I Don't Like the Game Master Guide


Product Discussion

151 to 200 of 216 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
The Exchange

Zeugma wrote:
I wrote a response to Mr. Mona.

Also, I spoilered it because I didn't think it's 100% on topic since this thread is about the APG. It is a bit tangential (but not as much as unicycle bears).

I'm not asking Paizo to leave out medieval sources because they were anti-semitic. I wouldn't ask them to leave out R.E.H. for being racist either. Like I wrote earlier, the whole game is built on tropes. I was just sharing my own experience with seeing stereotypes in an RPG book.
I just wouldn't expect people who don't have my background to be aware or sensitive to the source material in the way I was.
I wouldn't want to be dismissed as seeing something that isn't there at all, though, since it is there in the source material about Moloch and alchemy that the monster comes from. How much of that comes across depends on who you are, how you choose to play, etc. For me, at that moment in my life, with my background, it particularly bothered me.


Zeugma wrote:
Zeugma wrote:
I wrote a response to Mr. Mona.

Also, I spoilered it because I didn't think it's 100% on topic since this thread is about the APG. It is a bit tangential (but not as much as unicycle bears).

I got noticed! SQUEE!!!

The Exchange

Erik Mona wrote:

Ok, I can understand the connections a bit better now. The combo of the nose/beard and the Moloch greed thing. That makes sense to me, and I appreciate the additional info. Sorry to have inadvertently offended you!

Apology accepted. I figured it most likely wasn't intentional. [See my post above] That's why I speak up on the messageboards. One of the best things about Paizo, IMO, is you draw on such a wide variety of sources, that it gives me opportunities to look into the beliefs and myths of all SORTS of real world people, via thir myths, legends, monsters and (sadly) prejudices (but such is human nature).


For some reason I have imagined a new department at Paizo... that of forming correct impressions and avoiding slighting sensibilities. With hundreds of goblins censoring every book.

It would have been funny weren't it for Eric Mona apologizing for obscure and faraway and unintentional associations which included long nose of a devil, two real world name references and gossip.

That's a bit much. Let's not continue in this direction anymore... because at some point we'll see dragons dropped from bestiaries and our game because certain holy book associates them with evil.

Do you really want to play Dungeons & *CENSORED*? Or Uncomfortably Restricting Rooms & Intelligent Flying Descendants of Lizards for that matter?

Regards,
Ruemere

PS. Bias: I don't mind mature stuff.

Dark Archive

Zeugma wrote:

I wrote a response to Mr. Mona.

Also, I spoilered it because I didn't think it's 100% on topic since this thread is about the APG.

Just for clarification, I think this thread is about why the OP doesn't like the GMG and also some of the things he found ridiculous and offensive in it, and how he isn't sure he should continue to purchase PFRPG core products if they are going to be like it in the future.

To stay on topic and to be more precise in a response to the OP:

I think I said all I need to say about the GMG and offensive stuff in my previous post, but as for a negative reaction to one book (which has pretty good reviews, 4.3 stars out of 5 for 27 reviews) causing a person to never buy any similar product ever again, it could be an overreaction, or a gut reaction.

I have to say that out of all the PFRPG core products, the GMG was the one that actually had to grow on me. Out of the box it wasn't what I was expecting, and, although a little put off, I kept an open mind and over time I have gotten my money's worth and then some.

It also makes me think back to my 3.5 days when I bought every book that ever came out, and although I enjoyed reading all of them I never got to use anything out of a lot of them because the need for something that finely-focused never came up either when playing or GMing, and I have a lot of unused dollars wrapped up in those books (which is why I went with Pathfinder and backwards-compatibility... someday I will use that gold dragonwrought kobold sorcerer of doom, just you wait!).

So on a worth of use per page per dollar spent basis, the percentage since I have subscribed to the Pathfinder RPG is way over 100% for me, versus before when I was completely content to shell out $40 for a book or two every month that I would probably use 10% of in 2 sessions out of a 3-4 year campaign, with an over all percentage of my 3.0-3.5 collection somewhere around 60%.

YMMV, of course, and I'm not really here trying to be preachy or anything, I just want to share my experience. Someone else said it earlier, if you don't like 1 book out of the 4 you've bought and you still really like the other 3, there's a 75% chance the next book you buy from the same product line will be one you like based on your present disposition (I highly recommend the Bestiary 2 if you haven't had a chance to check it out, I'm fairly sure your # of likes will go up to 4 out of 5 if you like a combat-based game, which from your posts sounds like you do).


