Are there any Black gods (especially good ones) in Pathfinder?

[Nicos]

Draco Bahamut wrote:

Morzadian wrote:

It's not a simple issue that's binary is nature (black or white), How allegorical is the Pathfinder campaign setting supposed to be?

Do we ban Amiri because she goes against the ideas promoted in contemporary feminist theory?

Do we hold Paizo responsible for such actions? And what do we do about it?

Do we bombard their twitter accounts like critically minded feminists did to Joss Whedon during Avengers 2?

Paizo is just a role-playing game publisher not justice's hand for all of the world's woes. They do have a policy of inclusion not exclusion, and they do that admirably, although they do have to cater to the interests of a broad range of people, and make products that sell.

Not everyone views Pathfinder as a vehicle for social progression, and its fine that people do, but I think the history of D&D/Pathfinder and its community is strong enough to have many versions of the Pathfinder game.

Create some african gods and submit them to a 3PP publisher, accountability starts at home, rather than always expecting other people to do it for you.

Edit: I have studied post-colonial theory while at university, and queer theory, my senior lecturer, Adam Geczy wrote a book about it, so I have some idea how complex the issue is. It's not an easy fix and can be divisive even among people within the same community. Paizo are doing their best in the often turbulent socio-political climate we exist in.

So, what you are saying is that Paizo don´t want money from black people ? I am ok with that.

Come on, that is just purposely misreading of what he wrote.

[thejeff]

Draco Bahamut wrote:

Morzadian wrote:

It's not a simple issue that's binary is nature (black or white), How allegorical is the Pathfinder campaign setting supposed to be?

Do we ban Amiri because she goes against the ideas promoted in contemporary feminist theory?

Do we hold Paizo responsible for such actions? And what do we do about it?

Do we bombard their twitter accounts like critically minded feminists did to Joss Whedon during Avengers 2?

Paizo is just a role-playing game publisher not justice's hand for all of the world's woes. They do have a policy of inclusion not exclusion, and they do that admirably, although they do have to cater to the interests of a broad range of people, and make products that sell.

Not everyone views Pathfinder as a vehicle for social progression, and its fine that people do, but I think the history of D&D/Pathfinder and its community is strong enough to have many versions of the Pathfinder game.

Create some african gods and submit them to a 3PP publisher, accountability starts at home, rather than always expecting other people to do it for you.

Edit: I have studied post-colonial theory while at university, and queer theory, my senior lecturer, Adam Geczy wrote a book about it, so I have some idea how complex the issue is. It's not an easy fix and can be divisive even among people within the same community. Paizo are doing their best in the often turbulent socio-political climate we exist in.

So, what you are saying is that Paizo don´t want money from black people ? I am ok with that.

At worst he's saying that Paizo doesn't have to. I don't think that matches well with Paizo's own stance - as shown both in statements and in characters other than gods.

From earlier in this thread:

Erik Mona wrote:

To be perfectly honest there are not enough of them in the setting right now, and the ones that ought to have Garundi features ended up a goth woman with white hair, a fey-looking white dude with half a face, and a nature spirit with a pretty inhuman form.

Honestly, this has a lot to do with the pantheon and the campaign setting being designed concurrently, so the gods had largely taken form before the ethnicities of the campaign setting began to gel.

When we get around to detailing the rest of Garund we will have more of an opportunity to address this issue, but for now we don't have a lot of great options for what you are looking for.

That being said, I can easily see the folk of Thuvia imagining Abadar as a dark-skinned Garundi, and so on, so there is always that somewhat unsatisfying tactic to fall back on before we address the issue in print.

[Lord Twitchiopolis]

Kalindlara wrote:

Lord Twitchiopolis wrote:

Kalindlara wrote:

Lord Twitchiopolis wrote:

Kalindlara wrote:

They've also said that it's a problem with the artists. Paizo is generally good at seeing past that "white = default" sort of thing, but the fantasy artists they commission from aren't always. That's why it took until Mummy's Mask to get an elf/half-elf darker than tan.

Ummm, Skull and Shackles would like to disagree with you.

Was there one in Skull & Shackles? It's been a while since I've read that Path. Which book were they in?

** spoiler omitted **

** spoiler omitted **

Are we looking at the same art?

I feel like he doesn't look tan at all.
A lighter shade of black, yes, but that's because he's Bonuwat, not Bekyar. Expecting every half Mwangi half elf to be coal black is just silly, and really would clash with the genetics of skin coloration (unless the elf parent was drow).

Draco Bahamut wrote:

So, what you are saying is that Paizo don´t want money from black people ? I am ok with that.

Now I'm almost certain that you're trolling.

Such a statement is like saying that Marvel doesn't want whites to enjoy Black Panther.
It's saying that you can only enjoy something if you have a direct relationship with the thing.
I can tell you now, that idea is a false one.

Yes, I am a strait white male. But when I play Pathfinder I don't have to be.
I can be a strong minded Asian woman who has developed control issues due to living in her sister's shadow.
I can be a asexual white man with a god complex.
I can be an elderly dwarven woman who believes in the duality of nature.
I can be an aged bisexual male half orc who thinks that everything has a right to freedom.

I don't play Pathfinder to be who I am, I play to to be someone I'm not.

thejeff wrote:

At worst he's saying that Paizo doesn't have to. I don't think that matches well with Paizo's own stance - as shown both in statements and in characters other than gods.

If you look at the various resource materials, the Inner Sea gods are depicted as mostly white because the Inner Sea is mostly white.

It is explicitly stated in the Sargava splat book that the native Mwangi who do adopt Inner Sea gods into their worship envision them differently. It plays heavily off of the ideas of post-colonial worship.
Heck, there are even different interpretations of the gods between actual races (not ethnicity). Halflings envision a number of the gods as shorter in stature, any number of races claim that Gorem is one of their own.
Also, Nethys has an original human form depicted in one of the splat books; He's DEFINITELY Osirioni. How he looks after that is up to interpretation of those who witness him.

