though, and you'll see a case made for slapping "Mature Audiences" on your product...not that that's a better example really.
In live theatre, every time we issue a press release with the words "Warning: This show contains extreme staged violence and nudity" we sell out. Just saying.
Anyhoo, my REAL point was that I applaud not slapping a "Mature Content" sticker on...I think it'd be tacky and uncalled for considering the content in Pathfinder comes no where near things in the slock horror movies we see taking up all the space at our local movie theatre...why can't we have more 3:10 to Yumas? :-)
The gruesome action of Hook is mostly hinted at, and always takes place "off-screen."
Edit: to include the spoiler tag
|
Creative Director
|
PG-13 is the moneymaker rating, actually, with PG coming in at #2. Big-money R-rated movies generally don't make much in the way of cash; there are exceptions, but they're few and far between.
A quick check of the current box-office champs shows that, in the US, the biggest R-rated movie moneymaker was "The Passsion of the Christ," and it doesn't even break the top 10.
Worldwide it's even more blatant; you have to go all the way down to #27 before you hit an R-rated movie (The Matrix Reloaded).
In fact, looking at the lists over at boxofficemojo.com... the only time an R-rated movie cracks the top ten is when The Exorcist gets in at #9 in the "Adjusted for Inflation" category.
Anyway... PG-13 is where the money's at. In movies, at least. R is a niche in comparasion.
But Paizo's kind of a niche company in a niche market... so we'll be retaining our focus on PG-13 level content. Which will, sometimes, delve into some dark stuff.
"The Ring" was PG 13, after all...
An answer to the subject title, I'd have to say no. As others have said, what may offend any of my players will automatically be toned down or pulled out as I have a very diverse group in both age and experience. I also can add my hand in the air to one previously that said it seems that the older you get the less tolerance you have for really evil type of behavior, descriptions etc. But in this case it helps convey the tru horror of what should be the backdrop of the adventure.
I do have to commend PAIZO on the series for being a monthly publication of an ongoing adventure. I think it's freaking great! Especially with all the descriptions and background it gives. That really helps to keep the players actually "Afraid" of things implied instead of always feeling a bit insulated from the implied horror of what ogres could do int he game.
Very good and I am completely sold on both the quality (despite the few nagging grammatical errors I keep running across while reading) and the content as an ongoing module. Thank you!
|
|
OK, too much quotable stuff here, so I'll stick to topics of discussion.
1) the debated "disturbing" nature of the plot line and cast of characters ...
I have not been offended, per se, by any of the events or descriptions thus far. The optional encounter with the half-crazed staving goblin commando in Burnt Offerings is indeed graphic, but at the same time it emphasizes the vile nature of what had become, quite frankly, the joke creatures of the DnD world, the goblins.
I do agree with the poster who paralleled the Skinsaw Murders with a more Hitchcock / Old-School horror feel. And while there were some graphic descriptions, it really was more of an emphasis on the nature of the characters who had committed the acts; there was nothing gratuitous about them.
While the graphic nature increased in Hook Mountain, I do believe it was not without merit. For the half-ogre family, our level of disgust comes from our belief that their actions go against what we, the readers, hold to be the actions of decency. This belief is a cultural creation. Before anyone freaks out, I'm not saying the belief is wrong. I agree incest, murder, playing with dead things and the like are disturbing in their very nature and not things a "normal person" would do. But then that's the point, isn't it? For the half-ogres, these things could very well be considered a social norm and our behaviors of finding mates outside of one's family circles, pursuing a lifestyle that does not involve killing those who are different from (or look tasty to) you, and burying the dead instead of using them for a medium to practice one's "art" could be viewed as deviant and repulsive. It all comes down to perspective, and I applaud Nicolas Logue for giving us, however disturbing it may be, a glimpse at that alien perspective.
As the the image of "Mammy Graul", this is not an offensive image any more than seeing footage from National Geographic where there is not a social stigma assigned to the human form. [soapbox]In the US, we are so hung up on the human figure that we find offense where there really should be none. We have gone so far as to "cover up" a statue depicting justice because it was a topless female. Doom and gloom to any art form that depicts anything other than a fully clothed person (see ya later Michelangelo).[/soapbox] I know, I know, it's a personal issue as to how one views such images, but this, imho, "limited" viewpoint has always been a pet peeve of mine and for that I apologize. I just had to vent, sorry.
