| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
We all know there are taboo subjects that we can't discuss on the forums. I'm fine with that and it makes sense to me. These subjects are ones that are unpleasant, at best, and positively sickening, at worst. But please, don't make these subjects part of the APs if we can't talk about them.
For instance all players starting the skull and shackles AP start in this state and are expected to inflict this state upon others. If there are certain subjects too horrible to talk about, don't make them a significant part of the game! If we can't talk about torture, don't list the statistical benefits of torturing prisoners and then forbid people to talk about it.
It's too late to do anything about this now, but in designing 2e APs, you should probably keep in mind what subjects pathfinder should include and not include.
I'm honestly not trying to start a fight with the devs (although I don't really care if I get banned), I just want the rules of what subjects that are part of the game to be clear. Thanks for your time. I'm hoping for good things with 2e.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I haven't really been active again on the forums long enough to notice this with anything except paladins, but... did they really forbid talking about torture after including it in an AP? Yeah, that's a bad call. Anything in a published adventure should be fair game for discussing on the boards, and if it's not, don't put it in the published adventure.
I was thinking the same thing WhiteMagus2000. Thread lock over questioning the morality of something that's built into the canon of the pathfinder universe. So I understand where you're coming from: if it's too touchy to talk about on the forums, why is it not too touchy to be in the game? IMO, they should remove it or give CLEAR guidance on alignment ramifications of such subjects so people will not want to come here to talk about it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have no idea what your talking about.....0.O
If subjects are "taboo" on the forums, then it's because there are to many juveniles making a fuss. Adults should be able to handle an adult discussion about anything.
God's above their is nothing I hate more than political correctness :P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If subjects are "taboo" on the forums, then it's because there are to many juveniles making a fuss.
Nope, it was a fairly civil debate be seemingly mature posters.
Wander over to the paladin poll thread to see the exact issue.
If subjects are "taboo" on the forums, then it's because there are to many juveniles making a fuss.Nope, it was a fairly civil debate be seemingly mature posters.
Wander over to the paladin poll thread to see the exact issue.
Thanks for the bread crumbs :P
Now to see if I can stomach following them ;)
Oh no....way to many posts to wade through......
My vote, replace Paladin with Warpriest.....problem solved :P
I don't know of anyone I have gamed with that's ever played a Paladin anyway ;)
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
In honesty, I would prefer the game rules for torture were "It doesn't work, the subject will just say whatever they think you want them to say". Since that seems the most realistic model for it.
In honesty, I would prefer the game rules for torture were "It doesn't work, the subject will just say whatever they think you want them to say". Since that seems the most realistic model for it.
But still a viable tool to make your point :P Which is why it has such a strong historical usage :P
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Topics being explored in an AP and being discussed on this forum are two very different subjects.
I think its absolutely fine not wanting your public messageboard becoming the medium for a discussion about the implications and morality of certain acts and still have these acts being a topic within your fiction.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think its absolutely fine not wanting your public messageboard becoming the medium for a discussion about the implications and morality of certain acts and still have these acts being a topic within your fiction.
That's all fine and good except that certain classes have "morality" restrictions and determining what the implications of those acts are as they relate to those characters seems a suitable topic if they are actions that happen in established canon. We then add to that a nebulous alignment system and it gets pretty darn murky, especially with people looking at it like in a modern absolute perspective as opposed to a game-world subjective perspective.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't see how "don't debate about whether slavery is moral" is the same as "can't talk about slavery, even in the context of adventures it's included in". Particularly when the problem conversation involved a pretty extensive thread derail.
But that's just me.
I don't see how "don't debate about whether slavery is moral" is the same as "can't talk about slavery, even in the context of adventures it's included in". Particularly when the problem conversation involved a pretty extensive thread derail.
But that's just me.
The fact that a thread can get into the debate over the morality of slavery, is exactly why alignment should not be tied to mechanics in the game.
The Mods: we genuinely can't have a thread full of people discussing why slavery is morally okay
Y'all: censorship! abuse of power! death and famine upon us! political correctness gone mad!
Nah - more like 'You guys have paladins in the game that operate for a church where slavery is OK - how are they not fallen?'
Slavery's bad, Paladins can't own slaves, what are you guys /doing/?
Perhaps a good reason why tying the lore closer to the rules is a bad idea? Golarian as a fiction does many things that Pathfinder as a ruleset disagrees with - this was always handwaved in the past due to the setting and the rules being different.
Nah - more like 'You guys have paladins in the game that operate for a church where slavery is OK - how are they not fallen?'
I'm completely sure nearly every faith that allows paladins doesn't hold lay people to the same standards as paladins. That's how.
Nah - more like 'You guys have paladins in the game that operate for a church where slavery is OK - how are they not fallen?'I'm completely sure nearly every faith that allows paladins doesn't hold lay people to the same standards as paladins. That's how.
That'd be fine if this was about lay people - it's not. That's why.
Customer Service Manager
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Topics being explored in an AP and being discussed on this forum are two very different subjects.
I think its absolutely fine not wanting your public messageboard becoming the medium for a discussion about the implications and morality of certain acts and still have these acts being a topic within your fiction.