I think my take away point here is that the gods are shown as envisioned by the greater populous of the Inner Sea, but different peoples view them all in different light.

[Draco Bahamut]

Lord Twitchiopolis wrote:

Draco Bahamut wrote:

So, what you are saying is that Paizo don´t want money from black people ? I am ok with that.

Now I'm almost certain that you're trolling.

Such a statement is like saying that Marvel doesn't want whites to enjoy Black Panther.
It's saying that you can only enjoy something if you have a direct relationship with the thing.
I can tell you now, that idea is a false one.

Yes, I am a strait white male. But when I play Pathfinder I don't have to be.
I can be a strong minded Asian woman who has developed control issues due to living in her sister's shadow.
I can be a asexual white man with a god complex.
I can be an elderly dwarven woman who believes in the duality of nature.
I can be an aged bisexual male half orc who thinks that everything has a right to freedom.

I don't play Pathfinder to be who I am, I play to to be someone I'm not.

No, i am not. I am really ok with that. It´s just that in my city, "black" is not a minority, and many people refuse to play fantasy RPG games from USA because there so minor role for the black people. I am the local Venture-captain and i try hard to make more people experiment the game, and that work would be easier if there is more black cultural elements. If that is not Paizo intention, than i can rest and quit to try to sell this game as inclusive for our needs. But i well aware that my city culture is VERY away from what a "american" game should worry.

I don´t know very well about USA black people (beyond movies), but i guess they would play more if there were more divine significance in being black than just a barbaric people that have to learn the civilized way so they can go to heaven.

[thejeff]

Draco Bahamut wrote:

Lord Twitchiopolis wrote:

Draco Bahamut wrote:

So, what you are saying is that Paizo don´t want money from black people ? I am ok with that.

Now I'm almost certain that you're trolling.

Such a statement is like saying that Marvel doesn't want whites to enjoy Black Panther.
It's saying that you can only enjoy something if you have a direct relationship with the thing.
I can tell you now, that idea is a false one.

Yes, I am a strait white male. But when I play Pathfinder I don't have to be.
I can be a strong minded Asian woman who has developed control issues due to living in her sister's shadow.
I can be a asexual white man with a god complex.
I can be an elderly dwarven woman who believes in the duality of nature.
I can be an aged bisexual male half orc who thinks that everything has a right to freedom.

I don't play Pathfinder to be who I am, I play to to be someone I'm not.

No, i am not. I am really ok with that. It´s just that in my city, "black" is not a minority, and many people refuse to play fantasy RPG games from USA because there so minor role for the black people. I am the local Venture-captain and i try hard to make more people experiment the game, and that work would be easier if there is more black cultural elements. If that is not Paizo intention, than i can rest and quit to try to sell this game as inclusive for our needs. But i well aware that my city culture is VERY away from what a "american" game should worry.

I don´t know very well about USA black people (beyond movies), but i guess they would play more if there were more divine significance in being black than just a barbaric people that have to learn the civilized way so they can go to heaven.

Did you see Erik Mona's statement earlier?

I certainly don't think that's Paizo's intention. I guess the question might be more "How high of a priority is it?"
Other than deities, do you think they're do a bad job?

[Draco Bahamut]

thejeff wrote:

I certainly don't think that's Paizo's intention. I guess the question might be more "How high of a priority is it?"

Other than deities, do you think they're do a bad job?

No. In my personal opnion, they are doing a good job, knowing that they must feed their families. I just am trying to help, by pointing to some still remaining stereotypes, like the lack of a good outsider with black features. It don´t even need to be a new outsider type, just a regular angel or deva illustrated somewhere. It´s already a good thing that the iconic paladin is "black" (in truth she is garundi, but very few people notice she isn´t mwangi) or the investigator (the truly first iconic mwangi), and the recent adventures are a lot better portraiting non whites (Mummy Mask´s illustrations gained a lot of credits for Paizo around here).

[LazarX]

Lady Kamari Ipeq wrote:

Where does it say what the gods' skin color is?

Different artists will picture gods differently, its not like the gods sit down for a portrait.

So the people in the Mwangi Expanse probably picture gods very differently from how the people on Northern Astivan picture the very same gods.

Kind of like how those Europeans show Jesus as a white dude?

[Tim Statler]

LazarX wrote:

Lady Kamari Ipeq wrote:

Where does it say what the gods' skin color is?

Different artists will picture gods differently, its not like the gods sit down for a portrait.

So the people in the Mwangi Expanse probably picture gods very differently from how the people on Northern Astivan picture the very same gods.

Kind of like how those Europeans show Jesus as a white dude?

Yep.

And in many Black Churches, Jesus and the Virgin Mary are depicted as black.

[xavier c]

LazarX wrote:

Lady Kamari Ipeq wrote:

Where does it say what the gods' skin color is?

Different artists will picture gods differently, its not like the gods sit down for a portrait.

So the people in the Mwangi Expanse probably picture gods very differently from how the people on Northern Astivan picture the very same gods.

Kind of like how those Europeans show Jesus as a white dude?

so?

[xavier c]

Tim Statler wrote:

LazarX wrote:

Lady Kamari Ipeq wrote:

Where does it say what the gods' skin color is?

Different artists will picture gods differently, its not like the gods sit down for a portrait.

So the people in the Mwangi Expanse probably picture gods very differently from how the people on Northern Astivan picture the very same gods.

Kind of like how those Europeans show Jesus as a white dude?

Yep.

And in many Black Churches, Jesus and the Virgin Mary are depicted as black.

so?

[Draco Bahamut]

xavier c wrote:

so?

So the book show most gods as "white", even if the Inner Sea region is not only Avistan, and have parts of Garund and Casmaron.

[thejeff]

LazarX wrote:

Lady Kamari Ipeq wrote:

Where does it say what the gods' skin color is?

Different artists will picture gods differently, its not like the gods sit down for a portrait.

So the people in the Mwangi Expanse probably picture gods very differently from how the people on Northern Astivan picture the very same gods.

Kind of like how those Europeans show Jesus as a white dude?

