Відео

Once a game is released game companies cannot dictate who does or doesn't play their game. The difference is I will pay for a TTRPG devoid of political showboating by the creators. But if the creators get openly political I pirate their game (if I want it) instead.

So he is saying that if you disagree with them....Pirate it????

Magaphobes are at it again.

Someone selling a product has every right to intend their product to a particular type of person. However, if people outside of that intended range purchase the product, enjoy the product, and use the product as intended, then congratulations your field of view was too narrow. Kind of analogous to casting a fishing net. The larger the net the greater chance of catching fish. It seems Paizo officials want to go from using a net to cast, to a rod and reel, on a dry creek bed, in the desert. 😆

Never play woke RPGs. Instead, try independent OSR rule-sets like Advanced Crimson Dragon Slayer! *CHA'ALT*

I disagree. There are people I know enough about or associate themselves with certain organizations that I have NO INTEREST in having at my table. I would never play with a MAGA. There is no way we could possibly have common ground or enjoy the game together. And if I created the game I was playing I 100% would not want a single MAGA to be playing it.

Say what you will I just wish they would wear friggin deodorant. Tired of walking into my FLGS and 90% of the patrons smelling like they haven't bathed in 3 weeks. But I guess it kinda goes with the territory :\

Depends on the disruption of that player. If they are upsetting the other players, then it is a player talk. If they are just edgy as a character, that is an opportunity to introduce ethical dilemmas to that character, and really have them think about it. A lot of work goes into that: making them care enough about the campaign to make them feel that an ethical dilemma is important enough to require thought. Alternatively, lean into it. Let them be their own Batman, it can be very fun to play the brooding character, so long as the brooding character plays an active role in the party.

I'm only familiar with Vance due to his appearance on Joe Rogan and he seemed like a pretty normal guy. I'm tempted to not even say "for a politician". I genuinely do not see the point in this moral grandstanding and trying to ostracise people, but I guess everything in america has to be split along some line, either race or politics. All this virtue signalling does is alienate people. Nobody will buy your game just because you did this, but people will stay away. I'm not even american and I immediately want nothing to do with pathfinder because of this vitriol.

Tim Cain was talking about Do Devs know what Players Want?, and using that video, it informs my opinion that TTRPGs are made for: everyone and no one. What I mean by this is the popularity of a TTRPG is only as popular as the people who play it (that feels like a, "well... duh", but keep with me). Every player has their own tastes, and even if they can't describe what their problem is with a game, they know that they don't like it. But, they like Fantasy. Which takes me back to Tim Cain's video, where he says, "Most of the game industry doesn't even agree with itself. So, big companies will make a game trying to satisfy as many groups as possible, but end up making mush in the end.", same deal in TTRPGs. It's actually a problem that Matthew Colville has with Dungeons and Dragons, Hasbro/WotC made a game that's not really about anything, so nobody thinks anything about it. What does all this mean? Not much, just that the TTRPG that should be played should be attractive to the person interested in the game, that is who it is made for. For those who don't, it is not. It's for this reason that making a TTRPG is one of the hardest things to do on the gaming industry. Matthew Colville called these prospective games, "Heartbreakers", because the devs spent so much time on these games just for them to fade into obscurity.

I can see this from a couple of points of view. On the face of it, I agree it seems like Paizo is pandering and doing playground politics. On the other hand, in a world where rpg live streaming is a (popular?) form of entertainment, I can see another perspective: personally, I also wouldn't want my content being broadcast in an offensive context. If I publish a game, sure, do whatever you want with it in privacy. But broadcasting is different. You can imagine if you made a game focused on exploring Christian themes or scriptures, how would you feel if some people from the Church of Satan picked up a copy and started a youtube channel where they use your game in a way that satirizes or subverts your intentions? I'm not claiming anything like that was JD Vance's intention. I don't follow social media, so I don't know whether or not my example is relevant to that specific person's situation. I'm just saying, I can understand how, in a world of live streaming, I would want to be ahead of anyone who would use my published material for purposes that I consider reprehensible. (Or, if I was representing a company, for purposes that would do reputational damage and reduce sales.) Is it possible this is what Paizo is concerned about?

