"Hundreds" of people in a city of more than 300,000 isn't that many. It's less than a third of a percent.Sure, but I'd imagine that their owners used the 'we feed you during sieges' as part of the justification for their political power.They didn't. The cornucopias' function was a closely-guarded secret.No, it wasn't. A Guide to Absalom is very clear on this matter:
"The 12 cornucopias of Absalom are open secrets. Discussion
of their appearance, location, or function is banned by
law, but hundreds of people have to be aware of exactly
those things to enforce the laws." - A Guide to Absalom, page 60 (emphasis mine).Many people know what they are and what they do, it's just not openly talked about.
That's only the most relevant part, the text then goes on to say:
"As a result, anyone who truly cares how the government of Absalom functions knows of the cornucopias and their different appearances, but such things are never discussed openly." - A Guide to Abaslom, page 60.
The point is, it's vox populi in Absalom what the cornucopias are, what they do, etc. The big secret is their names and how they're hidden by each Primarch, as explained later in the same page.
"It is known that each has its own name, though those details are truly secret, as is the security each high seat uses to ensure his
own cornucopia is never stolen."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This really feels like it might be a side conversation for the lost omens world section instead of in this thread. I know I helped start it by asking about how average citizens were supposed to know what kind of magic was being used against them, but maybe even that would have been better in an advice or GM thread after we see what is in the first book.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Then what, in the entire state of Kentucky, fried f+*~ are you talking about?Somewhat on subject (and not to anyone in specific here), I've been deeply disappointed by the words of people on both sides of the conversation I've seen here. This thread has done more to push me away from the Pathfinder community than anything else since the original Pathfinder playtest. And I say this as someone who isn't white or straight.
Cydeth, I am really sorry that you have found this thread pushing you away from the pathfinder community. I am really curious if it is the general tone of the discussion, or the topics that are being discussed that is making you feel alienated, but I also understand if you don't want to comment in a space that feels unsafe to expressing yourself. It is important for all of us to remember that you are not having a conversation with one person when you respond in a public thread, you are talking to everyone who just stops by to learn more about the topic.
I am not exactly sure what the "sides" are in this thread, or even if there are enough people in agreement about any aspect about how a potential AP like this should or should not be approached to form sides, but it is definitely important that the discussion not make people feel unsafe about discussing their ideas, their concerns and their hopes for future content. That is probably generally true on this board, but seems extra important to remember in a thread like this where people are talking about real traumatic experiences they may have had and how a hobby they love might be able to tackle difficult material and still be respectful of the needs of all of its players.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Cydeth, I am really sorry that you have found this thread pushing you away from the pathfinder community. I am really curious if it is the general tone of the discussion, or the topics that are being discussed that is making you feel alienated, but I also understand if you don't want to comment in a space that feels unsafe to expressing yourself. It is important for all of us to remember that you are not having a conversation with one person when you respond in a public thread, you are talking to everyone who just stops by to learn more about the topic.
I am not exactly sure what the "sides" are in this thread, or even if there are enough people in agreement about any aspect about how a potential AP like this should or should not be approached to form sides, but it is definitely important that the discussion not make people feel unsafe about discussing their ideas, their concerns and their hopes for future content. That is probably generally true on this board, but seems extra important to remember in a thread like this where people are talking about real traumatic experiences they may have had and how a hobby they love might be able to tackle difficult material and still be respectful of the needs of all of its players.
To put it simply, the general tone of many people has been non-productive, extremist, and disappointing.
Your comments were well-written, and I feel were pretty even-keeled. Many other posts have not been. I'd even say most.
|
I generally find it interesting how often someone's opinion regarding both the content and tone of a person's post is dependent on how closely it aligns with their own personal bias
I mean, that is why it is called personal bias :p
Like I think people on paizo.com can be overly zealous when they get defensive, but who gets defensive about what is completely dependent on their opinion and topic. Which is how opinions work
|
I generally find it interesting how often someone's opinion regarding both the content and tone of a person's post is dependent on how closely it aligns with their own personal bias
Depends. I've certainly seen people who were on my 'side' in a debate go too far, and even called them out on it, and I'm not alone in that. But yes, bias like this is always a risk and we should be careful to examine ourselves for it in order to avoid it as much as possible, though we'll never be perfect.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Forum posters here also do have bit of habit of ganging up if there is only one person with unpopular opinion. Or straw manning the opposite side completely. Or carrying on grudges from previous conversations from other threads.
But yeah, not sure what can be done about that besides trying to practice self introspection and avoid it on my part at least.
