That's a good summary Judy. However, you might add the idea for the videos of games being played showing women playing alongside the guys.Added.
there could be an ammendment to that of showing a game with a female GM ...
there could be an ammendment to that of showing a game with a female GM ...
Also done!
I have suggestion...
I don't how you would do this but getting more women owning gamne stores would help I think.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Recap of suggestions so far, broken down by level at which they should be addressed
Looks great. I would say that this should be done in addition to general efforts to increase gamers in the hobby. e.g. I would hate to see mentoring seminars for women only, but not mentoring seminars that men could access. There doesn't have to be a men's only mentoring seminar, but there should certainly be seminars they are allowed to attend. Not every man has access to other players to help guide them. Just because most men may have that, doesn't mean for the one's that don't, they should be left out in the cold.
I'm pretty sure that the above is an "of course, duh!" thought, but I just felt it was worth saying it just to be clear.
Recap of suggestions so far, broken down by level at which they should be addressedLooks great. I would say that this should be done in addition to general efforts to increase gamers in the hobby. e.g. I would hate to see mentoring seminars for women only, but not mentoring seminars that men could access. There doesn't have to be a men's only mentoring seminar, but there should certainly be seminars they are allowed to attend. Not every man has access to other players to help guide them. Just because most men may have that, doesn't mean for the one's that don't, they should be left out in the cold.
I'm pretty sure that the above is an "of course, duh!" thought, but I just felt it was worth saying it just to be clear.
There are a lot of seminars that are available to anyone, regardless of gender. At GenCon, I think a conservative estimate would probably be 90% of events were open to male gamers. But this is said without having access to the spreadsheet from 2012, it looks like they took it down.
|
It's not the point, as much as there are other behaviors that women should also be aware of. Talking over each other and alpha female attitudes are not uncommon, for example. Also, just like with anyone else no two women have the same issues, likes, or aversions. Not the same draws to the game, so my suggestion on that note would be a catagory specifically focused on women, opening up, trying different things, (RP, tactics, support, front line, etc. . .) and see how they feel about them afterwards. Reiterate that it is all about having fun, and letting other people have fun, all in a shared environment.
|
I think the suggestions are excellent.
My one beef: I think the onus for warning players about adult themes should fall on Paizo, not the GM alone.
Here's why:
A new player comes to a local PFS site, clicks on a link and signs up for a game. A few days later that player is suddenly warned of adult content after scheduling the evening off! That seems unfair to the player.
If Paizo wants to be consistent, there should be a rating (like on video games or movies) for each scenario. That rating should be posted on PFS forums/local sites where players sign up BEFORE they travel all the way to the game table just to be told "you might not like this one...". Also, a rating system eliminates subjectivity. A GM might say, "Well, I don't find this offensive, so why warn a player about it in advance?"
One other reason I like the "rating" system: it doesn't sanitize the entire PFS view of Golarion in one big move. Some scenarios may be themed for adult content (not to make them intentionally raunchy, but rather they may contain some content players may find offensive). If players are looking for something gritty that night then they should sign up for it. If they're not, they should skip it.
This gives all players more options. It also gives writers for Paizo more options and allows them to retain their creative freedom.
|
I think the suggestions are excellent.
My one beef: I think the onus for warning players about adult themes should fall on Paizo, not the GM alone.
Here's why:
A new player comes to a local PFS site, clicks on a link and signs up for a game. A few days later that player is suddenly warned of adult content after scheduling the evening off! That seems unfair to the player.
If Paizo wants to be consistent, there should be a rating (like on video games or movies) for each scenario. That rating should be posted on PFS forums/local sites where players sign up BEFORE they travel all the way to the game table just to be told "you might not like this one...". Also, a rating system eliminates subjectivity. A GM might say, "Well, I don't find this offensive, so why warn a player about it in advance?"
One other reason I like the "rating" system: it doesn't sanitize the entire PFS view of Golarion in one big move. Some scenarios may be themed for adult content (not to make them intentionally raunchy, but rather they may contain some content players may find offensive). If players are looking for something gritty that night then they should sign up for it. If they're not, they should skip it.
