I was more joking about you calling it newage and touchy feely.

Lots of dark/gritty fantasy has had more unknowable gods. I actually prefer Gods who don't literally have the ability to walk the Earth and run their churches directly in settings. It makes things less interesting to me when there is no ambiguity.

And not having perfectly knowable gods doesn't really preclude the idea of holy knights.

Quote from: rawma;796570I also don't think it's fair to insist that anyone who buys a pre-made adventure is going to have to put in substantial work to adapt it; I don't buy that sort of product much but it seems to me that avoiding work I would otherwise have to do would be the major motivation.

It wouldn't be fair, perhaps, if it required substantion work.

But I'll go out on a limb here and say that it seems highly unlikely that substantial work is required. How essential are the exact details of the paladin's transgendered relationship really? Is there some reason that stupidquestion person couldn't just change the situation that requires the Paladin to sell the family heirloom sword to something that fits a couple getting married with genders that don't upset his world view?

Aren't Paladins supposed to give away wealth or make significant tithings? Maybe the Paladin is low on cash and needs to sell the sword to pay for some other things. Ten seconds of thought turned up a few possibilities that could fit in with couples of any gender: buying a home, castle, or tower to live in, setting up a business to retire to and support the couple in their old age, providing savings for children, their education etc., creating a trust as insurance to support the spouse and any kids in case the Paladin ends up biting it, maybe setting up an orphanage to help the less fortunate, or maybe just new towels and a set of fine china.

It's not like it requires a major rewrite, a substantial rewrite, or even a moderate rewrite. So bitching about it just shows the OP is either whining and bone idle lazy or is just trolling.

Quote from: Emperor Norton;796589And not having perfectly knowable gods doesn't really preclude the idea of holy knights.

Our Real World (tm) is full of unknowable gods, and holy knights - again, look no further than Islamists, or Knights Templar, etc. However, I can see where you're coming from, of course.

Still, in D&D there is no ambiguity.The gods are demonstrably real, and that changes the dynamic completely. As has been said elsewhere, what's the point of "faith" if your deity can be called upon for actual, measurable, help every day by their Clerics? And if your god is demonstrably real, then Paladins in the D&D sense make... sense. You're a holy warrior in the service to a god that can level mountains, drain rivers, spread (or cure) plagues, etc. for realz, yo.

Point being, PALADIN, in the D&D sense, has a definite meaning, and it's not gray at all - it's all based on the dictates and desires of your (alignment) GOOD god.

And with that being said, then anything you, as a Paladin, do that goes against said dictates disqualifies you to be a Paladin. Ipso facto.

Quote from: Emperor Norton;796589And not having perfectly knowable gods doesn't really preclude the idea of holy knights.

Oh you say that like there are actual examples of holy knights of an unknowable deity.

Quote from: Werekoala;796591Point being, PALADIN, in the D&D sense, has a definite meaning, and it's not gray at all - it's all based on the dictates and desires of you (alignment) GOOD god.

Just because the god sometimes manifests and is good does not mean that the god is necessarily chatty to the point that the god's will is always known with certainty. Remember these are limited deities. They are not omniscient, omnipotent, nor ominpresent. There is still some room for ambiguity. Which is a damn good thing in a game. Ambiguity allows players to make choices and to face consequences. If there is only one right answer. And that answer is known. Playing the character sounds boring and like they could easily be replaced with a robot.

Just because clerics have demonstrable powers, doesn't mean there is zero ambiguity in the worship of them.

Even if the existence of Gods is completely provable, it doesn't mean we will necessarily know everything they desire for their followers to do, and that there will never be a split in belief systems.

I mean, maybe a sect splits off because of their dietary beliefs. If the god doesn't really care one way or another, that sect might believe they are the true sect, and the other sect is getting powers from somewhere else. Who knows?

Two different sects could think they are even worshipping and getting powers from two different gods, which actually turn out to be the same god.

Gods being demonstrably true in a setting does not equal a lack of ambiguity.

Quote from: stupidquestion;796339But since i paid inadvertently for this, because i never considered some RPG stuff might contain such blatant nonsense (a paladin, sworn to live a life of not metamophorically but literal fighting evil resistant or immune to non-magic weapons, selling her only magic weapon - also inherited from her father slain by demons - to please her lover and herself and she doesn't need attonement for this?) for "commentary" purposes, i decided to inform myself about any tendencies some company i consider buying products from might have for "commentary".

First up, Paizo's Pathfinder is NOT WotC's D&D. Different games, different companies. If you don't like Paizo's politics or quality of writing, you are under no obligation to support them. I don't like Pathfinder's rules so I don't give them my money.

I actually agree with you there's a problem with the Paladin's actions here, and it has nothing to do with gender of the lover.