Certainly true, but it also matters how it's presented to us the players. If all the actual pictures are of whites, but theres a note somewhere that other cultures portray them differently that still presents to us a very white set of gods.

Showing us white and black gods (and all the other hues!) and still adding notes that different cultures portray them differently gets the same point across, but also lets everyone see it viscerally. More so if they actually portray the same god in different ways. A picture is worth a thousand words, they say.

[xavier c]

We are not talking about real life we are talking a game. In pathfinder all gods have a default appearance and race.

Why do only garundi and mwangi people have to make Iomedae or Abadar look like there race and the people the Avistan don't have to?

I think we do need some garundi and mwangi looking gods in pathfinder.

[xavier c]

Draco Bahamut wrote:

xavier c wrote:

so?

So the book show most gods as "white", even if the Inner Sea region is not only Avistan, and have parts of Garund and Casmaron.

I was talking about how this is a game and not real life and needs to be addressed in the game.( I said "so" in response to what was stated. In other words i meant why does real life stuff matter when we are talking about a game)

[thejeff]

xavier c wrote:

We are not talking about real life we are talking a game. In pathfinder all gods have a default appearance and race.

Why do only garundi and mwangi people have to make Iomedae or Abadar look like there race and the people the Avistan don't have to?

I think we do need some garundi and mwangi looking gods in pathfinder.

I'm not sure that's true. The Ascended Gods do and it would have been nice to have one or more.

I don't think there's anything definitive saying the other gods specifically default to one appearance, ethnicity or race. We've seen the "white" version because that's how they were presented to us in the first releases of the setting. There's no reason they couldn't be seen differently in different parts of the world and not have any of those be their default appearance.

[Morzadian]

Draco Bahamut wrote:

Morzadian wrote:

It's not a simple issue that's binary is nature (black or white), How allegorical is the Pathfinder campaign setting supposed to be?

Do we ban Amiri because she goes against the ideas promoted in contemporary feminist theory?

Do we hold Paizo responsible for such actions? And what do we do about it?

Do we bombard their twitter accounts like critically minded feminists did to Joss Whedon during Avengers 2?

Paizo is just a role-playing game publisher not justice's hand for all of the world's woes. They do have a policy of inclusion not exclusion, and they do that admirably, although they do have to cater to the interests of a broad range of people, and make products that sell.

Not everyone views Pathfinder as a vehicle for social progression, and its fine that people do, but I think the history of D&D/Pathfinder and its community is strong enough to have many versions of the Pathfinder game.

Create some african gods and submit them to a 3PP publisher, accountability starts at home, rather than always expecting other people to do it for you.

Edit: I have studied post-colonial theory while at university, and queer theory, my senior lecturer, Adam Geczy wrote a book about it, so I have some idea how complex the issue is. It's not an easy fix and can be divisive even among people within the same community. Paizo are doing their best in the often turbulent socio-political climate we exist in.

So, what you are saying is that Paizo don´t want money from black people ? I am ok with that.

I'm not saying that at all, real and complete inclusion is difficult.

Introducing some African influenced gods is not going to fix the issue, a couple of years ago I shared a studio with a girl originally from Sudan, and she had a different perspective on most things (a very interesting perspective I might add) and this was based on her cultural heritage.

I remember going to lectures with her and she would criticise some aspect of the lecture (post-colonialism often came up), rightly so, but it wasn't immediately apparent to me until she told me.

This is why I suggested that people write their own stuff and seek publication through a 3PP, so at least designers can pick up ideas coming from your perspective and realise what's important to you and go from there.

If Paizo doesn't cover some angle of inclusion I don't think they should be condemned for it.

I do agree with though on the topic of identity, having something to identify with. It's really important and should be addressed in some way.

[Mystic_Snowfang]

Morzadian wrote:

Draco Bahamut wrote:

Morzadian wrote:

It's not a simple issue that's binary is nature (black or white), How allegorical is the Pathfinder campaign setting supposed to be?

Do we ban Amiri because she goes against the ideas promoted in contemporary feminist theory?

Do we hold Paizo responsible for such actions? And what do we do about it?

Do we bombard their twitter accounts like critically minded feminists did to Joss Whedon during Avengers 2?

Paizo is just a role-playing game publisher not justice's hand for all of the world's woes. They do have a policy of inclusion not exclusion, and they do that admirably, although they do have to cater to the interests of a broad range of people, and make products that sell.

Not everyone views Pathfinder as a vehicle for social progression, and its fine that people do, but I think the history of D&D/Pathfinder and its community is strong enough to have many versions of the Pathfinder game.

Create some african gods and submit them to a 3PP publisher, accountability starts at home, rather than always expecting other people to do it for you.

Edit: I have studied post-colonial theory while at university, and queer theory, my senior lecturer, Adam Geczy wrote a book about it, so I have some idea how complex the issue is. It's not an easy fix and can be divisive even among people within the same community. Paizo are doing their best in the often turbulent socio-political climate we exist in.

So, what you are saying is that Paizo don´t want money from black people ? I am ok with that.

I'm not saying that at all, real and complete inclusion is difficult.

Introducing some African influenced gods is not going to fix the issue, a couple of years ago I shared a studio with a girl originally from Sudan, and she had a different perspective on most things (a very interesting perspective I might add) and this was based on her cultural heritage.

I remember going to lectures with her and she would criticise some aspect...

And when they do add a Garund and Mawangi Gazzetter and there are gods in it, then there will be a whole group of people baying about cultural appropriation, no matter HOW tasteful they are.

So yeah...

[LazarX]

Ms. Pleiades wrote:

I'm still absolutely baffled how people took offense to Black Widow from that movie. I'm usually at least somewhat cognizant of how a person can take offense to something.

** spoiler omitted **

I don't know if that many people are taking "offense" to her. What I do notice is that out of all the Avengers, she's the only one receiving absolutely no marketing out side of the niche bust kits sold only in specialty comic shops. Plenty of stuff out for every other Avenger, but nothing for Madam Romanoff.