Ian Eastmond wrote:

It also makes me think back to my 3.5 days when I bought every book that ever came out, and although I enjoyed reading all of them I never got to use anything out of a lot of them because the need for something that finely-focused never came up either when playing or GMing, and I have a lot of unused dollars wrapped up in those books (which is why I went with Pathfinder and backwards-compatibility... someday I will use that gold dragonwrought kobold sorcerer of doom, just you wait!).

So on a worth of use per page per dollar spent basis, the percentage since I have subscribed to the Pathfinder RPG is way over 100% for me, versus before when I was completely content to shell out $40 for a book or two every month that I would probably use 10% of in 2 sessions out of a 3-4 year campaign, with an over all percentage of my 3.0-3.5 collection somewhere around 60%.

Seriously, quoted for truth.

I've stacks of 3.5 books I've never used a single word of at my table. Heck, I've non-d20 books that I've used in my d20 games more than some 3.5 books.

Now, I know that I'll never use everything in the APG. But I've used quite a bit of it - traits, some of the feats, some of the spells, and have built at least one Inquisitor and two Witch NPCs (and have GMed for a Cavalier and Summoner, and one of my PCs is using a Rogue archetype...). I know I am satisfied with the worth of the APG.

Same goes for the GMG. The pregenerated NPCs (possible unintended racial slights aside) have been a godsend to me, who no longer can afford 30 or 40 hours a week of planning for two different weekly games. The separate rules for haunts and chases are cool - I had actually already used a very similar chase mechanic before, so I was surprised to see it codified in print (like someone had read my GM's notes!) Some of the stuff - dealing with players, some of the GM advice - I more or less have a handle on and didn't exactly *need*, but it made for good reading. I even used some of the random name and NPC and inn generator tables.

Overall - I do not in the least regret the purchase. (Yeah, it might be a bit silly to have a 16th level NPC king... but who says that has to be a king? He can be a powerful noble, or a high ranking diplomat... It's just a stat block. The labels don't much matter, it's the time saving numbers that do!)


Huh. I'm Jewish too, Zeugma, and I'll be honest, until you said something, I didn't even make a minor connection to it. Looking over it now, I can see how you saw it, but its still a bit of a stretch.

My thought is honestly that you need to take the bad with the good. I can handle a "Jewish" conniving moneylender if there's also Jewish hardworking and persevering people. Who build golems. I don't know that there is a Golarion Jewish human analog like there is Norse, but look at them. Fierce viking raiders? Check. Noble men to whom largess is the highest honor? Check. Same with the Mwangi. You've got evil witch doctors and good ones. You've got those trying to overthrow colonial overlords with violence and via other means.

It's important to look at the whole picture on these things, because it is the overall trend that perpetuates a feeling of in- or exclusion, not specific examples.

The Exchange

Kain Darkwind wrote:

Huh. I'm Jewish too, Zeugma, and I'll be honest, until you said something, I didn't even make a minor connection to it. Looking over it now, I can see how you saw it, but its still a bit of a stretch.

My thought is honestly that you need to take the bad with the good. I can handle a "Jewish" conniving moneylender if there's also Jewish hardworking and persevering people. Who build golems. I don't know that there is a Golarion Jewish human analog like there is Norse, but look at them. Fierce viking raiders? Check. Noble men to whom largess is the highest honor? Check. Same with the Mwangi. You've got evil witch doctors and good ones. You've got those trying to overthrow colonial overlords with violence and via other means.

It's important to look at the whole picture on these things, because it is the overall trend that perpetuates a feeling of in- or exclusion, not specific examples.

Yes! And I think Paizo is very, very inclusive, drawing on multiple sources for their ethnic analogues and presenting balanced perspectives.

I figured most other people wouldn't make the sort of connection for that devil that I did, including most Jewish people. I think I did because of a variety of factors (most of them outside of the game), so it just rubbed me the wrong way, and stuck with me. If I'd looked at that picture and read the text on a different day, I probably wouldn't have thought about it at all. I decided to share my feelings, spoilered, because I wanted to give another example of how something that most people wouldn't be bothered by, such as the Amerindian-looking shaman next to the cannibal stat block, could be off-putting.