That said, messageboard conversations easily become nasty. On text chat you can't tell people's tone from voice or face so people easily project their own feelings the poster didn't intend. I can definitely attest to feeling like everyone is really hostile on forum when I'm being depressed(which is most of the time in recent years :p)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Forum posters here also do have bit of habit of ganging up if there is only one person with unpopular opinion. Or straw manning the opposite side completely. Or carrying on grudges from previous conversations from other threads.
^ Have to agree.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A lot of the ganging up may not be intentional, just that you read a post and want to say something in response and if it's an unpopular opinion a bunch of other people may do so as well.
It's all in the delivery. Usually it's easy to tell between just a difference of opinion from multiple posters by tone alone.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No, he said there would be a blog on Agents of Edgewatch...That's splitting hairs. Paizo's blog IS a public statement and given the nature of the subject matter, I cannot imagine they would water it down by combining this one with a bunch of ancillary, possibly unrelated stuff. Either this isn't really a big deal, in which case it shouldn't take long to publish your commentary or it is a big deal, in which you would throw a lot of resources at it immediately and make your statement as fast as possible to avoid or minimize the speculation.
For the record: you were right and I was wrong.
I had hoped the extensive delay meant we would be seeing something with details about the issues presented in the AP and Paizo's stance on addressing them. That isn't what we got. I admit to disappointment as well as confusion over how long we waited for Mr Mona's statement.
The blog post is pretty much what I imagined it would be, and I appreciate a willingness by Eric Mona to acknowledge that mistakes were made.
However, I also think that there is still the potential to do a lot more to help make sure that the intentions of:
I hope that Agents of Edgewatch as a whole will display our ability to listen and present the subject matter respectfully.
are carried out.
I strongly urge the AP staff to take a look at the ideas I posted earlier in this thread about ways to help make sure that this AP doesn't feed into some of the most obvious ways that policing in a fantasy game setting can become problematic, such as when the figures in positions of authority are disconnected from the communities in which they serve, and when character growth is driven more by personal rewards than rewards that connect directly to the community.
Oftentimes we get around 6 backgrounds for an AP and they will go a long way to establishing the character arcs as rooted in the community, but with only 6, it can be difficult for players to find a back ground that really fits both the story and their character idea. If we could get 12 for this AP, and have them tie deeply to specific neighborhoods and NPCs I think it would go a long way to help the AP steer away from potential abusive power fantasies that plague real world law enforcement that grows to see their "beat" as a battle zone instead of home.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Paizo has addressed the question I posed to create this thread. I’ll continue my subscription for now. I’m gonna bow out of this thread for good. As I do not want to get pulled into off-topic discussions or participate in debates about the validity of the spectrum of reactions we may see.
Let’s remember to be excellent to each other.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
About what I expected.
I disagree with the decision they made, but that is based on what little information I have. Some of my concerns may have already been addressed internally and during the editing process. I do appreciate that the idea of canceling seems to have at least been considered, even if they did not ultimately go with that.
Hopefully the Player's Guide and Volume 1 will prove me wrong.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Regardless of how you feel about the content of the AP, you have to respect Erik's commentary. Personally I found it to be a bit too contrite, but I understand the situation they are in. On one hand, I an glad they are following through with publishing. OTOH, I fear for the fallout that the very vocal minority (on either side of the topic) might have that could seriously affect the sales. Not liking the content and not wanting to buy it is one thing, but there are too many people that seem to suggest no one should be able to buy/play the AP because they don't like it.
We all know there is no way Paizo is going to be pro-racism or pro-discrimination in their content so we don't need to do the sky is falling speculation. If there are perceived problems with bits and pieces it'll be nuanced and even if it offends YOU in some way, you should be reasonable enough to see that it won't offend everyone and they have as much right as you do to play what they want, when they want, with whomever they want.
The only thing that is still unknown is—the content. Despite Erik's statement and presuming that is the position of the entire team, we really don't know how applicable their contrition is until we actually read the content. I think it is interesting that they are releasing the Player's Guide so far in advance of the first book. IIRC the PG is usually at least a few weeks later, or at best as the same time, but I admit I have not been watching that closely.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It has everything to do with you and your players sensitivities, or preferences, or however you wish to call them.
You don't speak for everyone, and some people may enjoy such dark plot points in their campaigns. They're not wrong for doing so, just as you're not wrong for disliking it.
If you as the GM or a player at the table spring a mind control and/or rape scenario on another character with out everyone's buy in that is 100% on you.
Consent is paramount, and just carte-blanche declaring [I]some[/I[] people like dark stuff doesn't make it all okay or permission to use it everywhere and anywhere.
Yes some people do, are those some people all the people at the table? It's your kink doesn't make it everyone's kink, nor does it mean such a topic shouldn't be treated carefully and seriously.