And the real tragedy is that it seems to be a deliberate decision by Disney which has compartmented it's marketing strategy to Star Wars/Marvel for boys and Disney Princesses for the girls. (Leia Organa is also conspicuously absent in Star Wars marketing since Disney took over the franchise)

[Tacticslion]

LazarX wrote:

I don't know if that many people are taking "offense" to her.

Oooohhhhh, yeah. They have. A lot. Or at least a huge slew of comments and protests seem to make it look like they do.

LazarX wrote:

What I do notice is that out of all the Avengers, she's the only one receiving absolutely no marketing out side of the niche bust kits sold only in specialty comic shops. Plenty of stuff out for every other Avenger, but nothing for Madam Romanoff.

Even Hawkeye? I've actually noticed more stuff for the Black Widow than Hawkeye, even in other films (from the Iron Man to Thor to Captain America series; posters; exposure; dialogue; importance; etc.), though I've not seen any toys or many promotions for either.

LazarX wrote:

And the real tragedy is that it seems to be a deliberate decision by Disney which has compartmented it's marketing strategy to Star Wars/Marvel for boys and Disney Princesses for the girls. (Leia Organa is also conspicuously absent in Star Wars marketing since Disney took over the franchise)

That's pretty terrible, if true. And a very bizarre decision from some who otherwise seem to know better, as well.

That said, I don't really think you're correct on Star Wars (though Carrie Fischer herself might be making fewer appearances at the fan conventions for... mostly-understandable reasons).

Looking at the actual content and heroes and hinted plotlines of the films, I'm actually pretty sure that Star Wars isn't just a "boys" film at all.

EDIT: Though their toyline has always, sadly, succumbed to that problem. DANG IT. >:/

[LazarX]

thejeff wrote:

Doomed Hero wrote:

Egyptians don't qualify as black?

Not really. Black is usually used to refer to Sub-Saharan Africa descent, which really refers to several very distinct groups.

Historically, southern (Upper) Egypt would be from those groups - Nubia and Kush. Northern, Lower Egypt is North African. Genetically distinct from sub-Saharan Africa.

In Golarion's terms: Garundi rather than Mwangi.

This is starting to remind me of that Daily Show skit where Yusef (the guy who ran Egypt's version of the Show) has to remind Stewart that Egypt IS indeed part of Africa.

[captain yesterday]

Oh i know toys, yes the black widow is well represented, toy wise, while their are certain toys marketed for each (which are helpfully separated along gender lines, yes sarcasm,) however i can tell you with 100% certainty, they don't give a shit (toy companies and stores they are sold) who buys the toys, as long as someone does:-)

trust me as far as toys go, they throw a bunch of shit at a wall for pennies on the dollar and hope they found a winner:-)

[Morzadian]

Mystic_Snowfang wrote:

And when they do add a Garund and Mawangi Gazzetter and there are gods in it, then there will be a whole group of people baying about cultural appropriation, no matter HOW tasteful they are.

So yeah...

Earlier versions of D&D like Greyhawk has black gods (Touv pantheon) but has far less inclusion than Pathfinder, as Pathfinder has positive black characters, like Quinn the Investigator iconic.

Quinn is well-educated and highly intelligent, shifting away from the black character/savage barbarian or pirate stereotype, Seelah does that too, just not as well as Quinn.

[LazarX]

Morzadian wrote:

Mystic_Snowfang wrote:

And when they do add a Garund and Mawangi Gazzetter and there are gods in it, then there will be a whole group of people baying about cultural appropriation, no matter HOW tasteful they are.

So yeah...

Earlier versions of D&D like Greyhawk has black gods (Touv pantheon) but has far less inclusion than Pathfinder, as Pathfinder has positive black characters, like Quinn the Investigator iconic.

Quinn is well-educated and highly intelligent, shifting away from the black character/savage barbarian or pirate stereotype, Seelah does that too, just not as well as Quinn.

The closest thing that Golarion has to an "Elminster" or "Mordenkainen" figure is also Garundi, and more broadly knowledged in spells than either.

[Aelryinth]

Well, THAT's not true. Elminister is a level 29 Wizard (ignoring the other stuff) and a direct servant of the goddess of magic. I think he has knowledge of spells completely locked down.

Mordenkainen was 23rd or 24th, last I heard, and we have no way of knowing what special kinks and quirks Gygax gave his personal PC. Jatembe is a level 20 Mythic, so in pure ranks he'll be below both of them in top limits for knowledge skills and the like.

Let's just say they are all uber mages who can pull off the sage role with panache and call it a day.

==Aelryinth

[Deadmanwalking]

Jatembe is 20th level and Mythic Tier 6, though. With Int 41 and a bunch of special stuff unique to him personally (he has Shapechange on at all times and a bunch of Druid spells on his list, for example). He's definitely in the running.

[LazarX]

Aelryinth wrote:

Well, THAT's not true. Elminister is a level 29 Wizard (ignoring the other stuff) and a direct servant of the goddess of magic. I think he has knowledge of spells completely locked down.

Mordenkainen was 23rd or 24th, last I heard, and we have no way of knowing what special kinks and quirks Gygax gave his personal PC. Jatembe is a level 20 Mythic, so in pure ranks he'll be below both of them in top limits for knowledge skills and the like.

Let's just say they are all uber mages who can pull off the sage role with panache and call it a day.

==Aelryinth

And how many Druidic spells can either of them cast without cheating through Wish? That's the thing, Jatembe actually has a broader command of spells than either while still remaining only a wizard. His influence in magic is also more overreaching even today, centuries after his disappearance.

And I'll match his 12 Magic Warriors against the Circle of Eight any day.

[Set]

LazarX wrote:

And I'll match his 12 Magic Warriors against the Circle of Eight any day.

I like the notion that the 'Twelve Magic Warriors' might have been the first ever examples of what later became the Magus class (or some sort of Eldritch Knight hybrids, or Fighter or Wizard Archetypes that mixed the martial and the magical). Heck, even a Paladin works right out of the box as a 'Magic Warrior,' or an Arcane Archer.