As a GM, my gods hold Paladins to a higher standard in my games because they are important pawns in the mortal world for that god's power to be manifested. There are plenty of ways for that NPC to have adventured for gold to buy that potion that did not involve selling a magical weapon.

In my games, if a paladin were to sell their only magic weapon for a raise dead for their (mom, lover, child, best bro, whoever), there would atonement because a Paladin with a +2 Demonslayer is a valuable tool of their god.

BTW, Divine Bond is a once per day ability. So I don't see it as a replacement for a magical weapon.  

For me, the Paladin's act was "good, but not lawful" as the Paladin did not take into consideration the effect of her action on her temple and her community.

No reason to strip powers, but certainly my gods would geas that Paladin to either retrieve that weapon or quest for an even greater one.

Quote from: stupidquestion;796373I would prefer to buy rpg entertainment products that mostly or completely shut up about those topics, which are matter of more or less current political campaings, especially if the entertainment product picks a side.

Then don't buy White Wolf or Paizo. Boom, done.

Quote from: Ashoka;796379Next, you'll start telling us that vaccines cause autism, and same-sex marriage promotes beastiality.

Ashoka, stop denying hot bear on bear action!!!

Quote from: Will;796433Giving your love a life-changing gift because you sold a family heirloom is great story that is likely to have 0 impact on your actual adventuring power.

Only with a crappy GM. This tale could become very interesting. What about the father's ghost? Who bought the demon slaying sword? What if the Paladin's god had plans for the Paladin to wield that sword? What about the sword itself?

There are lots of possibilities for "no good deed goes unpunished" and "unintended consequences" by a good GM. Paizo could have made their story more interesting.

Quote from: RPGPundit;796448Obviously, no one is forcing you to make your next Ranger gay.

That's not true. I am totally forcing 1989 to make his next Ranger gay. I am sitting her right now casting a ritual curse upon him through the computer screen!

Will, touch your noggin to the screen to empower my curse upon him!

Quote from: Certified;796528Potions must be how the cool kids are doing it these days. I remember when you had to wear a belt in D&D land to get gender swapped. I also remember a +2 to Strength but that's besides the point.

Good point. D&D's had gender swapping for a long time.

Quote from: 1989;796410It's only going to get worse from here on out.

SJWs are hijacking RPGs to appease the 2-3% of the North American population that is gay/whatever.

Pathfinder already prouldy trumpets these anomalies and shoves them down your throat. D&D is close at hand.

It's been stated for the record, by the D&D lead designer, that if you don't accept/endorse homosexual acts, then you are a bigot.

I won't buy it.

What percentage of NPCs are "gay/whatever," do you think?  In, y'know, the whole game industry (which is, after all, what is being hijacked and ruined), I mean.  

Do you think it's maybe 2-3%?  Higher?  Lower?  What do you think the percentage is?

Quote from: Will;796559Haffrung: I'm pretty sure there was mention of married couples and occasional romances in RPGs long before Paizo.

Very little in the D&D material I've used. Certainly not the soap-opera level that Paizo takes it. But Paizo has their audience (largely people who read their books as hackneyed fantasy fan-fic, but don't actually play).

Quote from: Will;796559But privilege tends to overlook such things because married men and women isn't political, it's just normal, eh?

Ooh, I've been privilege-dissed.

Look, that crap doesn't want work with me because I'm almost certainly more liberal than you are. And by that I mean true liberal - I don't give a shit what other people do or believe. I really don't. But modern progressives of your ilk very, very much give many shits. That's why you feel you need to be ever-vigilant about what other people say and believe so you can point out their privilege.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;796569But it's not anything close to a consensus, especially in the broader society, and Haffrung raises the point that many people would find it intrusive regardless of their own beliefs on the matter.

It's not intrusive because of my beliefs. It's intrusive because it has fuck all to do with the real purpose of most adventures, and serves only to burnish the halos of the authors and signal to fellow ideologues that they're on the same side in an Absolutely Vital Struggle.

Quote from: Bren;796590It's not like it requires a major rewrite, a substantial rewrite, or even a moderate rewrite. So bitching about it just shows the OP is either whining and bone idle lazy or is just trolling.

My experience with Paizo adventure paths is that I have to excise so much anachronistic soap-opera bullshit that all the NPC background and motivations and plots - about 30 per cent of material - is unusable. So these days I stick to setting-based adventure material, where I can create my own NPCs and plots that aren't parables about the cultural hang-ups of left-leaning hipster geeks from Seattle.

In all the years I have played RPG, the groups I have been in have never "saved a princess (or prince)", had characters in romantic relationships (either with each other or NPCs), or dealt with interpersonal "icky stuff" (boy meets orc, falls in love, etc etc). You know "politics" with a small P.