And...where exactly did I say you shouldn't get consent for this kind of stuff? Or use it all the time? Oh wait, I know: nowhere.
My issue was mostly at you saying this:
In game if a character uses mind control to rape another character it's not a fun game.
It has nothing to do with my or my player's "sensitivities".
Because:
a) You don't get to declare what is and isn't fun for anyone, except yourself.
and
b) As I already said, it absolutely has to do with you and your player's sensitivities.
Because RPGs are all group activities, you should always speak to the group when it comes to...well, everything mostly, but especially stuff like this.
And if the whole group is ok with it and wants to partake, that's excellent. And if some people do and some don't, you either reach a compromise of some kind, or one of the sides leaves.
And everyone gets on with their lives.
Wow, I honestly hope I never run into a group that's okay with acting out a rape fantasy. That really breaths life into the whole neckbeard negative stereotype of gamer dudes.
Now i don’t know how paizo prioritises it’s social media platforms but would like to note that there are hardly any comments on the Twitter post linking this blog. And if there is one place where a vocal minority is going to seize on something and magnify it then it is there
TwilightKnight mentions concerns of a “very very vocal minority”. Now that comment focuses on the noise of said minority and not the relative size. It would seem like a very low number that may not be high enough to have an impact unless they also happen to be respected reviewers
This issue has been magnified on this board enough to generate the blog. The people in the community references as having issues are likely those in this thread. The existence of the blog response at this stage in the process was the best those who were unhappy could have hoped for. You can be unhappy with everything that was said but at least something was...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've been following this for a while and wanted to drop in my thoughts here as well as a comment on the blog itself
My AP sub has had issues since I moved due to changes in billing address. I wanted to get it started again but when I saw what AP was coming up I decided to hold off. The blog, while I think it does address some issues, is not enough for me to pick up from this AP. I'll wait for more community reviews and consider dropping back in later depending on a thorough assessment of how things are actually handled, or wait for the next cycle of APs in 6 months.
The blog admits to them having had opportunities early in the process to course correct, that weren't taken. That I think is my larger concern. What is being done to address the issues correctly recognised here about dismissing concerns about this early on in the process? This is what I'd like to see more detail on to be comfortable that Paizo are taking these issues seriously and have a strong commitment to addressing them. It's important to recognise that having some representation from marginalised groups doesn't automatically make you respectful or representative of all marginalised groups, and you have to work at that. I'd like to see them doing the work that I can be happy supporting, and would love to support that in future.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I love that the question of the thread title got answered directly by Paizo with a resounding "no".
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wow, I honestly hope I never run into a group that's okay with acting out a rape fantasy. That really breaths life into the whole neckbeard negative stereotype of gamer dudes.
That’s partially the point. You won’t. Even most racists know they are and are comfortable with it. But, they generally know not to bring it to a public game like PFS because it’s not going to be welcome or tolerated. If they want to participate they have to stifle it. With a few exceptions of course. I’m not saying that OP is devoid of problem players. Just generally it’s not a problem. The places where it will come up most is places where it won’t matter. If you are an open racists then you’re probably playing like minded people. It is quite possible for there to be racial bigots in a lot of our gaming groups, but as long as they check it at the door, you may not even be aware of it.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wow, I honestly hope I never run into a group that's okay with acting out a rape fantasy. That really breaths life into the whole neckbeard negative stereotype of gamer dudes.That’s partially the point. You won’t. Even most racists know they are and are comfortable with it. But, they generally know not to bring it to a public game like PFS because it’s not going to be welcome or tolerated. If they want to participate they have to stifle it. With a few exceptions of course. I’m not saying that OP is devoid of problem players. Just generally it’s not a problem. The places where it will come up most is places where it won’t matter. If you are an open racists then you’re probably playing like minded people. It is quite possible for there to be racial bigots in a lot of our gaming groups, but as long as they check it at the door, you may not even be aware of it.
You have had a lot of luck with your tables then.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wow, I honestly hope I never run into a group that's okay with acting out a rape fantasy. That really breaths life into the whole neckbeard negative stereotype of gamer dudes.That’s partially the point. You won’t. Even most racists know they are and are comfortable with it. But, they generally know not to bring it to a public game like PFS because it’s not going to be welcome or tolerated. If they want to participate they have to stifle it. With a few exceptions of course. I’m not saying that OP is devoid of problem players. Just generally it’s not a problem. The places where it will come up most is places where it won’t matter. If you are an open racists then you’re probably playing like minded people. It is quite possible for there to be racial bigots in a lot of our gaming groups, but as long as they check it at the door, you may not even be aware of it.