The intended audience of anything would be whatever the maker says it is. That's kind of it. If it's not for say, fascists or racists, then it's not for them, but this gets kind of hard to control when people can inject their own thing into the world you made or you yourself aren't actually selling it to have a vetting process. The guy can't stop Vance from buying anything, or people allowing Vance into their games, but he can send a message that says he hates Vance, and everything he and people like him want, so that every time he or those like him tries to partake, that's basically all they'll think about. The only creators who have to turn a blind eye to things they don't like for their creations to succeed, are those that haven't made it yet. On the "Wouldn't you want him to sit down a play" point; Vance would never sit down to play anything about colonialism being bad, and whoever is DMing for him would never use the campaign saying it is, and if all the campaigns essentially push these tolerant storylines, you'd more than likely chalk it up to propaganda, like Marvel or any of the other things that were listed early in the video, so this seems like a disingenuous argument for being tolerant of intolerance. Conservatives regularly try to deny others things if they don’t like or aren’t comfortable with someone else’s lifestyle or some other thing to boot. Vance is a grown man who isn't about to change because a campaign in a TTRPG is good, and he shouldn't need that in the first place, so no, you wouldn't want him sitting down to play. If the guy is a fan and does play TTRPGs and has interacted with all these fantastical different species/creatures and has still walked away and is able to be seen as a fascists, by the creator no less, idk how this helps, and this isn't the thing to change him. A game like Wolfenstein has you literally running around killing Nazis. I don't think Nazis want to play that game. It's okay if you don't want a certain POLITICAL group to play a game. Especially if said group has been aligned with what's pretty much universally been recognized as bad before. There's nothing differentiating a Nazi from a normal person aside from their harmful ideology. You shouldn't be so "Live by the party, die by the party" with politics that it literally becomes you in the first place.

I find the only people I would not want playing a TTRPG is the type of person who would name any other group or type of person as someone they don't want playing a TTRPG. That said, having a target and intended audience is not a bad thing. It helps you decide the scope and intricacy of the game as well as tone and aesthetics. If you want to target new players, you want the system to be streamline and intuitive. If you want to target experienced players, you want wide options that bring sophistication. Do you want casual players? Then you make simplified systems with short term scenarios and don't worry about character growth or leveling so much. Want long term players? Then have character and power growth be a core element of the game. As for aesthetics, worth remembering that the intended group is more of the GM than the game designers, so leaving that flexible is a good idea, but generally tone should match the expected play time. The more extreme the tone, the more likely it is to be short term. Super deadly horror games and light hearted comedies have the same short lifespan since either characters or jokes die after a few sessions. Game design is complex.

What I'm getting is we should all be sitting down and playing Pathfinder with JD Vance. Appreciate your nuance and self-reflection

I say fine we still have other ttrpgs out there like shadowrun, cyber punk , gurps, and many others. I don't need dnd at my table, safe space trigger word pandering not included in any of those

Damage is done. They hid and blocked comments on FB and X. I already canceled my subscriptions with them.

You outed yourself by admitting you listen to Jordan Peterson and take him seriously. Kind of baffling that you are in the ttrpg sphere at all.

This was a big mistake on your part, imo. Ttrpgs are inherently progressive and creative, the antithesis of Conservatism. The bigotry, xenophobia, racism, and sexism of the Right has no place in ttrpgs. There are thankfully a minority of Right wingers in ttrpg.

I didn't think I would, but I totally agree with your statement. Pathfinders' lore is very progressive and most definitely has viewpoint if you know where to look, and you would think you would want those with the opposite opinion to have positive interactions with your ideology. Rational arguments don't change people minds; experiences do. People don't remember what you said, they remember how you made them feel. JD Vance will be in a position of power, they are throwing away any way of influencing him with outright rejection. That might feel good in the moment but it hinders their own cause.