Finally, I do agree this AP is not suitable for younger players without filtering on the part of the DM. But it is a series on the Seven Deadly Sins, so the nature of the AP should be somewhat expected.
2. The "absence" of ...
Greed. Greed is defined as "An excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what one needs or deserves, especially with respect to material wealth" (American Heritage Diction as per Dictionary.com). Greed is, at best then, a loosely defined sin. One can have greed for wealth and fortune (the gamblers in Turtleback Ferry, the Scarnetti's, etc), one can have greed for power (Aldern, Lord-Mayor Haldmeer Grobaras), one have have greed for a life one does not have (Nualia, Kaven Windstrike), one can have greed for ... damn near anything. Greed is pervasive throughout the villains of the AP, it's just that it manifests in different ways.
Additionally, there is also the underlying theme of ALL the sins being connected (when Karzoug activated his runewell it activated ALL the other runewells as well. As such, while the main (ultimate) villain is concerned with Greed, all the other sins are now sparked as well and can also take shape in molding the events that unfold in Sandpoint's troubled future.
3. The "lesser creatures" comment.
In response to the poster who stated there is a difference between utilizing all parts of a "lesser" creature and doing the same to a human. Most people on this forum would (hopefully) agree. However, to this there are two additional elements to consider. First is the simple fact that perhaps the ogres in Hook Mountain DO view humans, elves, etc as lesser creatures. Their point of view is definitely not that of a human and as such is (as stated above) an alien mind set to "normal people" who are running the campaign for our players. By giving the descriptions, the seeds are therefore planted for the DM to be able to convey, either literally from the text or paraphrasing in other terms, the very alien nature of this environment and mind set to their players.
Second, there are those out there who do who view humans as just another form of cattle and are worthy of treatment no better than that given to a cow. Think Henry Lee Lucas, Ted Bundy, Patrick Kearney, John Wayne Gacy, Aileen Wuomos and Jeffery Dahmer. These actual people did things to other humans that one could only do if one viewed them as "lesser" creatures. In this vein, could the Skinsaw cultists not also have a similar view? As the collecting of "trophies" is not uncommon for individuals of this ilk, Ironbriar's "collection" is not a far cry.
I won't touch on the leaders of nations who have pushed or directed their people into committing horrific acts, as this is another case altogether.
That's a fair point, and my original connection was a bad one. Likening an niche industry like RPG publishing to multi-billion dollar cinema is facile, so I shouldn't have done so. Look at the music industry though, and you'll see a case made for slapping "Mature Audiences" on your product...not that that's a better example really.
In live theatre, every time we issue a press release with the words "Warning: This show contains extreme staged violence and nudity" we sell out. Just saying.
Anyhoo, my REAL point was that I applaud not slapping a "Mature Content" sticker on...I think it'd be tacky and uncalled for considering the content in Pathfinder comes no where near things in the slock horror movies we see taking up all the space at our local movie theatre...why can't we have more 3:10 to Yumas? :-)
The gruesome action of Hook is mostly hinted at, and always takes place "off-screen."
** spoiler omitted **Edit: to include the spoiler tag
What would you think of a “Mature Content Warning” on the inside of a product similar to the “DM’s Eyes Only” warning that used to appear in the old TSR modules?
I find it interesting that Mr. Jacobs feels “obliged” (for lack of a better word) to tell “Diamond and the book trade“ (who act as distributors, I presume) that ”Pathfinder is for mature audiences (ages 16 and up)“ but doesn’t feel obliged to tell us, the consumer.
The cynic in me says that you didn't use the wordage on the books themselves because it would impact sales. After all, you're the guy who made most of the pregens female so their appearance on the cover would boost sales.Not quite.
I made most of the pregens female because I was tired of seeing adventuring parties that were mostly male. Of the three female characters, only Seoni's really what you could call a "cover girl." Merisiel's got a lot of clothes on, and Kyra's VERY covered up.
The choice of three female iconics was very much a "Why NOT have a mostly female adventuring group?" decision rather than a "who would look cool on the cover" decision, especailly since Pathfinder, being a book, doesn't have to use the same tricks that a more transitory venue like magazines need to use.
And I for one applaud this. This industry is so dominated with men, and most women depicted ALL look like Seoni. I think it's awesome that Kyra and Mersiel are in the mix. Having a mostly female adventuring party is progressive and gets my female friends on the fringe of playing D&D a LOT more interested. Now they can identify with these strong saavy women in the books. f@%@ing awesome.