@rumere: I can't speak for the OP, but I didn't post with any intention of trying to get someone at Paizo to apologize to me for how I felt. I was just sharing how I felt. Try not to be upset that other people choose to share their negative, as well as positive, feelings about Paizo products with Paizo. I honestly don't think Paizo is going to start censoring themselves just because I commented on their messageboard*. I wouldn't want them to (as I said in my post earlier in the thread). Also, apologizing for an inadvertent insensitivity doesn't make Eric Mona any less awesome, manly or good at what he does. To the contrary, it makes him even more admirable in my eyes. He didn't HAVE to apologize. I never asked him to. I never expected him to (I even spoilered the whole comment, so he didn’t even have to read it!) He CHOSE to, and I chose to accept.

*if the Mammy Graul controversy didn't make them fold up shop, my one comment about one entry in one Bestiary certainly isn't going to.


Well, I see the GMG as simply a 'nice to have'.

It has some nice stuff in it, and a ton of stuff that is pretty much old hat to me as having had many many moons experience. That said, I have STILL managed to incorporate some of the material that I quite liked.

So yes its a nice book, but UNLESS you are a GM, you really need not concern yourself unduly with it.

Silver Crusade

Zeugma wrote:
Kain Darkwind wrote:

Huh. I'm Jewish too, Zeugma, and I'll be honest, until you said something, I didn't even make a minor connection to it. Looking over it now, I can see how you saw it, but its still a bit of a stretch.

My thought is honestly that you need to take the bad with the good. I can handle a "Jewish" conniving moneylender if there's also Jewish hardworking and persevering people. Who build golems. I don't know that there is a Golarion Jewish human analog like there is Norse, but look at them. Fierce viking raiders? Check. Noble men to whom largess is the highest honor? Check. Same with the Mwangi. You've got evil witch doctors and good ones. You've got those trying to overthrow colonial overlords with violence and via other means.

It's important to look at the whole picture on these things, because it is the overall trend that perpetuates a feeling of in- or exclusion, not specific examples.

Yes! And I think Paizo is very, very inclusive, drawing on multiple sources for their ethnic analogues and presenting balanced perspectives.

I figured most other people wouldn't make the sort of connection for that devil that I did, including most Jewish people. I think I did because of a variety of factors (most of them outside of the game), so it just rubbed me the wrong way, and stuck with me. If I'd looked at that picture and read the text on a different day, I probably wouldn't have thought about it at all. I decided to share my feelings, spoilered, because I wanted to give another example of how something that most people wouldn't be bothered by, such as the Amerindian-looking shaman next to the cannibal stat block, could be off-putting.

Exactly. People aren't stretching to find offense, it's just that some things click the wrong buttons the wrong way for some of us even if it's entirely unintended.

Paizo being sensitive to that doesn't lessen them in any way as a company or a creative group.


Mikaze wrote:

Exactly. People aren't stretching to find offense, it's just that some things click the wrong buttons the wrong way for some of us even if it's entirely unintended.

Paizo being sensitive to that doesn't lessen them in any way as a company or a creative group.

And yet others would simply say that either those people are too over sensitive, or they are simply too free with the word 'offence'.

It really takes a lot to get me 'offended', and it usually takes the very conscious efforts of people working to make me offended.

To avoid every delicate sensibility getting its toe stubbed would be an impossibility frankly. So that they step on as few as they do is a miracle in itself.


I think the Paizo staff have shown them selves to be smart and mature in the way they handle possible controversial subjects in the material they write.

I applaud Paizo for their willingness to take on "edgy & mature" themes as it is too easy for a RPG company to hide in a sea of bland and cliché these days.

Unfortunately due to the the range and diversity of the Paizo customer base there will occasionally be people who find some portion of the product conflicting with their moral/religious/societal outlook. It cant be helped and the person expressing the concern should not be pilloried for expressing the concern.

I don't think it will stop Paizo from being edgy but they might make a note to check art orders layout and stat block placement next time. So there is nothing to fear from people expressing their concerns.

ON TOPIC

I liked the GMG, I have been playing and DMing for years so most of the how to stuff confirmed things I have learned in my time. I have used the stat blocks when winging stuff and I love the charts and tables.