Sure, but as I don't play PFS anymore (haven't really since the end of 2016), it would be home groups that I'd come across. And it sounded a lot like several posters were promoting the right of groups of players to play in whatever style they want to play. I know that we try our best to be inclusive and not say "badwrongfun". But I'm gonna say it.
Just like tabletop RPGs can help socially awkward people, shy, and people on the spectrum or with high levels of anxiety incorporate into a group of people in a positive manner, so to can such groups perpetuate hatred, bigotry, and negativity. If a group of people get together to roleplay in an echo chamber of misogyny, hatred, etc., how is that really any different than a club of people who think like that getting together to think like that?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wow, I honestly hope I never run into a group that's okay with acting out a rape fantasy. That really breaths life into the whole neckbeard negative stereotype of gamer dudes.That’s partially the point. You won’t.
EDIT: Double post. System's being funky today.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wow, I honestly hope I never run into a group that's okay with acting out a rape fantasy. That really breaths life into the whole neckbeard negative stereotype of gamer dudes.That’s partially the point. You won’t.
The thriving community over at r/rpghorrorstories and the endless testimony of marginalized folks of all sorts suggests otherwise.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I’m sorry, I didn’t realize I had explicitly say “generally” or “not all” or something to that effect. I’ve been getting yelled at for years when people make statements like cops are bad or men are pigs that they aren’t saying ALL, just some. So when I say you won’t, I assume the same expectation applies that generally, in most cases, you won’t.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I’ve been getting yelled at for years when people make statements like cops are bad or men are pigs that they aren’t saying ALL, just some.
I have to wonder why. My experience has been that when people say "all cops are bastards" and "all men are pigs," they're really talking about the roles they play as groups in society and aren't really making individual judgments. People who paint with a broad brush only to walk it back just aren't committing to the structural argument - likely because they're too committed to individualism.
|
|
Hard to tell how common they are overall though. Since its always easier to remember and notice really horrible people and that is without getting into problems specific to internet.
I really get feeling that some people really missed the point of "don't kink shame people" :P Like point of that isn't "You are allowed to force your creepy and taboo fetishes on others in public or without consent"
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The actual semantic content of "All X are Y" arguments is basically "it is impossible to efficiently distinguish a member of group X from those X which are Y."
Since bad actors who mean ill generally know to pick their spots, after all.
|
|
I get it though that when you feel like group you are part of(or your friend or family member is part of) is being generalized that its easy to feel like its personal attack on you. But I think its really unfair to claim mistreatment of marginalized group being on same level as marginalized group saying something mean about privileged group :p
Plus like... I had to once spend multiple months in same location with random sample group of men in my age group and vast majority of them acted bigoted, sexist or otherwise horrible :p(Finnish mandatory military service wasn't exactly pleasant to me) If you have any sense of empathy, you are going to be scarred by that even if you aren't direct target of discrimination. I'd think if you are direct target, its even more scarring, so all forms of "Oh you have been treated badly, but I'm not going to offer extra sympathy for you because you generalize my group" comes across to me as... Well like if person who says that never has to deal with it themselves in any form :P
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I haven’t read through this whole thread, and only even heard of this AP when I saw the Paizo blog post, so I apologize if my comment has been said several times before, but if Paizo needs to apologize for having us play cops, what about Hells Vengeance where we play evil supporters of oppressive devil worshippers? Is that not problematic? Or probably most of the APs where the group are violent vigilantes killing their way through the countryside?
I’m not trying to be snarky or engage is whataboutism to make a point and I very much recognize the moment we are in right now and the systemic racism that infests policing (and many other institutions), but this is a sincere question.
That said, I am very much looking forward to more options and consideration for solving problems nonviolently or at least nonlethally. I’ve long felt that too much of the game revolves around killing. I’d love to see skills be more prominent and more varied plots that aren’t just connecting various battles.
But why is a cop so much worse than a pirate or an assassin or a necromancer or a vigilante or a soldier or any of the other roles and classes we are given to play?
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I haven’t read through this whole thread, and only even heard of this AP when I saw the Paizo blog post, so I apologize if my comment has been said several times before, but if Paizo needs to apologize for having us play cops, what about Hells Vengeance where we play evil supporters of oppressive devil worshippers? Is that not problematic? Or probably most of the APs where the group are violent vigilantes killing their way through the countryside?
I’m not trying to be snarky or engage is whataboutism to make a point and I very much recognize the moment we are in right now and the systemic racism that infests policing (and many other institutions), but this is a sincere question.