I really wasn't trying just to be objectionable with Hook Mountain. Just trying to make the monsters really monsters. The kind of horrific stuff written about in the module is the SAME stuff you'll find in Grimm's Fairy Tales. It's awful, and scary, and monstrous.
Good point.
What would you think of a “Mature Content Warning” on the inside of a product similar to the “DM’s Eyes Only” warning that used to appear in the old TSR modules?
I find it interesting that Mr. Jacobs feels “obliged” (for lack of a better word) to tell “Diamond and the book trade“ (who act as distributors, I presume) that ”Pathfinder is for mature audiences (ages 16 and up)“ but doesn’t feel obliged to tell us, the consumer.
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. Should I have children, I'd hope to be involved enough as a parent to know what would be appropriate. If you've ever witnessed any of the infamous flame wars on the Wizards of the Coast forums, D&D is not for the feint of heart.
I'd repeat that if a label makes the cover, then I think what's currently in the books are all tinker toys compared to what I'd demand from an "adult" rated publication.
That's a fair point, and my original connection was a bad one. Likening an niche industry like RPG publishing to multi-billion dollar cinema is facile, so I shouldn't have done so. Look at the music industry though, and you'll see a case made for slapping "Mature Audiences" on your product...not that that's a better example really.
In live theatre, every time we issue a press release with the words "Warning: This show contains extreme staged violence and nudity" we sell out. Just saying.
Anyhoo, my REAL point was that I applaud not slapping a "Mature Content" sticker on...I think it'd be tacky and uncalled for considering the content in Pathfinder comes no where near things in the slock horror movies we see taking up all the space at our local movie theatre...why can't we have more 3:10 to Yumas? :-)
The gruesome action of Hook is mostly hinted at, and always takes place "off-screen."
** spoiler omitted **Edit: to include the spoiler tag
What would you think of a “Mature Content Warning” on the inside of a product similar to the “DM’s Eyes Only” warning that used to appear in the old TSR modules?
I find it interesting that Mr. Jacobs feels “obliged” (for lack of a better word) to tell “Diamond and the book trade“ (who act as distributors, I presume) that ”Pathfinder is for mature audiences (ages 16 and up)“ but doesn’t feel obliged to tell us, the consumer.
I'll take a stab at this (unofficial of course), since I actually read things like the Previews books from Diamond. (Although if Pathfinder was in Previews, I totally missed it).
Diamond distributes comic books primarily, and associated toys/products. RPG stuff falls into the group I guess.
Most of the stuff they have they distribute is for kids, and others are for older audiences. (Think a comic book like the smurfs or ducktales, vs Punisher or a dark Batman tale). Even if the comic book isn't "edgy" enough to get an age-appropriate label on it, there is still a bit of forewarning for people/stores buying the stock sight unseen.
Now for a typical consumer, you are going to go to the store, pick it up, read the back, flip through it, and then decide to buy or not. Or if online, you'll presumably read the description, look at the preview material in the blog, maybe google a review.
A store buys it based on the brand name, cover and the short description that accompanies it. Therefore they need to get a little more heads-up on the content than a consumer.
At least thats my take on it.
*And as pointed out above, it might actually sell better with a R sticker on it. But personally I don't think it needs one. And we don't generally (as a society) rate books PG-13, right? <shrugs>
Edit: Aw man, I got smurfed. I shouldn't have used that comparison, lol
I find it interesting that Mr. Jacobs feels “obliged” (for lack of a better word) to tell “Diamond and the book trade“ (who act as distributors, I presume) that ”Pathfinder is for mature audiences (ages 16 and up)“ but doesn’t feel obliged to tell us, the consumer.
I find it interesting that anyone could even make this statement since the whole AP has been described in very upfront detail without giving away all of the secrets to potential players from the beginning. There's been nothing hidden as far as the level of maturity involved.
I find it interesting that anyone could even make this statement since the whole AP has been described in very upfront detail without giving away all of the secrets to potential players from the beginning. There's been nothing hidden as far as the level of maturity involved.
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.
The cynic in me says that you didn't use the wordage on the books themselves because it would impact sales. After all, you're the guy who made most of the pregens female so their appearance on the cover would boost sales.Not quite.
I made most of the pregens female because I was tired of seeing adventuring parties that were mostly male. Of the three female characters, only Seoni's really what you could call a "cover girl." Merisiel's got a lot of clothes on, and Kyra's VERY covered up.