I am looking forward to GMG 2 with a deeper look at the problems experienced DMs encounter. Also more NPCs more charts and lots more tables.


The 8th Dwarf wrote:
I am looking forward to GMG 2 with a deeper look at the problems experienced DMs encounter. Also more NPCs more charts and lots more tables.

Hmm more charts and tables is good, in that 1st Ed way.

Not sure about the problems etc, can't think of any!


Shifty wrote:


Not sure about the problems etc, can't think of any!

I think jadedness and over-familiarisation with the dangers and powers of monsters comes with experienced players. How do you keep stuff fresh?

so

How to go from (I apologise for the mills and boon melodrama):

DM: The cold silver light of the moon bathes the maidens face in a soft light, her beauty almost impossible. A howl in the distance distracts you for a second.

As you turn back to gaze upon the maiden she half screams half growls "run" Flashing eyes foot long claws and sharp yellow teeth greet you.

Player: Cool a Werewolf thats umm roughly XX xp, I have a silver dagger, hey wizard cast the spell of werewolf fraking and cleric get ready to hit me up with remove disease and remove curse....

TO

DM: The cold silver light of the moon bathes the maidens face in a soft light, her beauty almost impossible. A howl in the distance distracts you for a second.

As you turn back to gaze upon the maiden she half screams half growls "run" Flashing eyes foot long claws and sharp yellow teeth greet you.

Player: Oh no! the horror! master wizard can you stop her from moving, Priest is there a cure....


The 8th Dwarf wrote:
I think jadedness and over-familiarisation with the dangers and powers of monsters comes with experienced players. How do you keep stuff fresh

New life to old (t)rope!

Best thing I find is to 'tinker' with some of the creatures; it starts to get them guessing.

For vanilla critters, like Orcs, just leave it - or throw in the odd elite squad. For the werewolf, throw out as much of the bestiary as you want to!

Sure, silver may or may not work... as to a cure, well that may or may not work either. If it was as simple as 'just hit me with a common as dirt spell plzkthx~!' then wouldn't Lycanthropy be an extinct disease?

Maybe they need to melt down a few holy relics or something to make just the right kinda silver weapon... who knows...!

I got my campaign guessing with a custom Vampire with a few new moves, and it has been great for a jaded party, lots of 'EH!?' moments.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Playing around with banes is a nice way to keep things fresh indeed, with one Caveat.

The Characters need to have a way of knowing/forwarning the banes.

If you decide that all your trolls are immune to fire but vulnerable to water you either need to give them Signs or let them retreat and research. For example, if you make the above fair maiden vulnerable to gold, have her wear silver ear rings, pay the party in silver/platnium, etc. Else they might need to be able to make Knowlege X checks to realize the legends were wrong. If you get really esoteric, then they should know before hand. In Fool Moon the issue wasn't that silver bullets didn't work...

Spoiler:
The silver had to have had an emotional connection to the user. Thus Murphy melting her mother's silver jewelry into bullets and Harry hurting it with his pendant.

Harry knew (well via Bob) this weakness going in.

Personally if I was going to make 'super werewolf' to frak with the party, I'd give it regeneration/silver instead of DR/silver. That makes more of a horror movie werewolf. "Hah! suck fireball! What do you mean, 'he's getting better?'"


Matthew Morris wrote:


The Characters need to have a way of knowing/forwarning the banes.

Nah not always; trial and error for the win!

Of course, some research etc is always ok, maybe a quest to find a sage etc could be a side hook...


Matthew Morris wrote:

The Characters need to have a way of knowing/forwarning the banes.

Just the standard researching methods, which shouldn't include studying the bestiary, as they do with standard monsters.

As you say:
Knowledge checks (Yes, skills are useful in combat no matter what they say!)
A few hints (the Ice dragon vulnerable to fire has Ice around him, uhmmm)
Roleplaying before combat if possible, speaking with NPCs, etc..

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Which is why I said characters and not players, Ike :-)

Also you need players who will run away. If a party thinks "werewolf" and arms themselves with silver, only to encouter a wolfwere that's vulnerable to cold iron, they need to know they can run away and regroup.

If anyone remembers the old Van Richten's guides, his biggest weapon in fighting the monsters was research. Either in researching the legends, or having an encounter running the frak away and then doing research with the data discovered.