I was going to write more. It became a pompous rant. You play games that have relationships in, I don't. What?? No marriages, sexualities, love, or romance stuff? nope. Don't want it. Which is why I don't understand the need to "include" these things or mention them regardless of who or what is involved in that equation.

Some game producers do. They make games they want to play, other people play them. Good for them.

Me? I am currently (yes, still) perplexed by the notion of deities in games. I actually freaked out and emailed a GM recently about the PCs being chosen and going on a religious quest. A jumping off point for a campaign, but really? Higher beings? Divine? Prayer?? I covered that in another post ages ago though.

>in before anyone says "muh cthulhu" fhtagn.

Yes, it "problematises" clerics in fantasy RPGs. So what.

Quote from: Spinachcat;796601Only with a crappy GM. This tale could become very interesting. What about the father's ghost? Who bought the demon slaying sword? What if the Paladin's god had plans for the Paladin to wield that sword? What about the sword itself?

There are lots of possibilities for "no good deed goes unpunished" and "unintended consequences" by a good GM. Paizo could have made their story more interesting.

Oh definitely!

I only meant that, from a sterile character power point of view, losing a +2 sword is a rather minor thing. Heck, by level 10 or so you need a wheelbarrow to carry out all the +1 weapons you can end up with.

STORY-WISE, it's a lot more potentially interesting, but that, of course, is up to GMs and players to tinker as desired.

Quote from: Spinachcat;796601Will, touch your noggin to the screen to empower my curse upon him!

BY THE POWER OF THE GIANT PINK POTATO, I COMMAND THEE!!!

Quote from: Bren;796590But I'll go out on a limb here and say that it seems highly unlikely that substantial work is required. How essential are the exact details of the paladin's transgendered relationship really? Is there some reason that stupidquestion person couldn't just change the situation that requires the Paladin to sell the family heirloom sword to something that fits a couple getting married with genders that don't upset his world view?

My point was in general; you can feel bad about buying a given adventure if it requires too much work to make it playable for you.

For this adventure, it's a pointless argument since neither of us seems to know enough about the actual adventure in question to say how much work is required.  Yes, the obvious solution is to change the genders and switch to some other circumstance; changing race, removing a significant curse, etc; then figure out any consequences to that change.

Quote from: Haffrung;796605My experience with Paizo adventure paths is that I have to excise so much anachronistic soap-opera bullshit that all the NPC background and motivations and plots - about 30 per cent of material - is unusable. So these days I stick to setting-based adventure material, where I can create my own NPCs and plots that aren't parables about the cultural hang-ups of left-leaning hipster geeks from Seattle.

Your experience in needing to excise 30% of Paizo material is irrelvant to the OP who bitched about just one thing. Not about 30% of the content. And fixing that one issue is easy and in no way comes even remotely close to needing to fix 30% of the adventure content. Which leads me to conclude that he is bone idle lazy (and I have little sympathy for people that lazy), that this was just an excercise in trolling, or both.

Quote from: rawma;796615My point was in general; you can feel bad about buying a given adventure if it requires too much work to make it playable for you.

Yes one can. But obviously that wasn't the OP's real point.

Quote from: Werekoala;796587You know what I mean. Go back and read Deities and Demigods and tell me how much gray area each deity had in regards to their followers.

This isn't Real Life (tm) we're talking about, despite what some folks would try to force us to believe.

Agree.

Typically a god might allow 2 groups to flourish under their banner and power their miracles and what not but when the two sides get into a fight, unless they are the god of "dicking around with people for fun", one of the sides will find that their magic doesn't work.

Its not like history where all the gods are made up. These gods are actually manifest entities with their own projects and goals.

I can see a deep game of some type where religious sects are at war with each other all supported by a single god where the god turns out to be evil and duping their followers or where it was the god of war or chaos or such like but if you are running paladins RAW as lawful good folk then they don't usually worship the Gods of Death, Chaos and War.  Now if you allow paladins to be holy knights of any religion not just the good ones so you can have a CE Paladin of Charak the Destroyer, Lord of Primal Chaos then sure maybe he wants to power up folks on each side.

Quote from: Will;796559Haffrung: I'm pretty sure there was mention of married couples and occasional romances in RPGs long before Paizo.

But privilege tends to overlook such things because married men and women isn't political, it's just normal, eh?

TSR did a series called HeartQuest or somesuch which were fantasy romance Endless Quest books.

I believe Oriental Adventures touched on marriage and/or consequences. But been ages and dont have the book handy to check.

And of course Dragonlance has that whole romance a dragon thing going.

Overall though the actuall marriage part was left open ended just like laws and other aspects. Stuff the DM can set up or not.