Other sorts of 'Magic Warriors' from previous games could include the Abjurant Champion, Suel Arcanamach, various types of Death Knight, Bladesingers, Gish, etc.

Tying the legends of Jatembe to the founding of one of the settings base classes (the Magus) kind of gives the Old Mage a lasting impact not often seen (although others might see that as stealing it from elves, who could also be seen as the 'first Magi').

[Shisumo]

The elves only wish they were as cool as the Old Mage. Jatembe would beat the Winter Council like the spoiled whiny brats they are.

[Arachnofiend]

One thing I've always thought was interesting about Nethys's depiction was that he follows the "half light/half dark" trope but his "light side" is brown rather than being white like you'd normally see with that type of character. I feel like the decision to make him explicitly Osirian was probably a direct jab at this old and rather anglocentric trope.

["Devil's Advocate"]

Morzadian wrote:

Earlier versions of D&D like Greyhawk has black gods (Touv pantheon) but has far less inclusion than Pathfinder, as Pathfinder has positive black characters, like Quinn the Investigator iconic.

Huh???

Pathfinder is very far from inclusive. They might be more inclusive in some specific cases, namely gender and orientation, that's also about it in. But even for just those two, they are pretty far behind the curve, (considering thing like the WoD, oddly Greyhawk, Dragonlance, and many other similar settings). Don't get me wrong, they do a pretty good job in that sense, but there are a lot of groups out there that Pathfinder/Paizo have not touched or outright decided they will not.

[thejeff]

"Devil's Advocate" wrote:

Morzadian wrote:

Earlier versions of D&D like Greyhawk has black gods (Touv pantheon) but has far less inclusion than Pathfinder, as Pathfinder has positive black characters, like Quinn the Investigator iconic.

Huh???

Pathfinder is very far from inclusive. They might be more inclusive in some specific cases, namely gender and orientation, that's also about it in. But even for just those two, they are pretty far behind the curve, (considering thing like the WoD, oddly Greyhawk, Dragonlance, and many other similar settings). Don't get me wrong, they do a pretty good job in that sense, but there are a lot of groups out there that Pathfinder/Paizo have not touched or outright decided they will not.

I'm sure there are lots of groups Paizo hasn't touched and maybe even some they've declared they won't touch, but "far from inclusive" and "pretty far behind the curve" are very strong statements and I'll need some evidence. At least examples so I know what you're talking about.

[Arachnofiend]

You're talking to an alt with the name "Devil's Advocate".

[thejeff]

Arachnofiend wrote:

You're talking to an alt with the name "Devil's Advocate".

There is that.

[Aelryinth]

LazarX wrote:

Aelryinth wrote:

Well, THAT's not true. Elminister is a level 29 Wizard (ignoring the other stuff) and a direct servant of the goddess of magic. I think he has knowledge of spells completely locked down.

Mordenkainen was 23rd or 24th, last I heard, and we have no way of knowing what special kinks and quirks Gygax gave his personal PC. Jatembe is a level 20 Mythic, so in pure ranks he'll be below both of them in top limits for knowledge skills and the like.

Let's just say they are all uber mages who can pull off the sage role with panache and call it a day.

==Aelryinth

And how many Druidic spells can either of them cast without cheating through Wish? That's the thing, Jatembe actually has a broader command of spells than either while still remaining only a wizard. His influence in magic is also more overreaching even today, centuries after his disappearance.

And I'll match his 12 Magic Warriors against the Circle of Eight any day.

Like I said, now, now.

Elminster is also a Chosen of Mystra and can use SPellfire and the True Fire of magic, AND he has clerical levels. And used to be a Wild Talent Psionic. His ability scores were never optimized, but just given multiclass rules and basic gear he'd have an absolute minimum Int of 38 (17 + 3 Age +6 item + 5 Inherent +7 levels) and that's without messing around with Epic toys (which he most certainly could). The Chosen of Mystra template alone...ugh. Plus immune to 9 spells and so forth and so on. Heck, his starting stats, to be what he was, would have had to have been 15 Str, 17 Int, 17 Wis, 17 Dex. Just, ugh. And we know he had a 16 Con and 18 Cha before 3.5.

I think the ability to cast one spell cleric or druid in 3.5 was ONE FEAT. So it's not going to impress Elminster much.

By 3.5 rules, he's supposedly something like a level 35 character. Just go look at the wealth limits of what he can afford by the Epic rules.

It's not the Circle of Eight, it's the Circle of Eight and all their organizations and the like. Remember the real Rary is basically high wizard of Ket, Otiluke ran the Greyhawk Wizard's Guild, Tenser is the most powerful LG mage in the Flaness, blah blah blah, servants, henchmen, contacts, cohorts, blah blah blah. They are all up and active in the current political scene, where the 12 Magic Warriors seem like they are retired.

And hey, Mordenkainen rides around on a Cloud Dragon, so give him props for style. Like I said, we don't know what wild and crazy powers he might have. He's been to Gamma World, Metamorphosis Alpha, Boot Hill, numerous demi-planes, hobs with quasi-deities, and blah blah blah.

They are the sages of their respective worlds. Saying one is better then another is just ignoring their basic styles.

==Aelryinth

[Kalindlara]

Ten. Ten Magic Warriors. Not twelve.

...Sorry. ^_^

[LazarX]

You really can't count Rary The Traitor and the members of the Circle, Tensor, and Otiluke that he offed. So it's more like the Circle of Five now.

[LazarX]

"Devil's Advocate" wrote:

Morzadian wrote:

Earlier versions of D&D like Greyhawk has black gods (Touv pantheon) but has far less inclusion than Pathfinder, as Pathfinder has positive black characters, like Quinn the Investigator iconic.

Huh???

Pathfinder is very far from inclusive. They might be more inclusive in some specific cases, namely gender and orientation, that's also about it in. But even for just those two, they are pretty far behind the curve, (considering thing like the WoD, oddly Greyhawk, Dragonlance, and many other similar settings). Don't get me wrong, they do a pretty good job in that sense, but there are a lot of groups out there that Pathfinder/Paizo have not touched or outright decided they will not.