This gives all players more options. It also gives writers for Paizo more options and allows them to retain their creative freedom.
There are PFS scenarios with adult content? I mean other than the violence: <insert rant about censoring sex and glorifying violence here>
I know about the infamous Ogre AP module and I've seen a few bits here and there in other APs/modules, but they could usually be glossed over if group didn't want to deal with them.
The chalaxian woman does go a bit too BDSM for some folks
|
|
There are PFS scenarios with adult content? I mean other than the violence: <insert rant about censoring sex and glorifying violence here>
I know about the infamous Ogre AP module and I've seen a few bits here and there in other APs/modules, but they could usually be glossed over if group didn't want to deal with them.
There are some. The Throaty Mermaid is a great romp full of
On the other hand, won´t go too far with changing some things that earned them honest admiration so far, else next there might be reasonable fear the pantheon and creation myth of Golarion has to be changed. After all the sea is drafty and mermaids like water, it´s probably a good example for kids how not to catch a cold and become throaty.
|
|
On the other hand, won´t go too far with changing some things that earned them honest admiration so far, else next there might be reasonable fear the pantheon and creation myth of Golarion has to be changed. After all the sea is drafty and mermaids like water, it´s probably a good example for kids how not to catch a cold and become throaty.
Lol.
As I said, I'm not trying to sanitize anything. Quite the opposite!
I'm merely saying, GMs have enough to do on game night, warning players AFTER they've already signed up is illogical.
In passing: for those who remember a different publisher's OGL game about a certain infamous barbarian - there was a content-warning on the back cover of the book. Just sayin'.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd say don't treat women any different than men treat men, and for men not to treat each other like crap.
Treat everyone equally... and humanely. No need to single out players by sex or sexual preference or religious beliefs or race or anything. Just don't be a dick to the person sitting next to you, period.
I'd say don't treat women any different than men treat men, and for men not to treat each other like crap.
Treat everyone equally... and humanely. No need to single out players by sex or sexual preference or religious beliefs or race or anything. Just don't be a dick to the person sitting next to you, period.
We've already had this aphorism presented to us. Just hoping/wishing that everyone were nice doesn't solve the problem.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Have you ever noticed that things with "mature content" ... aren't.
Can you PLEASE explain to me what about my comment is against the rules?
If you have an issue with a moderator decision, you can email webmaster@paizo.com.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Awesome Summary
While all of the elements on the list are important, I think the apex of the issue for Paizo (and the industry as a whole, really) is how Pathfinder is marketed to women—non-gaming women, not just women who are already gaming. Everything else on the list plays into this one point. You can say that TTRPGs are ok for women to play, but if you have offensive art or unfriendly gaming environments, that destroys your message. Everything on that list points directly to the marketing of the product.
I know a number of women who love watching Lord of the Rings/Harry Potter and playing Skyrim/Final Fantasy/Fable on their gaming console but absolutely abhor the idea of playing a table-top RPG. They obviously don't have any issues with the genre, but they can't see the merits of gaming through the big dark stinky cloud known as "THE STIGMA". What spell can Paizo cast to make this cloud finally go away?
On a side note, I think Paizo should send Stephen Colbert a signed copy of the CRB (and maybe an adventure or two) and invite him to attend PaizoCon. Have him play in a game being GMed by Lisa. While he's a satirist, I think you could get an honest story about women and gaming (or at the very least, gaming in general) out of him. This would certainly get Paizo out into the mainstream.
Geek and Sundry is organizing some stuff for March 30th. Not exactly "mainstream", but a little bit of a broader 'geek' audience.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is a very large difference between "has adult content" and "will automatically make women uncomfortable". Please avoid conflating them. Children at the table are an entirely separate issue.
They *can* be the same thing, but there is also such a thing as adult content that caters to the heterosexual female and gay male gaze. Unfortunately heterosexual men are usually so uncomfortable with that type of fanservice that they react quite violently, so it is significantly rare to see it at all.