Of course that's a different play style than 'kick down the door' but it can be fun.


Matthew Morris wrote:
The Jade wrote:
Cannibals shot my paw.
I thought they ate your paw.

That's what I first typed in but it made me lose the western/wolf pun. Maybe the cannibals show my paw and ate my maw?

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

The Jade wrote:
Matthew Morris wrote:
The Jade wrote:
Cannibals shot my paw.
I thought they ate your paw.
That's what I first typed in but it made me lose the western/wolf pun. Maybe the cannibals show my paw and ate my maw?

it was a common enough joke when W:tWW came out, that changing 'shot' to 'ate' didn't ruin it.

Maybe
The Jade walks into the saloon, the piano stops playing.
"I'm lookin for the man who ate may paw."

;-)


Matthew Morris wrote:
The Jade wrote:
Matthew Morris wrote:
The Jade wrote:
Cannibals shot my paw.
I thought they ate your paw.
That's what I first typed in but it made me lose the western/wolf pun. Maybe the cannibals show my paw and ate my maw?

it was a common enough joke when W:tWW came out, that changing 'shot' to 'ate' didn't ruin it.

Maybe
The Jade walks into the saloon, the piano stops playing.
"I'm lookin for the man who ate may paw."

;-)

A sincere thanks for demonstrating the tipping point of that joke. I did wonder.

Dark Archive

Isn't it rude to accuse Paizo of racism based on such flimsy evidence? Is such slander as bad, if not worse, than the alleged racism?


DCironlich wrote:
Isn't it rude to accuse Paizo of racism based on such flimsy evidence? Is such slander as bad, if not worse, than the alleged racism?

There's a distinction between accusing a person of racism, and finding something racist. A non-racist can say something racist unintentionally. I doubt anyone here actually thinks of Paizo - the staff or the company or the heads - as racist (otherwise, they probably wouldn't be brooking their custom). It's merely pointing out something that the person finds real, from their perspective.


Archmage_Atrus wrote:
DCironlich wrote:
Isn't it rude to accuse Paizo of racism based on such flimsy evidence? Is such slander as bad, if not worse, than the alleged racism?
There's a distinction between accusing a person of racism, and finding something racist. A non-racist can say something racist unintentionally. I doubt anyone here actually thinks of Paizo - the staff or the company or the heads - as racist (otherwise, they probably wouldn't be brooking their custom). It's merely pointing out something that the person finds real, from their perspective.

This, there have been things I've looked at or read and thought "Wow that presents a bit of a racist stereotype" without thinking the person themselves were actually racist -- or that they were "bad" racists.

Ignorance doesn't pardon much -- but if you don't know something is offensive to someone else you might do it several times without realizing that what you are doing is offensive, especially if you never before met someone of the culture/type/region and your own region has ingrained prejudice already (this doesn't have to be bad stereotypes or prejudice either -- many have a stereotype of Asian kids as being all study and really smart. While many are that doesn't mean that they are such because they are Asian though -- it's still a prejudice. In the same light people might always trust someone from a certain region or place simply because "Those are good trustworthy folk incapable of evil!" without any proof to back it up).

Please note I'm not saying it's right (it isn't) but it can be more understandable.

In some cases (some of which I've been in) something is offensive for reasons that are lost in history to a newer generation -- some of my Jewish friends have pointed out something of the things I do that are... offensive or considered rude that I didn't know about, simply from a lack of exposure to their culture and ways.

It doesn't change the fact that what I was presenting was wrong or misguided -- but it does offer the chance of forgiveness through realization and apology.


Archmage_Atrus wrote:
DCironlich wrote:
Isn't it rude to accuse Paizo of racism based on such flimsy evidence? Is such slander as bad, if not worse, than the alleged racism?
There's a distinction between accusing a person of racism, and finding something racist. A non-racist can say something racist unintentionally. I doubt anyone here actually thinks of Paizo - the staff or the company or the heads - as racist (otherwise, they probably wouldn't be brooking their custom). It's merely pointing out something that the person finds real, from their perspective.

It can still be a bit rude (talking in general case, not about this thread), when someone gets hurt and says "Oh my F**k**g God" I don't say him "You are offending me, sir, stop doing it".