Behind the curve? They pretty much set the curve in Non-Earth settings. (WOD doesn't count because it's an adaptation of our world, not a wholly created setting)

["Devil's Advocate"]

thejeff wrote:

"Devil's Advocate" wrote:

Morzadian wrote:

Earlier versions of D&D like Greyhawk has black gods (Touv pantheon) but has far less inclusion than Pathfinder, as Pathfinder has positive black characters, like Quinn the Investigator iconic.

Huh???

Pathfinder is very far from inclusive. They might be more inclusive in some specific cases, namely gender and orientation, that's also about it in. But even for just those two, they are pretty far behind the curve, (considering thing like the WoD, oddly Greyhawk, Dragonlance, and many other similar settings). Don't get me wrong, they do a pretty good job in that sense, but there are a lot of groups out there that Pathfinder/Paizo have not touched or outright decided they will not.

I'm sure there are lots of groups Paizo hasn't touched and maybe even some they've declared they won't touch, but "far from inclusive" and "pretty far behind the curve" are very strong statements and I'll need some evidence. At least examples so I know what you're talking about.

Well, if you count yourself as an "internet expert" than WoD basically goes without saying. So, lets just look at Dragonalance.

Dragonlance, in much the same way as the X-Men movie are an analogy for homosexuality, is an analogy for, well inclusion. It has a multitude of very important characters, ranging from black to white to asian to "green" and "purple". It presented strong and independent women, and men, and a broad range of motivations and personalities. Unlike Pathfinder, it didn't shriek in fear at including everyone, so there are things like Judeo-Christianity in there, or atheism, native americans, blacks, interracialism, heroes (and villains) of all sorts.

And the fact that it's over 30 years old says something. It also says a lot that Dragonlance's war cry I "We need each other to stand strong" while Pathfinders is more along the lines of "OH, pick me, I have a _____ as an Iconic. See how progressive I am. I must be the first one to do it." Well, minus the ". . . Oh wait, you don't agree. CLUB, CLUB, CLUB <over the head>. Like I said, I must be the first one to do it." part.

:)

["Devil's Advocate"]

LazarX wrote:

"Devil's Advocate" wrote:

Morzadian wrote:

Earlier versions of D&D like Greyhawk has black gods (Touv pantheon) but has far less inclusion than Pathfinder, as Pathfinder has positive black characters, like Quinn the Investigator iconic.

Huh???

Pathfinder is very far from inclusive. They might be more inclusive in some specific cases, namely gender and orientation, that's also about it in. But even for just those two, they are pretty far behind the curve, (considering thing like the WoD, oddly Greyhawk, Dragonlance, and many other similar settings). Don't get me wrong, they do a pretty good job in that sense, but there are a lot of groups out there that Pathfinder/Paizo have not touched or outright decided they will not.

Behind the curve? They pretty much set the curve in Non-Earth settings. (WOD doesn't count because it's an adaptation of our world, not a wholly created setting)

What gaming setting is? Maybe d20 Modern? Nah, saying that the WoD is just an adaptation isn't going to cut it. Might be better to argue that it's a lot closer to the real world, with strong metaphors of addiction, religious persecution and extremism, personal believes vs freedoms vs security, but unless you want to argue that vampires, werewolves, mages, ghosts, and angels are both real and secretly hidden and controlling us since the start of time, I don't think that's going to fly. Or that racism is the direct result of a pair of elder's petty squabble, that religious persecution is the result of some dark pagan entity trying to corrupt mortals, and all human achievement is only possible because of the Matrix.

:)

[knightnday]

"Devil's Advocate" wrote:

Morzadian wrote:

Earlier versions of D&D like Greyhawk has black gods (Touv pantheon) but has far less inclusion than Pathfinder, as Pathfinder has positive black characters, like Quinn the Investigator iconic.

Huh???

Pathfinder is very far from inclusive. They might be more inclusive in some specific cases, namely gender and orientation, that's also about it in. But even for just those two, they are pretty far behind the curve, (considering thing like the WoD, oddly Greyhawk, Dragonlance, and many other similar settings). Don't get me wrong, they do a pretty good job in that sense, but there are a lot of groups out there that Pathfinder/Paizo have not touched or outright decided they will not.

They also aren't done yet. There are portions of the world, and the gods and people therein, that haven't been touched on.

Not everything is going to be there for everyone right off the bat; that doesn't mean that they are never going to follow up.

["Devil's Advocate"]

knightnday wrote:

They also aren't done yet. There are portions of the world, and the gods and people therein, that haven't been touched on.

Not everything is going to be there for everyone right off the bat; that doesn't mean that they are never going to follow up.

Which is all fine and dandy, but you may want to actually look up "inclusiveness", and reconsider just how long Pathfinder/Golarion has ostensibly been in existence. It' either a "pick and choose" setting or a "a little bit for everyone" setting. Can't be both, and by it's very nature, Golarion is not a "a little bit for everyone" setting.

Don't get me wrong. I'd absolutely love for Pathfinder to catch up, and start seeing some awesome stories come from it. A single father caught between taking care of his kids and a life of adventure. A "half-breed", or heck a cajun offspring of as Mwangi and an Andoran seeing the corruption and mistrust in both their parent's peoples and trying to come to grips with life in a world that I not altered just to highlight their struggle. A classic Christian knight story. A jewish occultist. Native American Indians that are not some sort of beastmen alternate species. "The Orient" that is not some sort of secret mystic society of exoticism. There is so much ground not covered/allowed, it's insane.

[Shisumo]

"Devil's Advocate" wrote:

knightnday wrote:

They also aren't done yet. There are portions of the world, and the gods and people therein, that haven't been touched on.

Not everything is going to be there for everyone right off the bat; that doesn't mean that they are never going to follow up.

Which is all fine and dandy, but you may want to actually look up "inclusiveness", and reconsider just how long Pathfinder/Golarion has ostensibly be in existence. It' either a "pick and choose" setting or a "a little bit for everyone" setting. Can't be both, and by it's very nature, Golarion is not a "a little bit for everyone" setting.