The right answer is get these fucking political cancel culture out of our game it drives me insane.

I want everyone to play it except people who dont want others to play.

I think it's ok for me as a creator to say "I'd rather you didn't listen to my music if you are an SS Officer and go around killing people" (to use an extreme example). That's my right. Nobody can force that guy to stop listening to my music. I just feel weird knowing he's out there enjoying my stuff.

“So, if you’re Jason, shouldn’t you be trying to get that person [JD Vance] to play in a TTRPG with you?” The answer is no. The point of that tweet is to show solidarity with Paizo’s intended audience, who tend to be liberal and consider themselves anti-fascist. To try to branch out to JD Vance, or those with a similar political views, would be a waste of time and resources because chances are they’d complain Pathfinder is “too woke” and not buy the books anyway. My take: it’s all a non-troversy.

ua-cam.com/play/PLpft-UmnoeyQrz8rJWF1W9_TtYYUJINjF.html&si=3ORVp-BvSiUEPjI4

Gatekeeping the entire hobby is impossible; all it can really accomplish is deterring some people from trying it themselves, at a general level. On the other hand, there are many reasons to play, and many different desirable returns from playing; thus, providing information about what a specific games is trying to accomplish and/or what kind role-playing and gaming its rules are intended to support best, is good practice. That said, turning away any and all consumer purchases would just be foolish. Knowing when an individual is not right for your table, and helping them to find another game more suitable for their interests and aptitudes...priceless.

Have you seen The Dungeon Minister.

It isn't my job as a DM to lecture? I present the highly capitalistic, imperialist culture and you, the player, tell me what your CHARACTER thinks about it and, more importantly, what you intend to do about it?

What's wrong with Colonialism? I love Colonial Sanders, his fried chicken is fantastic

The twit in your thumbnail … is never going to improve the world. Do I mean the poster, the politician, the message, or the platform? Yes. The answer is yes. My opinions of the politician aside (they're not positive), the post is fairly uninspired and encourages the kind of us-vs-them two-worlds sort of total BS that is resulting in these wild and ever more violent pendulum swings back and forth in public policy. The responsibility for that can be laid largely at the feet of so-called "social" media, which IMO is one of the most anti-social things I've ever seen. It divides us into neat little algorithmic boxes and then feeds us outrage after outrage, because nothing gets engagement faster than rage and hate. It's designed to tear people apart. TTRPGs, classically, brought people together. I won't say politics and social policy don't factor into TTRPGs because they do, but they're not OUR politics and they're not OUR social policy. That means that the players can approach problems from the perspective they know and try to do what they can try to do about the problems they see. And sometimes they were wrong-deceived by guile, by magic, or even just by limited perspective. But for the most part the players see a problem and maybe if the plot development allows for it, a non-evil party will try to right the wrongs because it's what they do. And that happens across political and social lines, because ultimately we're not that different from one another. When I first played D&D, my first DM was honestly terrible. My second … had a simple rule: Whomever wishes to play is welcome. The rule is simple: While they're at the table, you'll treat everyone else at the table with dignity and respect. If you can't, you'll be leaving. If the table decides collectively that incivility is the rule, then he'll be leaving. At the time, he'd only ever once had to declare a game ended once due to a table's collective mistreatment of a player (with only that player ever invited back), but he'd ejected one or a couple of people a number of times. Shockingly not always who you'd expect. The result was that sometimes people who'd never say three words to each other away from the table became friends in time, some people who'd behaved poorly learned how to be better, and generally much fun was had. That's always the rule for me now. I don't expect this to fix major political divides. It's not going to bring the wealthy socialite together with the dirt poor slum-dweller, and it's not going to break down every social, religious, political, or ethnic barrier that exists in the world. Just that if you're willing to sit down with our group, we should have a good time together. Whatever happens beyond that, happens. TL;DR: The games are made for everyone, theoretically. The question is … can people set aside whatever outside crap is outside long enough to play the game together?

lets find common ground at the table.