Anyone without enough tolerance to don't mind when someone does something wrong (for him) unintentionally once is being *intentionally* as offensive as the supossed offender.

Dark Archive

I'm a little late to the party folks, but as a Native American (Apache/Cherokee) I take no offense in the Tribal section or the cannibal entry in it. Its a game folks, and the text makes it clear that the cannibal entry can be used as other types of NPC. Just my two cents.

What bugs me is the 16th Level King. But anyway...

Shadow Lodge

Evil Genius Prime wrote:
What bugs me is the 16th Level King. But anyway...

Same here. I guess a prince's father is rendered effectively immortal until such time as the prince reaches 16th level. Or perhaps the 10 year old prince who's father dies gets a huge mass of XP...for the fact that his father died. Gotta kill a lot of orcs to run your own country.

Sovereign Court

Kthulhu wrote:
Evil Genius Prime wrote:
What bugs me is the 16th Level King. But anyway...
Same here. I guess a prince's father is rendered effectively immortal until such time as the prince reaches 16th level. Or perhaps the 10 year old prince who's father dies gets a huge mass of XP...for the fact that his father died. Gotta kill a lot of orcs to run your own country.

Or older siblings....

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 16, 2012 Top 32

Kthulhu wrote:
Evil Genius Prime wrote:
What bugs me is the 16th Level King. But anyway...
Same here. I guess a prince's father is rendered effectively immortal until such time as the prince reaches 16th level. Or perhaps the 10 year old prince who's father dies gets a huge mass of XP...for the fact that his father died. Gotta kill a lot of orcs to run your own country.

Or it's that whole divine right thing that was so prevalent in many feudal cultures. You know, the belief that you inherit the grace of God (or the Mandate of Heaven, or the equivalent) when you inherit the throne and are thus instantly elevated to a status above and beyond that of lesser mortals (in this case represented by free class levels).

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

Now that sounds like a cool plothook. Similar to what they did with the Silver Flame in Eberron.


When I saw the king was higher level than the queen, my thought was, "This is so stereotyped."

Not offensive, really, just meh. "Oh, of course the male is presented as more powerful by default."

Scarab Sages

The King has to put out a lot of fires. It's hard running a country.

Shadow Lodge

see wrote:

When I saw the king was higher level than the queen, my thought was, "This is so stereotyped."

Not offensive, really, just meh. "Oh, of course the male is presented as more powerful by default."

See, meet Ileosa Arabasti, Your Highness, meet See.

Dark Archive

It seems to me that using the charge of racism for such obscure and questionable evidence cheapens the word and insults those who have had to suffer the real thing.

I purchased the PDF of the book and was astonished how this picture or text could have been perceived offensive--and even more so when the totality of the book's content is considered.

The OP asserted the book had "flat out racism". I say nonsense. Others have asserted it might be an obscure or vague or unintended form of racism. I say guys use your imaginations for productive purposes. Stop chasing every perceived slight, else you'll become bitter, anxious, angry and unhappy.


Muser wrote:
See, meet Ileosa Arabasti, Your Highness, meet See.

SEE doesn't play in Golarion.

Silver Crusade

IkeDoe wrote:
Archmage_Atrus wrote:
DCironlich wrote:
Isn't it rude to accuse Paizo of racism based on such flimsy evidence? Is such slander as bad, if not worse, than the alleged racism?
There's a distinction between accusing a person of racism, and finding something racist. A non-racist can say something racist unintentionally. I doubt anyone here actually thinks of Paizo - the staff or the company or the heads - as racist (otherwise, they probably wouldn't be brooking their custom). It's merely pointing out something that the person finds real, from their perspective.

It can still be a bit rude (talking in general case, not about this thread), when someone gets hurt and says "Oh my F**k**g God" I don't say him "You are offending me, sir, stop doing it".

Anyone without enough tolerance to don't mind when someone does something wrong (for him) unintentionally once is being *intentionally* as offensive as the supossed offender.

Personally, if I was unintentionally making someone uncomfortable or offending them, I would damn well hope they would tell me about it.

Sovereign Court

Mikaze wrote:
Personally, if I was unintentionally making someone uncomfortable or offending them, I would damn well hope they would tell me about it.

And if you were offending them by, say, your race, religion or ethnicity, you would still want to hear it?

