| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ogres are an...icky topic
I would bot be surprised If they got phased out silently
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm relatively certain that Paizo can still keep ogres as they are, since ogres are a generic fantasy term, and ogres aren't as ingrained in the D&D setting in relation to how Paizo has portrayed them in their own setting.
Odds are, if ogres get changed, it won't be because of the OGL.
Paizo can still salvage them. They were never known to be kind or nice in previous editions. Neither did they have to turn into the mutants from thecHills have eyes franchise either. They kind of ruined an iconic D&D monster imo
Paizo can still salvage them. They were never known to be kind or nice in previous editions. Neither did they have to turn into the mutants from thecHills have eyes franchise either. They kind of ruined an iconic D&D monster imo
Legally, Paizo could probably get away with using them, but I wouldn't count on it because they are pretty icky as described by other posters.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think ogrekin embodied some pretty uncomfortable tropes that Paizo is happy to move away from. Ogres themselves should be fine, edgy as they are.
I kind of like Pathfinder's edge, personally. I just don't like it to be at the disabled's expense, I guess, and the fixation on ogrekin deformities has rarely felt anything but cruel.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh lets go crazy. If they're going to rework Ogres, negotiate with Steve Jackson Games and create an adventure path where *that* OGRE comes out of Numeria and terrorizes folks. :)
...this was a TriumPh!
Creative Director
|
| 14 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ogrekin are not something that's enmeshed in the OGL, but a lot of their lore pushes deep into R-rated territory and consists of content that, while we COULD explore it in a 2nd edition product, would certainly come with a content warning and would likely not present them as player ancestries.
They're not removed from the world, but they're certainly downplayed. If we DO do something with them in the future, I'd like to explore keeping as much of their horror content as possible while also dialing back the parts that are pretty distasteful and not appropriate for our current target audience. I don't know if that's possible, so I'm in no rush to bring them back, personally. There are plenty of other great monsters to use in adventures in the meantime.
A bit of (safe for work) historical context:
I'm still very proud of the work we did on Rise of the Runelords. When we updated it from 3.5 to the 1st edition hardcover, I did my best to retain its grisly edges while adjusting language to be less problematic. If we update it again I hope we'd do the same, because I am 100% sure that part of that campaign's enduring popularity is that edge. But there's always ways to talk about mature content without being immature, and we are better at that today than we were yesterday.
Anyway... one of the things I wanted to do in Runelords, as a fan and scholar of horror literature, was to have two adventures explore themes from two very different genres of horror. In Skinsaw Murders, I hired someone from Europe to write us an adventure that delved deep into the themes of British gothic horror—in particular, a lot of the classic Hammer horror movies. Then with Hook Mountain Massacre I hired someone from the USA to write us an adventure that delved deep into the slasher/gritty horror themes of indie 70s horror—in particular movies like "The Hills Have Eyes" and "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" (hence that adventure's title having the word "massacre" in it and using rugged terrain in the title to evoke the notion of "the wilderness is scary" in the title).
|
Ogrekin are not something that's enmeshed in the OGL, but a lot of their lore pushes deep into R-rated territory and consists of content that, while we COULD explore it in a 2nd edition product, would certainly come with a content warning and would likely not present them as player ancestries.
They're not removed from the world, but they're certainly downplayed. If we DO do something with them in the future, I'd like to explore keeping as much of their horror content as possible while also dialing back the parts that are pretty distasteful and not appropriate for our current target audience. I don't know if that's possible, so I'm in no rush to bring them back, personally. There are plenty of other great monsters to use in adventures in the meantime.
A bit of (safe for work) historical context:
** spoiler omitted **...
That is cool! Thanks, Mr. Jacobs!
|
Creative Director
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, while Mammy Graul gave my players some memorable, if not gross, moments. I think I am okay with replacing the ogrekin in my Jade Regent game with ogres... My PCs will be 3rd level by the time they reach that area and Ogre Warriors are lvl 3, so it might be tough but not out of the question...
If you want fast and easy ogrekin replacements, throw the weak creature adjustment on an ogre warrior and presto... a level 2 ogre. You can even call it an ogrekin in your game and the players won't realize your'e using a weak level 3 ogre stat block. How much lore you get into about that ogrekin is up to you to choose as befits your table's comfort level and interests.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
IMO, one of the... potentially less controversial ways to address the topic if/when PF2 allows giant ancestries (as Ports of Call recently published a giant species for PC generation)... is to have a general giantkin versatile heritage with more specific subsets by giant type. Similar to the current geniekin heritage and subsets for ifrits, oreads, sulis, sylphs, and undines.