The choice of three female iconics was very much a "Why NOT have a mostly female adventuring group?" decision rather than a "who would look cool on the cover" decision, especailly since Pathfinder, being a book, doesn't have to use the same tricks that a more transitory venue like magazines need to use.
So when you said this as one of the three reasons so many iconics were female, you were kidding?
3: Women on covers sell better. As crass as that may sound... it appears to be the truth. And since Pathfinder's success is pretty important to me and to Paizo, we're kind of doing everything we can to get readers hooked as soon as possible.
|
Creative Director
|
I find it interesting that Mr. Jacobs feels “obliged” (for lack of a better word) to tell “Diamond and the book trade“ (who act as distributors, I presume) that ”Pathfinder is for mature audiences (ages 16 and up)“ but doesn’t feel obliged to tell us, the consumer.
I trust our readers to be able to pick up our products and judge for themselves if they're appropriate for them. I'd rather not be in the position where I or someone here at Paizo decides what's appropriate for who, but for the Diamond solicitation, that's one of many fields we had to fill out. Made more sense to err on the side of mature audiences than teen, since the mature audiences are the target customer base for Pathfinder anyway.
|
Creative Director
|
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.
I chose to have more women iconics in the first four installments of Pathfinder simply because I wanted the first iconic adventuring party to be mostly women because I was tired of seing the tired-old mostly men adventuring groups.
In the end, though, by the time we get to Pathfinder 12 and all our iconics are illustrated... it'll be an even split; 6 men, 6 women.
|
Creative Director
|
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.
I'm not trying to trick anyone into reading something that they don't want to read, and if that's what you feel like happened with Pathfinder 3, then I apologize. That wasn't my intention.
I do not, however, apologize for the content of Pathfinder. It's what I wanted it to be, what I think and hope most of our readers are looking for, and I don't regret not editing more content out of it.
I'm not trying to trick anyone into reading something that they don't want to read, and if that's what you feel like happened with Pathfinder 3, then I apologize. That wasn't my intention.I do not, however, apologize for the content of Pathfinder. It's what I wanted it to be, what I think and hope most of our readers are looking for, and I don't regret not editing more content out of it.
James, I realize the intent of this post is for those essentially displeased with this particular installment (HMM, PF3) specifically, but I've already put in my two cents on that issue. On another note, the fact that Pathfinder is not shying away from tougher situations and more adult (read: some think disturbing) content is a great thing. I've been tired of the blase way that so many adventures have been done in the past. The fact that this is part of Pathfinder is a good thing in my opinion. I am not a fan of 'Torture-porn' either, as I stated earlier. I just want you to know, in spite of a few poster that are taking this on a long discourse, there are still many of us out there that not only support Paizo in this venture but appreciate it.
I know some people will also say that they don't want 'reality' intruding on their gaming, this I understand. I also think that by making my adventures more gritty and sometimes downright disturbing makes my games better. It all depends on whom you game with. The people I have been gaming with all agree this is what we have been looking for.Thank you and Nick for his hard work...but I mean really...was this hard for him? Likely not, he just unleashed his inner hillbilly. Go Nick!
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.
Does an Ogre care that his back scratcher is made from a human. No, they probably see us as no more than animals. Like my previous post, I bet some of you use animal products regulary.
One defence was that, it is okay to use animal body parts but not sentient humanoids, cause thats evil. Tell that to tribes of PNG who use human remains to fashion tools out of need or an orangatang (spelling?) using a found monkey knuckle to scratch himself.
Seriously, if the idea of a desecrated corpse, or an incestous mater, or even something more vile, chance are
a.) It happens in reality (look at some of goya's "victims of war series")
b.) Is probably something your character has done previously without paying the actuallity of it any mind, and
c.) someone has seen it on Springer anyways.
Use a little common sense, you playing in a vile world where evil and death roam freely, you have to expect some consequences.
Wow, long post. Man can I waffle on...
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, you'd have alot more disturbed players.
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.
...
Thanks!
And what Shepard has said is almost exactly what I am saying to my players in game. The last time kobolds were fireballed after going through the description of the screams and twitching of 9 roasted sentient beings I described the odour and one of my players immediately chimed in with "Hey, when was the last time we ate?".
Some guy's face got eaten off? Mammy gets pleasured by her boys?
My grandmother would be shocked by this, but she was born in 1910.
All this makes me wonder: what kind of DMing are the folks who are shocked by PF seeing.
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