Well, if your criteria really are

"Devil's Advocate" wrote:

It has a multitude of very important characters, ranging from black to white to asian to "green" and "purple". It presented strong and independent women, and men, and a broad range of motivations and personalities. Unlike Pathfinder, it didn't shriek in fear at including everyone, so there are things like Judeo-Christianity in there, or atheism, native americans, blacks, interracialism, heroes (and villains) of all sorts.

then I guess I'm still waiting for your argument, since Golarion has pretty much all of that.

[knightnday]

"Devil's Advocate" wrote:

knightnday wrote:

They also aren't done yet. There are portions of the world, and the gods and people therein, that haven't been touched on.

Not everything is going to be there for everyone right off the bat; that doesn't mean that they are never going to follow up.

Which is all fine and dandy, but you may want to actually look up "inclusiveness", and reconsider just how long Pathfinder/Golarion has ostensibly be in existence. It' either a "pick and choose" setting or a "a little bit for everyone" setting. Can't be both, and by it's very nature, Golarion is not a "a little bit for everyone" setting.

Are they supposed to be? Is that the mission goal of the company, or are they trying to put out the product on their terms instead of that set by others?

There is a good deal for everyone on Golarion. People seem upset that their current wants aren't being met on the schedule that they want, which seems to be the sub-heading under inclusiveness as far as the Internet is concerned.

As stated above and in other threads, if something you (the universal you) want isn't being made by the various companies, perhaps you should work towards making it because you've found something that you, and presumably others, want. Your schedule of need isn't always the company you are dealing with's schedule, despite the Internet's need and desire to rally against perceived injustices.

[thejeff]

"Devil's Advocate" wrote:

thejeff wrote:

"Devil's Advocate" wrote:

Morzadian wrote:

Earlier versions of D&D like Greyhawk has black gods (Touv pantheon) but has far less inclusion than Pathfinder, as Pathfinder has positive black characters, like Quinn the Investigator iconic.

Huh???

Pathfinder is very far from inclusive. They might be more inclusive in some specific cases, namely gender and orientation, that's also about it in. But even for just those two, they are pretty far behind the curve, (considering thing like the WoD, oddly Greyhawk, Dragonlance, and many other similar settings). Don't get me wrong, they do a pretty good job in that sense, but there are a lot of groups out there that Pathfinder/Paizo have not touched or outright decided they will not.

I'm sure there are lots of groups Paizo hasn't touched and maybe even some they've declared they won't touch, but "far from inclusive" and "pretty far behind the curve" are very strong statements and I'll need some evidence. At least examples so I know what you're talking about.

Well, if you count yourself as an "internet expert" than WoD basically goes without saying. So, lets just look at Dragonalance.

Dragonlance, in much the same way as the X-Men movie are an analogy for homosexuality, is an analogy for, well inclusion. It has a multitude of very important characters, ranging from black to white to asian to "green" and "purple". It presented strong and independent women, and men, and a broad range of motivations and personalities. Unlike Pathfinder, it didn't shriek in fear at including everyone, so there are things like Judeo-Christianity in there, or atheism, native americans, blacks, interracialism, heroes (and villains) of all sorts.

And the fact that it's over 30 years old says something. It also says a lot that Dragonlance's war cry I "We need each other to stand strong" while Pathfinders is more along the lines of "OH, pick me, I have a _____ as an Iconic. See how progressive I am. I must be the first one to do it."...

Well, I don't count myself an "internet expert", but I'm willing to concede WoD, with the caveat that as LazarX, it's our world with twists rather than a new creation. That said, it was also pretty Eurocentric and bits of their treatment of other cultures and groups made me cringe at the time - often being more US/European pop-culture takes than anything else.

For Dragonlance, I only read the original novels (maybe 2 series?) and a couple modules and haven't done so in decades. They did have women as major characters, though I can't really comment on their roles at this point. I don't recall (and a quick internet search doesn't help) much racial diversity - though I guess Riverwind(?) & Goldmoon(?) were basically Native American?
I may be forgetting or they may have come in later, but I don't remember any black or asian characters.

I have no idea what you mean to imply by "analogy for inclusion". You can also present an analogy for something without actually including it. In fact that's how you usually do it. The original X-Men were an analogy for racism and were all white. Then it became more homosexuality, but it was still a long time before there was a homosexual character. You could have a strong theme of "We need each other to stand strong", but just not include people of different races or give them narrow stereotyped roles.

And really, "Judeo-Christianity"? In Dragonlance? As an analogy or actual Jews and Christians? Cause that's hard to fit in.

I'm also not sure why you think Paizo shrieks in fear at including everyone. They don't have Judeo-Christianity, for what I think are obvious reasons. They haven't done much if anything with Native Americans, though there is a place in the world for them and there's been some talk of it. They do have atheism, blacks, interraciallism and heroes and villains of all sorts. So, near as I can tell, you're way off base there.

[Shisumo]

The Shoanti have a pretty heavy Native tribes vibe going on.

["Devil's Advocate"]

Shisumo wrote:

The Shoanti have a pretty heavy Native tribes vibe going on.

They do at that. Honestly, they slipped my mind, so thanks for the reminder. :)

["Devil's Advocate"]

thejeff wrote:

Well, I don't count myself an "internet expert", but I'm willing to concede WoD, with the caveat that as LazarX, it's our world with twists rather than a new creation. That said, it was also pretty Eurocentric and bits of their treatment of other cultures and groups made me cringe at the time - often being more US/European pop-culture takes than anything else.

For Dragonlance, I only read the original novels (maybe 2 series?) and a couple modules and haven't done so in decades. They did have women as major characters, though I can't really comment on their roles at this point. I don't recall (and a quick internet search doesn't help) much racial diversity - though I guess Riverwind(?) & Goldmoon(?) were basically Native American?
I may be forgetting or they may have come in later, but I don't remember any black or asian characters.