Although Golarion has it's own history, there are plenty of real world myths about heroes/villains descended from giants.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Paizo can still salvage them. They were never known to be kind or nice in previous editions. Neither did they have to turn into the mutants from thecHills have eyes franchise either. They kind of ruined an iconic D&D monster imo
They kind of made them better; far more interesting, and sinister too,imo.
Before they were simply ugly evil giants. When Pathfinder got a hold of them though, they suddenly had personality. And it was absolutely horrifying.
Ogres became the things in the wilds that everyone in the party feared at low levels. The kind of threat which you hoped would kill you before taking you prisoner. Really evil.
It was great (for our group and the stories we told).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Isn't that bugbears? :P
It's true that there are similarities, but they both occupy different types of regions.
Bugbears keep their lairs in hard-to-find places deep in the forest or hills.
Ogres lair in caves, crumbling ruins, or dilapidated shacks close enough to humanoid settlements or animal trails to make raiding easy.
I suppose it's possible you could find both deep in the forest near an animal trail, but I imagine that would be the exception that proves the rule. Also, I imagine they wouldn't get along very well more often than not.
Furthermore, bugbears often operate alone, whereas ogres will almost always have their families. The differences in intellect and personality also makes how you deal with them completely different too.
I really liked what Paizo did with Ogres and Ogrekin; Just like with Goblins and Bugbears, they were able to give them a unique spin and Paizo style that made them into something beyond "Generic humanoid bad guy #545. however I am also a hardcore Horror Fan whose watched and appreciated both versions of the Hills Have Eyes, Wrong Turn, etc. I know they are not to everyone's taste nor are they appropriate for all tables.
Paizo in Hook Mountain Massacre essentially gave back ogres their original themes from European fairy-tales ("Fee-fi-fo-fum," heads on spikes, etc.), with a dash of modern horror flavor.
I thought that the Hook Mountain Massacre was an interesting (even if grotesque) take on Ogres, since it gave probably the only in-game example of Ogre life/culture at the time.
It's largely non-descript and assumed otherwise, meaning Paizo could literally spin that off as being an exception and not the rule for Ogres.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is this thread, after all these years, that made me realize that Paizo has made a not-so-subtle pivot to "PG-13" instead of "R" Rated content with the back half of PF1 and into PF2. This explains a lot.
It's not like they won't publish some really dark, disturbing stuff (the last book of Hell's Rebels and much of Agents of Edgewatch comes to mind) it's just that they now do it for a specific purpose rather than "shock value for its own sake", which is IMO better.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've noticed the pivot to PG-13, too. I have complicated feelings about the move; I think it's great for making the hobby easier to, say, introduce your family to, and there's still plenty of neat, edgy stuff here, but we definitely lost something cool and unique of its own. I wouldn't mind it so much if it was clearer that PFI creations were allowed to take it a tidge further.
I also don't know that I mind the current ogres much, though I can see why some would. If the lore's uncomfortable for your table, you can always write your own. Ogres aren't a major part of Golarion. They're easy to avoid. I definitely don't think every creature and rules element in the game should be written to fit every table's comfort levels. If we did that, Calistria and Arshea probably wouldn't exist.
It is this thread, after all these years, that made me realize that Paizo has made a not-so-subtle pivot to "PG-13" instead of "R" Rated content with the back half of PF1 and into PF2. This explains a lot.
To be fair the Ogres in Runelords AP were imo a bit much. That is even after they were given a rewrite to make them less worse than they were before. I’m not bothered by material too much I had to tone down done elements of the Kruge? family.
I get they wanted to make Ogres stand out yet the whole let’s make them debased as possible was a bit much. I would have liked to se them made more intelligent, organized and evil. Imagine Ogres trained and using similar tactics like Fire Giants.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is this thread, after all these years, that made me realize that Paizo has made a not-so-subtle pivot to "PG-13" instead of "R" Rated content with the back half of PF1 and into PF2. This explains a lot.
To be fair the Ogres in Runelords AP were imo a bit much. That is even after they were given a rewrite to make them less worse than they were before. I’m not bothered by material too much I had to tone down done elements of the Kruge? family.
I get they wanted to make Ogres stand out yet the whole let’s make them debased as possible was a bit much. I would have liked to se them made more intelligent, organized and evil. Imagine Ogres trained and using similar tactics like Fire Giants.