That said, I am very much looking forward to more options and consideration for solving problems nonviolently or at least nonlethally. I’ve long felt that too much of the game revolves around killing. I’d love to see skills be more prominent and more varied plots that aren’t just connecting various battles.
But why is a cop so much worse than a pirate or an assassin or a necromancer or a vigilante or a soldier or any of the other roles and classes we are given to play?
Because there's a world of difference between saying "hey, you play bad people in this AP" and saying "hey, the violent cops you play in this AP are good guys."
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
That has been addressed, there's a difference between playing outright evil characters in an evil game (which sucked btw), and when police brutality is rampant in real life them releasing a campaign that goes "let's play vigilante cops it'll be fun!".
Yeah, if you read Erik’s apology, it wasn’t for the content - he says they tried to treat the subject matter sensitively and that the assumption is one of celebrating heroes, not of glorifying violence committed by cops.
The apology was because it wasn’t an appropriate theme for an AP, he was told it wasn’t a year or two ago (back when it was approved) and he didn’t pay sufficient attention to those warnings.
There’s a whole bunch of themes Paizo wouldn’t consider appropriate as a focus of an AP and they have belatedly realised PCs-as-cops is one of them (no matter that they no doubt treated the material with their usual respect and skill).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Because there's a world of difference between saying "hey, you play bad people in this AP" and saying "hey, the violent cops you play in this AP are good guys."I haven’t read through this whole thread, and only even heard of this AP when I saw the Paizo blog post, so I apologize if my comment has been said several times before, but if Paizo needs to apologize for having us play cops, what about Hells Vengeance where we play evil supporters of oppressive devil worshippers? Is that not problematic? Or probably most of the APs where the group are violent vigilantes killing their way through the countryside?
I’m not trying to be snarky or engage is whataboutism to make a point and I very much recognize the moment we are in right now and the systemic racism that infests policing (and many other institutions), but this is a sincere question.
That said, I am very much looking forward to more options and consideration for solving problems nonviolently or at least nonlethally. I’ve long felt that too much of the game revolves around killing. I’d love to see skills be more prominent and more varied plots that aren’t just connecting various battles.
But why is a cop so much worse than a pirate or an assassin or a necromancer or a vigilante or a soldier or any of the other roles and classes we are given to play?
Or even more subtly, playing hero cops doing hero things and never being unnecessarily violent, still paints a picture of what cops are like that's not real, but one that many white people still hold onto.
Both Officer Friendly and the darker version where cops break the rules to stop the bad guys work as propaganda.
In a thread full of great answers, this has been my favorite.
Playing the "Good Guy" who uses violence to solve problems doesn't quite square with a real life job that shouldn't be using violence to solve problems.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Because there's a world of difference between saying "hey, you play bad people in this AP" and saying "hey, the violent cops you play in this AP are good guys."I haven’t read through this whole thread, and only even heard of this AP when I saw the Paizo blog post, so I apologize if my comment has been said several times before, but if Paizo needs to apologize for having us play cops, what about Hells Vengeance where we play evil supporters of oppressive devil worshippers? Is that not problematic? Or probably most of the APs where the group are violent vigilantes killing their way through the countryside?
I’m not trying to be snarky or engage is whataboutism to make a point and I very much recognize the moment we are in right now and the systemic racism that infests policing (and many other institutions), but this is a sincere question.
That said, I am very much looking forward to more options and consideration for solving problems nonviolently or at least nonlethally. I’ve long felt that too much of the game revolves around killing. I’d love to see skills be more prominent and more varied plots that aren’t just connecting various battles.
But why is a cop so much worse than a pirate or an assassin or a necromancer or a vigilante or a soldier or any of the other roles and classes we are given to play?
Or even more subtly, playing hero cops doing hero things and never being unnecessarily violent, still paints a picture of what cops are like that's not real, but one that many white people still hold onto.
Both Officer Friendly and the darker version where cops break the rules to stop the bad guys work as propaganda.
In a thread full of great answers, this has been my favorite.
Playing the "Good Guy" who uses violence to solve problems doesn't quite square with a real life job that shouldn't be using violence to solve problems.
But isn’t that a more fundamental problem with this whole genre? All games involve playing a good guy who uses violence to solve problems. A huge portion of the feats, class features, etc involve combat.
|
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
What an idyllic notion
Sometimes, cops have no real choice but to use violence. Indeed, sometimes any person might have no real choice but to use violence. But that's fundamentally not the core of the job of police officer, they are peacekeepers rather than soldiers, or at least they should be. They should, frankly, if anything be more reluctant to use violence than random civilians are because they have greater power and authority to use it when they do choose to.
Violence is not their primary job, it should be their last resort rather than their first.