It's interesting that some people clearly know how uncomfortable it feels to have RPG material that does fanservice for an orientation they don't happen to be, but not notice it at all or defend it as normal and good when it's the other way around.
I think that, in all honesty, the solution to this isn't to NOT warn women that there's adult content upcoming, but rather to warn EVERYONE that there's adult content upcoming, lest ANYONE be offended.
|
|
There is a very large difference between "has adult content" and "will automatically make women uncomfortable". Please avoid conflating them. Children at the table are an entirely separate issue.
No its actually the point of the topic. This is not just about bringing in more women. Its about bringing in more women and everyone else.
|
|
It's interesting that some people clearly know how uncomfortable it feels to have RPG material that does fanservice for an orientation they don't happen to be, but not notice it at all or defend it as normal and good when it's the other way around.
I don't particularly care about offensive material, nor do I care about its particular definition or audience. I don't.
I care about getting YET more responsiblilty dumped on to GMs!
If someone out there deems something potentially sexist/offensive/age-innapropriate...then Paizo should say so in the scenario's description. Don't leave it up to the GM to have to decide. Imagine if the GM decides "wrongly" then suddenly he/se gets pulled aside for a tsk tsk tsk and slap on the wrists?
No. I don't think so.
If Paizo wants progressive policies in place for their PFS tables/senarios/modules - then Paizo has to take responsibility for conent. Dumping responsibility onto their customers is the wrong move.
My comments are in response to the editor's collection of GM suggestions (below). Like I said: rating system solves the problem. Done.
Here's the impractical suggestion for GMs that justifies a reating system:
"• Check with players before running adult content (particularly themes of rape and sexism). "
You can't check with players AFTER they've already signed up for a game! They're sitting there at your table having booked the night off. So an excited player sits down then gets this dumped on them? How is the GM to warn them before the player signs up? They can't. That's why the publisher has to warn them in advance.
I don't think that to "save the girls" we need to resort to a rating system. In fact, for someone that really isn't offended or highly insulted by anything, I find myself a little insulted at the thought of this.
I'm going to give my unpopular opinion this, so if you're going to be offended, skip to the next post please.
women gamers are adults (zomg it's true) and as adults we are perfectly able to decide for ourselves what may be offensive to us. We are also perfectly capable of reading the blurb on the scenario and going "oo that may not be something I want to do."
We have not yet created a rating system for the guys (and trust me we probably do); so I don't see the need to create one specifically to "save the girls".
I point to other mentions that have been made of not singling out the women gamers... a rating system created so that they can better choose what scenario to play is most certainly singling them out. We don't need special treatment, we just want to game w/out being made to feel like a piece of meat that you're trying to devour with your eyes.
I don't think that to "save the girls" we need to resort to a rating system.
I'm going to give my unpopular opinion this, so if you're going to be offended, skip to the next post please.
women gamers are adults (zomg it's true) and as adults we are perfectly able to decide for ourselves what may be offensive to us. We are also perfectly capable of reading the blurb on the scenario and going "oo that may not be something I want to do."
We have not yet created a rating system for the guys (and trust me we probably do); so I don't see the need to create one specifically to "save the girls".
I point to other mentions that have been made of not singling out the women gamers... a rating system created so that they can better choose what scenario to play is most certainly singling them out.
Absolutely agreed. If a rating system was needed it would be needed for kids more than anything else.
I'm not all that familiar with PFS scenarios, but I'm not aware of any that would need a "No Kids" rating. At least not, as I've said before, for anything that couldn't be downplayed or ignored.
there are only a couple of scenarios (in my opinion) that might benefit from a kids rating system, however, up til now they haven't had one, they are older season scenarios, and GMs have been fairly adept at mitigating the "adult" content if needed.
Ingame rape is PvP and therefore not allowed in PFS as far as i know.
For home games, if there is someone stupid and insensitive enough to do something like this, the GM should step in and if he doesn´t, one should stand up and leave, hopefully getting the insight that what is happening there is connected to the players not the game. One should also tell those persons to see a mental counsellor before they do things in real life where the police would need to be involved.