The basic issue is that you have people pushing their agenda and that IS the sole point. They don't want a dialogue, they don't want to collaborate or make concessions, they want to push their thoughts and that's it. It's a very one-sided thing, and you'll often find the things they claim to support are often contradicted by things they actually do.

The correct answer of course is anyone who is willing to pay for it. One should never forget that these people are out to make money for themselves making a viable product is a secondary concern. It is the double-edged sword of living in a capitalist society. It's better than the socialist BS that some developers are ironically starting to espouse thinking it will bring in more customers...... But in a truly capitalist society you're always going to have the jerkwads that toss "enlightened self-interest" (the concept of doing well for) hose around me so that I may do well for myself ) out the window and do whatever they think will make the most amount of money in the least amount of time so that they can get rich and who cares what the fallout is as long as they get their paycheck.

I spend time at work counting material. I don't want to play an inventory management game. You don't have to address anything you don't like in reality at the table top. I also don't like Communism and I don't want to play a ttrpg dystopian communist setting.

If you make a game political - attached to a political party - then you will alienate a large portion of the ttrpg audience. Sell the game and not your politics.

The issue for me is that the Zines have very little context, and you need some experience to be able to create the context and how everything relates. For the moment, I am going with something that has a bit more around. Playing Hero kids, which is more like a dungeon crawler, and then transitioning to Household.

Who's the "Hell's Vengeance" AP for then? You know, the one where you play LE/NE chars on the side of very-very fascist Cheliax? P. S. I know it's not the same, it's just funny) P. P. S. Yeah, no, the community fostering an environment where skinheads and whatnot aren't welcome is one thing, but this sort of partisan bullshit from the writers... Especially in American system? Like, bruh, you have two right-wing parties, one of them is just a little more gay, give it a rest.

If you don't kick the Nazis out of your bar, then you become "the Nazi bar", because the Nazis absolutely will kick people out. Or, more broadly, when you're making a community, you can decide who to welcome. And that's what RPGs have been, ever since the beginning. They're more than just the book you buy off the shelf, they're the game you make with the book, and they're the entire group of people talking about it, sharing session writeups, exchanging tips, proposing changes. They're the community of "game makers", and that's GMs and players both. You can get into the community without even buying the book. But, just because you buy the book, that doesn't mean you're welcome into the community, and if somebody bought the book under that assumption, it's reasonable to offer a refund.

Facts: nobody didnt mention the tweet is over 6 months old (weird you read a 6 months old x tweet recently) and he clarified later he didnt mean republican voters with it. People that base their business and income on drama, will not only report about drama, they will create it out of thin air, because when they dont, they will have no content for their videos. These people are the same dramamongers as woke activists were before, they dont care about games or gamers, they are only interested to keep the business going. be critical, use your brain, be not like a woke activist

let me explain to all that are struggling to cope. its a guy, using his plattform to stand against fascism. thats all. easy right? but some snowflackes do not like that and point out that its not a good business decision. to those i say, thats called principles and not business. maybe its your first, but its not all about business, not even in business. capitalism is not our master (but maybe it is yours). The developers are allowed to say what ever they want. they have not power over what you play or buy. its your choice to move on or not. no big deal. just buy something else or keep playing it. who cares?

Man you sound like Jordan Petersen ahah

very distracting mess in the background...but yes, the point about highlighting the evils in the world in fantasy (and sci-fi) is an oldie but a goodie in those genres that seems to have been forgotten by black and white thinking of those who enjoy "calling out" everything and virtue signaling. yet, art can frame that which it depicts in ways that can send a message with a positive or negative value judgment. in world I have built or played (e.g. Dolmenwood), i love to expose the imperialism of dominant monotheistic religions. players cab then choose whether to ally with them, rebel against them, or keep options open. after all, not everyone in that religion is a completely evil person.... PS...I see tje same thing with people who "call out" Neil Gaiman or Gary Gygax. Sure he has likely done some really bad things that we can reject, but a wholesale rejection of anything associated with him is too stupid for me. What about HP Lovecraft or Picasso? We'd have to reject just about every artist that ever lived, and every person...because we all have a dark side to go along with the good side. wall building, even the virtual wall building of "calling out", is the beginning of fascism, right Tondril? (What if we find some dirt on the people who are calling others out, just like those in the dominant monotheistic religions do?)