I dunno, having lesser giants acting like Fire Giants would kind of make fire giants less interesting. I like that different types of giants lean into different cultural practices.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've enjoyed using ogres a lot in my games. I don't go with the inbred hillbilly tropes, but I have lifted some stuff from their entry in Classic Monsters Revisited, like their sport of swordfighting with people as their swords.
They're big brutes that love violence and have little capacity for empathy. The exact details as malleable and can be adjusted to individual groups.
I've noticed the pivot to PG-13, too. I have complicated feelings about the move; I think it's great for making the hobby easier to, say, introduce your family to, and there's still plenty of neat, edgy stuff here, but we definitely lost something cool and unique of its own. I wouldn't mind it so much if it was clearer that PFI creations were allowed to take it a tidge further.
I also don't know that I mind the current ogres much, though I can see why some would. If the lore's uncomfortable for your table, you can always write your own. Ogres aren't a major part of Golarion. They're easy to avoid. I definitely don't think every creature and rules element in the game should be written to fit every table's comfort levels. If we did that, Calistria and Arshea probably wouldn't exist.
I am also of two minds here. On the one hand I want it to be a game I can introduce my kids to. On the other hand I also play with my friends and (once in a while) some more grizzly topics are interesting - also because it gives something clear to fight. (We get enough gray tones in RL).
Maybe it would be an idea for Paizo to have a line of less PG-13 books - like a Bestiary, etc.
Now I don’t need a “Book of Vile Darkness” but just some none PG-13 would be fine - in particular in separate books.
Paizo's making what sells, so I can't fault them too much. I'd love to see more R-rated PFI content, though.
I think the only logical conclusion is that this calls for a third rarity dial:
• Rare as in, "few examples exist in the setting"
• Rare as in, "disruptive in certain stories and plots"
• Rare as in, "for refined tastes, not safe for work"
Joking aside, I wouldn't mind seeing what kind of product a more mature Paizo could put out that explores R-rated content, if there come a point where where they thought it would be worth it and could afford the smaller audience for such a product. I don't know what I'd want to see, just that I'd be interested to know what they could do.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am curious about how they will put pants on the centaur.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am curious about how they will put pants on the centaur.
Actually, there are RL clothes you can put on horses to protect their whole body from biting insects and other bad things.
The Centaurs would likely need help donning them though. Which would make them a very communal society and a lone Centaur with zero buddies a very rare thing.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
If scanty outfits is what people really miss about PF1 mature content, I'm suddenly bored. I've nothing against nudist pixies but I remember the outcry against letting the succubus put on a dress. Just doesn't interest me much on the topic of things we could do with an R rating.
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, it feels kind of petty. Like, the clothed succubus just looks more interesting than the old naked one. Costuming is a big part of character design. Also, like, I think most people enjoy clothed fanservice more, anyways? It's more titillating and gets across more personality. That could be my ace bias, though.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, it feels kind of petty. Like, the clothed succubus just looks more interesting than the old naked one. Costuming is a big part of character design. Also, like, I think most people enjoy clothed fanservice more, anyways? It's more titillating and gets across more personality. That could be my ace bias, though.
I can attest my personal feelings of feeling uncomfy/annoyed by all the scanty women and some other topics that I won't mention that's obviously designed/written by and for straight men. And that the last last sentence is my feelings too--At least give more fanservice for all and I'll have more fun and feel less targeted :P
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am curious about how they will put pants on the centaur.
I don't uh, think they will. They'll just ONLY release art of them from certain angles or like the art in the blog post when an angle from ABOVE isn't possible or desired they'll put something in "the way" of the nitty gritty.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am curious about how they will put pants on the centaur.I don't uh, think they will. They'll just ONLY release art of them from certain angles or like the art in the blog post when an angle from ABOVE isn't possible or desired they'll put something in "the way" of the nitty gritty.
I hope this is not the case. Including anthropomorphic ancestries should also include and explanation of their cultural customs including fashion. If centaurs believe that they must wear clothes over their human halves and not their horse halves, I am going to feel very bad for them and wonder why they feel such shame over human looking body parts.
I would much rather see examples of clothing like skirts, loin clothes, or other protective gear that centaurs use, at least when interacting with humanoid ancestries so as to not be treated or seen as “animals” by those cultures where fashion modesty would be expected.
I am totally ok with Centaurs rejecting the social morales of humanoid ancestries and doing their own thing/having their own ideas about their bodies, but it seems like a rather big thing to just ignore within the setting and giving players options for clothes that can fit their own vision for their character feels important.