But this has nothing to do with the game, all with the players and all content can be changed when it doesn´t suit. Except for PFS but i don´t believe there is any questionable stuff there.
I am beginning to believe that in some areas, seminars and explicit guidelines on communication, behaviour and for some men how to interact with women are more neccesary.
there could be an ammendment to that of showing a game with a female GM ...That's a good summary Judy. However, you might add the idea for the videos of games being played showing women playing alongside the guys.Added.
ON a related note, I haven't seen the later Gamers movies, but do they have any women in the play group?
|
|
A ratings system might solve one suggestion:
• Check with players before running adult content (particularly themes of rape and sexism).
It doesn't address any of the others at all.
One is better than none, right?
As for the bizzare possibility of rape in game..that's PvP. GMs can handle that.I just don't like the idea of someone signing up, showing up then being told THE NIGHT OF THE GAME they might be offended by content. No thanks. That's ridiculous. That's why the publisher (not the GM) has to take the onus.
Lastly: none of these issues have ever been anything I've seen or had to really deal with after a year of play. That said, its' nearly 1000 posts on the subject so saying "there's no problem why worry?" is unhelpful.
|
ON a related note, I haven't seen the later Gamers movies, but do they have any women in the play group?there could be an ammendment to that of showing a game with a female GM ...That's a good summary Judy. However, you might add the idea for the videos of games being played showing women playing alongside the guys.Added.
Yes. In fact, there's a funny bit about a female player who builds an unconventional Fighter character. The guy tries to tell her she did it "wrong", but she sticks to her guns, and her design proves to be very useful in the game.
Also, one of the male players decides to play a beautiful sorceress and keeps forgetting he's female in the game until someone reminds him, including at one point when a demon says he will make her his consort.
Gamers 2 is posted in 11 parts on Youtube if you want to watch it. Here's part 1 to get you started:
|
|
The possibility of rape in game may seem bizarre to you, but several posters have said it's happened.
No one, to my knowledge, has complained about the adult nature of published modules run at events.As I said above, I think the "Check with players before running adult content", is more about modifying either the tone or details background details of scenarios than about telling players to leave if they don't like it. In general, I agree with you that if the scenario involves or requires adult content, that should be known ahead of time.
However, that doesn't remove the need for the GM to know and play to the preferences of his table. Innuendo and suggestive content can be played up or toned down as desired. Players can also initiate actions without PvP, either with NPCs or consensually with other PCs, that might go too far for some. Knowing beforehand what everyone's limits are helps the GM keep everyone happy.
As a GM, I'd sqaush any rape scene in a second. Done. Letting it fly or not addressing it is what seems bizzare to me. My apologies for being sloppy there.
Letting players know about issues ahead of time is really all I'm asking for. And again, I throw the ball back to Paizo.
Lastly, I agree with you: if the players have been duly informed about potential content, then YES, the GM can say with confidence (and support from the PFS structure) "AS YOU KNOW there is some sexual innuendo and mature conent in this scenario. How do you all feel about the tone?" that's fine with me. It's logical. But surprising players with that speech isn't okay with me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's interesting that some people clearly know how uncomfortable it feels to have RPG material that does fanservice for an orientation they don't happen to be, but not notice it at all or defend it as normal and good when it's the other way around.
I don't particularly care about offensive material, nor do I care about its particular definition or audience. I don't.
I care about getting YET more responsiblilty dumped on to GMs!
If someone out there deems something potentially sexist/offensive/age-innapropriate...then Paizo should say so in the scenario's description. Don't leave it up to the GM to have to decide. Imagine if the GM decides "wrongly" then suddenly he/se gets pulled aside for a tsk tsk tsk and slap on the wrists?
No. I don't think so.
If Paizo wants progressive policies in place for their PFS tables/senarios/modules - then Paizo has to take responsibility for conent. Dumping responsibility onto their customers is the wrong move.
My comments are in response to the editor's collection of GM suggestions (below). Like I said: rating system solves the problem. Done.