People need to stop looking for reasons to be offended, and others need to quit worrying about potentially offending complete strangers by the car they drive, the way you talk, or which had they wipe their arse with.


Twowlves wrote:


And if you were offending them by, say, your race, religion or ethnicity, you would still want to hear it?

I have offended people by simply being in certain company and have most definitely heard about it. Do I wish they'd kept their comments to themselves? NOPE. Because now I know who it is I need to stay away from.

Twowlves wrote:
People need to stop looking for reasons to be offended, and others need to quit worrying about potentially offending complete strangers by the car they drive, the way you talk, or which had they wipe their arse with.

You know what else people need to do? Stop telling other people what they should and shouldn't be offended by. We get it. You're not offended and you think it's stupid that people are getting offended by it.

I'm not offended by it, but I'd never tell someone to man up and not be offended by something that means NOTHING to me.


ShinHakkaider wrote:
You know what else people need to do? Stop telling other people what they should and shouldn't be offended by. We get it. You're not offended and you think it's stupid that people are getting offended by it.

But isn't that, at the root of it all, what's happening here in this thread? By pressuring Paizo to remove the supposedly offensive content, aren't they telling Paizo what they should be offended by, and ipso facto, what the customer base should be offended by?

Shadow Lodge Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8

I figure that they wanted to have NPCs at a wide range of levels in the book, and if you're going to have a 16th level NPC, it makes even less sense to have him be the town cobbler.

So a 16th level Aristocrat is a King.

In no way does that mean you must be a 16th level Aristocrat to be king, or even that all kings are 16th level Aristocrats.

Simply that the sample 16th level Aristocrat they present is a king, and you may use his stats to represent a king if you get into a pinch.


Benchak the Nightstalker wrote:

I figure that they wanted to have NPCs at a wide range of levels in the book, and if you're going to have a 16th level NPC, it makes even less sense to have him be the town cobbler.

So a 16th level Aristocrat is a King.

In no way does that mean you must be a 16th level Aristocrat to be king, or even that all kings are 16th level Aristocrats.

Simply that the sample 16th level Aristocrat they present is a king, and you may use his stats to represent a king if you get into a pinch.

Exactly what I was thinking. Thanks for articulating that.


Personally, I liked it. A lot. Its possibly the most used book going forward for me next to the Core book. Great sub sets of rules, great examples of materials, etc. I never touched the first half, running and managing a general campaign, but the rules materials and what not are just fantastic by themselves. Bravo Paizo on what you did right!


Nate Petersen wrote:
Personally, I liked it. A lot. Its possibly the most used book going forward for me next to the Core book. Great sub sets of rules, great examples of materials, etc. I never touched the first half, running and managing a general campaign, but the rules materials and what not are just fantastic by themselves. Bravo Paizo on what you did right!

Ditto. The NPCs are fabulous, as are the random tables strewn throughout the book. The art is fabulous - the goblin holding the huge d20 is one of my favorites.


cranewings wrote:

You know, using the middle experience table, a party of four can level up every couple of games, every two or three really, fighting absolutely nothing that has an honest chance of killing them. If you start stacking on experience for talking to people characters will be leveling every other session.

Which leads to one logical conclusion of the game: 17 year old supermen.

Another one is the 9th level town mayor, which is by my count stupid as all hell, because if he got those levels by being great at leading his people by talking, he shouldn't have such awesome killing ability for no reason. I guess sense he lives in the D&D world, all that talking gave him the drive to do two finger pushups and the superhuman reflexes to kill a dozen men.

You would be right if going up in levels didn't actually confer killing ability, but a 9th level town mayor is awesome at fighting. If it said he had 12 hit points, an AC of 12, and a +14 to Diplomacy, sure I'd buy that. If it said he had 2nd level fighting and 9th level talking, I'd buy that as a basic write up as well. That isn't how Pathfinder works. 9th level fighting, as a regular mayor of a regular town? That is a lot of 9th level fighters all over the world, a lot of Huma Dragonbanes.

what you are complaining about is the rules system itself. while I like pathfinder/3.5 for it's STRATIGIC rules, it kinda sucks because if it's level system. I prefer WoD storyteller system that is more organic. But I think that is the problem. NOt the book itself.