I have no idea what you mean to imply by "analogy for inclusion". You can also present an analogy for something without actually including it. In fact that's how you usually do it. The original X-Men were an analogy for racism and were all white. Then it became more homosexuality, but it was still a long time before there was a homosexual character. You could have a strong theme of "We need each other to stand strong", but just not include people of different races or give them narrow stereotyped roles.

And really, "Judeo-Christianity"? In Dragonlance? As an analogy or actual Jews and Christians? Cause that's hard to fit in.

I'm also not sure why you think Paizo shrieks in fear at including everyone. They don't have Judeo-Christianity, for what I think are obvious reasons. They haven't done much if anything with Native Americans, though there is a place in the world for them and there's been some talk of it. They do have atheism, blacks, interraciallism and heroes and villains of all sorts. So, near as I can tell, you're way off base there.

Theros Ironfeld wasn't included much in the novels as they had to trim over half of them, but he was a blacksmith that was forced into slavery after loosing his arm. It was through his dedication and mastery of hard work and the later acquisition of the Silver Arm of Ergoth that allowed to recreate the Dragonlances and present them in the time of greatest need.

Depending on your point of view, Tanis can be either a representation of bisexuality, caught between two very different worlds and not fully accepted by either, or the more common half breed. In the first, Laurana is the more feminine aspect while Kitiara is the masculine, and it also plays a great deal into how his character is least of all understood even by his closest friends. More of a read-between-the-lines case than an explicit one, as the character as presented is not bisexual.

There is also something to Tas being gay. Again, it's more read-between-the-lines, but there are a lot of comments like "when are you going to find a good Kender (Halfling) woman and settle down, start a family,. . ." and his reply is something like "I've tried. I just, well, I can't really related to other Kender anymore." The given connotation is that he has grown up, but it could also very easily be suggesting he doesn't have any attraction to females.

For the Christian part, Tracy Hickman is a devout Mormon (I believe), and he and other have included a lot of aspects in there, some as easter eggs and others as parables. For example, the Platinum Discs of Mishakal (that hold the greatest gift for mankind) is an allusion to the Joseph Smith's Golden Plates. Paladine is often presented as a carring father that wants mortals to make the right choices on their own, there are more than a few miraculous curings of the "get up and walk" style.

Both Gilthanus' and Silvara's as well as Huma's and Gwyneth are tales of interracial relationships, (as well as the more upfront Tanis and Laurana), and there is also something to be said for Raistlin being a metaphor for transgender.

[xavier c]

"Devil's Advocate" wrote:

knightnday wrote:

They also aren't done yet. There are portions of the world, and the gods and people therein, that haven't been touched on.

Not everything is going to be there for everyone right off the bat; that doesn't mean that they are never going to follow up.

Which is all fine and dandy, but you may want to actually look up "inclusiveness", and reconsider just how long Pathfinder/Golarion has ostensibly been in existence. It' either a "pick and choose" setting or a "a little bit for everyone" setting. Can't be both, and by it's very nature, Golarion is not a "a little bit for everyone" setting.

Don't get me wrong. I'd absolutely love for Pathfinder to catch up, and start seeing some awesome stories come from it. A single father caught between taking care of his kids and a life of adventure. A "half-breed", or heck a cajun offspring of as Mwangi and an Andoran seeing the corruption and mistrust in both their parent's peoples and trying to come to grips with life in a world that I not altered just to highlight their struggle. A classic Christian knight story. A jewish occultist. Native American Indians that are not some sort of beastmen alternate species. "The Orient" that is not some sort of secret mystic society of exoticism. There is so much ground not covered/allowed, it's insane.

Pathfinder does have Christian elements in the setting. The planes of Heaven and hell come from dante's inferno and a Paladin is a classic Christian knight. The idea of the Paladin, Cleric and Inquisitor classes come from Catholicism. And then theirs all the angels, Both Sarenrae and Iomedae have classic strong Christian elements going on. And then there's the the archangel gods Sandalphon, Jegudiel, Uriel and Salaphiel that live on the plane of Heaven.

Then there's Asmodeus(who is just a surrogate for lucifer) and all the Archdevils who come from real world religion(Baalzebul, Barbatos, Belial, Dispater, Geryon, Mammon, Mephistopheles, Moloch)

[xavier c]

"Devil's Advocate" wrote:

thejeff wrote:

Well, I don't count myself an "internet expert", but I'm willing to concede WoD, with the caveat that as LazarX, it's our world with twists rather than a new creation. That said, it was also pretty Eurocentric and bits of their treatment of other cultures and groups made me cringe at the time - often being more US/European pop-culture takes than anything else.

For Dragonlance, I only read the original novels (maybe 2 series?) and a couple modules and haven't done so in decades. They did have women as major characters, though I can't really comment on their roles at this point. I don't recall (and a quick internet search doesn't help) much racial diversity - though I guess Riverwind(?) & Goldmoon(?) were basically Native American?
I may be forgetting or they may have come in later, but I don't remember any black or asian characters.

I have no idea what you mean to imply by "analogy for inclusion". You can also present an analogy for something without actually including it. In fact that's how you usually do it. The original X-Men were an analogy for racism and were all white. Then it became more homosexuality, but it was still a long time before there was a homosexual character. You could have a strong theme of "We need each other to stand strong", but just not include people of different races or give them narrow stereotyped roles.

And really, "Judeo-Christianity"? In Dragonlance? As an analogy or actual Jews and Christians? Cause that's hard to fit in.

I'm also not sure why you think Paizo shrieks in fear at including everyone. They don't have Judeo-Christianity, for what I think are obvious reasons. They haven't done much if anything with Native Americans, though there is a place in the world for them and there's been some talk of it. They do have atheism, blacks, interraciallism and heroes and villains of all sorts. So, near as I can tell, you're way off base there.

Theros Ironfeld wasn't included much in the novels as they had to trim over half of them, but he...

You do know that mormonism is not Christianity right?

[Shisumo]

Please for the love of all that is good and decent, let's not go there.