Here's the impractical suggestion for GMs that justifies a reating system:
"• Check with players before running adult content (particularly themes of rape and sexism). "
You can't check with players AFTER they've already signed up for a game! They're sitting there at your table having booked the night off. So an excited player sits down then gets this dumped on them? How is the GM to warn them before the player signs up? They can't. That's why the publisher has to warn them in advance.
Yes, you can.
I run games at conventions. One scenario I have touches on some pretty heavy themes of free will, subjugation, domination and a potential for animal cruelty. At GenCon, no event is free, so the people sitting at my table just paid $4 to be there. I also swear a lot. I don't swear "like" a sailor, because I am a sailor.
Here's me talking about my short presentation prior to a game.
That method has worked very well for me and at least a dozen other GMes who used the same method in the room where I ran games. A GM at a convention has the added responsibility of "being in charge" of a table. Even if they aren't really in charge, the event organizer has essentially delegated responsibility to watch over and report problems at that table. While I was there to have fun too, it was also my responsibility to help create a safe atmosphere at my table.
|
|
You can't check with players AFTER they've already signed up for a game! They're sitting there at your table having booked the night off. So an excited player sits down then gets this dumped on them? How is the GM to warn them before the player signs up? They can't. That's why the publisher has to warn them in advance.
Yes, you can.
I run games at conventions. One scenario I have touches on some pretty heavy themes of free will, subjugation, domination and a potential for animal cruelty. At GenCon, no event is free, so the people sitting at my table just paid $4 to be there. I also swear a lot. I don't swear "like" a sailor, because I am a sailor....
I run games at cons too.
That said, you CAN do what you suggest, but it's not ideal. The customer (after for the first time getting news something nasty might be coming) now has to think "Rats...I don't want to play this but I'm stuck here. It's either I play this game or ask to be moved and cause a ruckus..." some may cause a ruckus, some won't. The point is: this discomfort and difficulty could have been avoided totally if the module was rated.
In addition: that sensitive but cooperative NEW player will think, "If this is what PFS is about, I'm not interested. Too rough and edgy." If they were warned before hand, the new player would know there is flexibility and options open to them.
I don't run for PFS.
Also, you should go check out the post I linked. It contains a method for people who are sensitive to certain issues/topics to establish boundaries about what they can handle. They can do it quickly and on the fly as needed. And by giving them explicit permission to do so, you empower them to help protect themselves, creating a safe environment to game in.
Go read it, it's very simple, it has been tested. It is highly effective.
ON a related note, I haven't seen the later Gamers movies, but do they have any women in the play group?
Yes. Most of the concerns brought up in this thread could be linked to a scene from gamers 2...
The rating may not be overt when published, but it's pretty clear in the open call guidelines that stuff for PFS should be PG13 at most.
• Do not include anything considered “adult” in nature
in your submission (keep it PG-13). Also keep in mind that
the Pathfinder Society is neither evil- or good-aligned, and
that evil characters are not allowed in Pathfinder Society
Organized Play.
Also, not all games played everywhere are PFS, or even follow a published scenario.
Returning to making women welcome at conventions, this blogpost about boundaries resulted from incidents at GenCon.
|
|
My suggestion seems to have been eaten. The nWoD's adventures have a small note on the front cover that essentually gives a quick glance at what sorts of challenges the adventure focuses on. In that system, ability scores are broken into three catagories (Physical, Social, and Mental) and each adventure has a 1-5 rating showing how important those catagories are for that specific adventure.
I would like to see Paizo do something along those lines, particularly with something like PFS scenarios, and say on the front cover, for examlpe, if the scenario focuses a lot on RPing, Skill Checks, Tactics, Combat, or other things (maybe a 1-5 rating that could be placed near the Level Tiers), and also include a small line about mature content.
The point for this is to give an honest evaluation of how the adventure will play out for playstyle, but also will not specifically call out "this is a woman's scenario", for example. Mature tags might include racism, animal or child abuse, sexual content, or slavery. Things along those lines. While I do not think that this will help bring anyone to the game, I do think it will make it easier for newer players and groups to find things they like up front, as well as an easier time finding the items they want for purchase.