Silver Crusade

Brian E. Harris wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:
You know what else people need to do? Stop telling other people what they should and shouldn't be offended by. We get it. You're not offended and you think it's stupid that people are getting offended by it.
But isn't that, at the root of it all, what's happening here in this thread? By pressuring Paizo to remove the supposedly offensive content, aren't they telling Paizo what they should be offended by, and ipso facto, what the customer base should be offended by?

Not saying they should be offended. Merely asking that they be more sensitive and aware of the portrayal of "primitive" cultures and saying we would have been much more comfortable with the baseline "Tribal" NPC being named Tribal Warrior instead of Cannibal.

But apparently that bothers some people.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Mikaze wrote:
Brian E. Harris wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:
You know what else people need to do? Stop telling other people what they should and shouldn't be offended by. We get it. You're not offended and you think it's stupid that people are getting offended by it.
But isn't that, at the root of it all, what's happening here in this thread? By pressuring Paizo to remove the supposedly offensive content, aren't they telling Paizo what they should be offended by, and ipso facto, what the customer base should be offended by?

Not saying they should be offended. Merely asking that they be more sensitive and aware of the portrayal of "primitive" cultures and saying we would have been much more comfortable with the baseline "Tribal" NPC being named Tribal Warrior instead of Cannibal.

But apparently that bothers some people.

So we should ignore the fact that there was cannibal tribal cultures? I was not planning on adding to this but I agree with others, you are going to far in this. Anyone can find offense in anything if they look for it, and that is exactly what you are doing.

What they put in was a Cannibal, and the best place to put into it in that version of a cannibal is where they put it. There may be other types of cannibals, and the majority of tribal cultures are not cannibals but the version of cannibal they decided to put is the version they did. It is in no way racist or offensive, this is a fantasy world and in this one they have feral tribal cannibals, that is in no way an offense to the real world or to tribal cultures in our world. If you want a Tribal Warrior, make your own or use the many other NPC tribal warriors Paizo has made.

leave your misplaced sensibilities where they belong, with real racist issues.

This version of cannibals is no different then ones from Raiders of the Lost ark, another fictional story based on similar inspiration.

Edit: Now if they took a Normal Tribal Warrior and put the cannibal tag on it, then you would have reason to be offended.

Silver Crusade

Dragnmoon wrote:


So we should ignore the fact that there was cannibal tribal cultures? I was not planning on adding to this but I agree with others, you are going to far in this. Anyone can find offense in anything if they look for it, and that is exactly what you are doing.

I will thank you to not tell me I was doing something I was not. I did not hunt through the book looking for things to take issue with. It was something that stuck out to me, and didn't sit well with me. And I wanted to tell Paizo about it.

And apparently I'm badwrong for wanting to say anything.

And where the hell did I say we should ignore actual cannibal cultures? All I said was that they could have presented a more generic and inclusive Tribal Warrior instead of painting that block with a pulp cannibal brush(read: "Pulp Cannibal", not nuanced representation of real world cannibal cultures).

Hell with it. I'm done with this. This day has been crappy enough already. Enjoy your damn dogpiling.

Sovereign Court

ShinHakkaider wrote:
Twowlves wrote:


And if you were offending them by, say, your race, religion or ethnicity, you would still want to hear it?

I have offended people by simply being in certain company and have most definitely heard about it. Do I wish they'd kept their comments to themselves? NOPE. Because now I know who it is I need to stay away from.

You miss my point entirely. You offended by being IN certain company, not by the mere act of BEING certain company.

Sinhakkaider wrote:


Twowlves wrote:
People need to stop looking for reasons to be offended, and others need to quit worrying about potentially offending complete strangers by the car they drive, the way you talk, or which had they wipe their arse with.

You know what else people need to do? Stop telling other people what they should and shouldn't be offended by. We get it. You're not offended and you think it's stupid that people are getting offended by it.

I'm not offended by it, but I'd never tell someone to man up and not be offended by something that means NOTHING to me.

You are offending me, and I want someone to come in on my behalf and tell you to stop. Better yet, someone else should be offended for me and make you conform to groupthink.

Shadow Lodge

The only problems I had with it was it didnt delve far enough in a lot of places like the alternate playstyles, and the riddles and puzzles.

151 to 200 of 216 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Paizo Products / Product Discussion / I Don't Like the Game Master Guide All Messageboards