Why do people keep bringing real life politics into TTRPGs? To me it’s stupid. People play to escape real world crap

1. Rules thus game's core mechanics are not copyrightable. Also it seems that it even doubles down in tabletop or other paper/make-believe games whose "core mechanic" is basicly your imagination and social interaction... And how do you copyright these and then run court cases with everyone? 2. Tabletop Roleplaying Games are a very young media, not precisely defined and more flexible than most modern media - ran through messages, videos, books, conversations, images, figurines... How much someone can claim of it to acquire a total reign over one? And if so, does not it make Pathfinder stolen goods from Hasbro's D&D 3e? 3. My issue on The Arts and The Craftsman/Artsman. Why does one come to the enviroment he hates, to make a product he disdains just to sell it to the community which he holds in contempt? One such excuse is a war to conquer, to make one's place yours. Why so, if the conqeuror shall leave it anyway? It angers me even more not for the destruction or sullying of a market, but for grotesque that is driven by ill-will. It reminds me of Saturn eating his own. And I would have some compassion over them, if they were not so forcefull in pushing it away. The Art of The Craftsman fullfills not only need for His Craft but also fulfills The Life of His. The Craftsman does not create for the gain which comes afterwards His Craft is noticed. The Gain for which He strives flourishes immediately during The Act and Blooms bearing Fruits at The Finish. For many it would be different, yet it'd stay positive - good feeling, learning, preserving a skill. Yet still I can't bare it whence I see above-mentioned. And more often than not such "salesman" will claim the title of an artist/craftsman for himself - meanwhile the title bares no significance. It simply is. Thus I am seething when someone tells me that it entitles them. Hmm, it does not fit Vance and MtG controversy with Pathfinder being involved... But current stream of the discussion seems to flow in the same riverbed as "The Culture Wars : The Trads' Return" xD Well, I suggest to lay eyes beyond the curtain of "social division", because as they say in my part of the world "If they are speaking of 》n《, they are stealing something else." It rings true as they stole our time ;3 And oh, I already wasted a bunch of time... Well nevermind, will write whence I can and certainly have time for... Or so do I hope ;) Godspeed! Have a good one, mate!

I would want everyone to play it. That’s the whole idea behind it right?

So much political nonsense going on rn, trying to get people upset at nothing again. Like the last Gygax nonsense. I don't honestly think Vance will ever care about what you're upset about. He's ~unfathomably~ powerful, and not from being sensitive to some nerds' opinions, but the opposite. The game is likely for anyone who will resonate with it. But Vance, like Musk, is more likely to stir up poop for his own clout, than improve *anything*. It's like how musicians kept asking Trump not to play their music because they don't identify with what he stands for, so they didn't want their music associated with him. Criticism you can't understand is often the most important kind.

TTRPGs create a story, and everybody loves a good story!

Colonialism is like porn. Good in moderation

If ya only think "new" Star Trek is propaganda, look at when the original was made and the cast. A Russian during the cold war? Commodore Stone - a black man - higher rank than Captain Kirk? In the 60s? In general SciFi is usually some form of propaganda because it makes it so easy to write in metaphors.

As an indie publisher, I don't care who plays my games just as long as they enjoy doing so.

Paizo is based out of Seattle and drinks the "We'd rather have a third world city than hold people accountable for doing drugs and committing crimes" Left-wing cool aid. I would not be surprised at all if Jason speaks for the company as a whole on this one. Clearly you have not read recent Pathfinder content, because it is literally the kind of propaganda that you describe in other media.