So, regarding the "Persecuting Society" sidebar -- it seems to me that this is the exact opposite of the previous claims. In prior posts, it was said that C&S was portraying medieval Europe as unrealistically diverse -- like having majority women and non-whites in medieval Iceland. (Gagarth's Post #82)

The "Persecuting Society" section is mostly about how medieval Europe was *not* tolerant and diverse.

Quote from: Brad;1119751This kind of stuff right here is why it's fucking annoying reading this book:

So a bit more than Palladium's disclaimers about magic not being real?  Is it persistant or sporadic?  And again, what are the mechanics like?

At any rate it's nice to see some actual content to discuss.

Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser;1119759Is that quote from C&S 5E?  I can see what people are griping about if it is.  That said, if that's the only section addressing the topic in the entirety of over 600 pages, it seems easy enough to skip past or scribble over.

Should anyone engage in a carnal act with the
demon the demon may attempt to seize their soul;
the victim must make willpower roll at –20 or die
instantly. In a campaign more historically correct
than politically correct the GM may wish to extend
this power to a woman engaged in an affair; it was
generally socially acceptable for a man to have an
affair whereas it was a serious sin for a woman. A
Demon of Lust is incapable of using any of their
powers on one who is truly in love with another. A
Demon of Lust can climb (10 PSF%) but prefers to
fly over obstacles; they cannot swim though they
cannot drown.

This kind of stuff is just littered through the book...like, wtf man? IDGAF what some modern fuckface thinks, I care what medieval people thought; there is no need to preface every single thing that is "questionable" with some sort of "hey, we know this is not cool with you, but these people were fucked up, man" sidebar.

Again...irritating. You're reading the book, it's alright (although...fuck these mechanics. I was not a fan in 3rd/Rebirth, even less of a fan now), then they just throw this kind of crap in there, which breaks any sort of immersion. Yes, you can skip and ignore, but it's goddamn annoying. I get it, people in the past were assholes, but at least they didn't proselytize about their fucking moral superiority 24/7.

Quote from: David Johansen;1119772So a bit more than Palladium's disclaimers about magic not being real?  Is it persistant or sporadic?  And again, what are the mechanics like?

At any rate it's nice to see some actual content to discuss.

Persistent...it's 600+ pages, and it crops up constantly. The mechanics are Skillskape, essentially, with Rebirth sensibilities. Again, I am not a fan, but there COULD be a decent game in here. Honestly, though, if you're going to play C&S, go full 1st/2nd, or just play something like Lion & Dragon. Trying to modernize this game is futile because you're gonna lose all the flavor.

If anyone is interested, I can post an actual review.

Quote from: VisionStorm;1119766Nice sidebar text, but you forgot to throw in some jabs at people objecting to the notion that women warriors and black people were commonplace in medieval Europe, then work in some defense of Islam while simultaneously acknowledging that they were also patriarchal to shut down any objections to that defense, and finish it off with a recommendation to some downloadable woke propaganda disguised as game aids.

That's in the fine print.

Quote from: trechrironThis really amounts to an overblown melodramatic response to an equally melodramatic virtue signaling.

That's not inaccurate, but it's a little reductionist. It's not so much the virtue signal itself as the attitude it betrays.

If part of the reason one likes the game Chivalry & Sorcery at all is its evocation of a fascinatingly different era of history -- albeit a highly romanticized, fantasticized version thereof -- which is nonetheless the root of our own, then realizing that the people producing the game are approaching that historical age with a sense of apologizing for it at best and actively deconstructing it at worst is, I think, a valid red flag. As I noted back in my first post, I'm tired of that approach, and ceasing to reward it is a useful method of discouraging it.

Likewise, the way I understand the complaints about the "emphasis on diversity" is not so much objecting that the game acknowledges the existence of minorities not generally depicted at centre stage of history, and often exceptionally persecuted into the bargain, but that the game's designers are apparently going out of their way (in community promotion, if not yet confirmed in the game itself) to argue that these groups and their struggles should be given at least as much "stage time" in the average campaign as any more classic knights-hunting-dragons narratives. Moreover, the strong implication is that this isn't merely a potential dramatic interest but a moral imperative (because that's what SJ advocacy always boils down to). BadWrongFun was an aggravating accusation when it came from one group of gamers about another over a common interest; I've lost all patience for it if it's a pre-emptive, morally personal implication from the game's very designers.

If I'm wrong, and all that's actually there is a couple of forum posts and the occasional sidebar in 600 pages of text, I'll freely admit it; any evidence to this point is welcomed. But if I'm not wrong, I hope this clarifies why I don't consider my annoyance at the possibility an overreaction.

Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser;1119774If part of the reason one likes the game Chivalry & Sorcery at all is its evocation of a fascinatingly different era of history -- albeit a highly romanticized, fantasticized version thereof -- which is nonetheless the root of our own, then realizing that the people producing the game are approaching that historical age with a sense of apologizing for it at best and actively deconstructing it at worst is, I think, a valid red flag. As I noted back in my first post, I'm tired of that approach, and ceasing to reward it is a useful method of discouraging it.

Thank you for distilling exactly what my opinion of this game is so succinctly; it's difficult to objectively approach something you have a lot of personal investment in.

C&S is all about balls-to-the-wall "medieval wargaming." It isn't historically accurate, but it definitely is accurate to whatever the romantic literature of the era claimed was true. Constantly admonishing people for daring to enjoy that literature because it was racist/sexist/religious/whatever is annoying. It's not like I can't ignore this crap, but I shouldn't have to, nor should I have to apologize for liking it in the first place. Again, not a huge deal in the grand scheme of things, but it's just...disappointing. Like finding out your favorite football player beats his wife. You just want to throw your hands up and wish it wasn't true.

Quote from: Shasarak;1119744Now hang on sureshot, lets get this accusation straight.  Paizo published a Demon Lord that targeted children and that makes them "woke"?

As AC pointed out they are all about being Woke then publish something like the Folca which is anything but. Being Woke as long as it does not interfere with them making a money. The Folca was created to take advantage of the IT remake hitting theaters. It's not King Pennywise the clown the similarities are too much of a coincidence. Considering how much they preach about being Woke and too many of their fans on their forum are the same the Folca was huge mistake on their part imo.

Shasarak a question you can answer do you know why some of the creatures in the 2E PF Bestiary have had their names changed? Derro is spelled Dero. The Ankheg seems to have another name as well.

Quote from: sureshot;1119778As AC pointed out they are all about being Woke then publish something like the Folca which is anything but. Being Woke as long as it does not interfere with them making a money. The Folca was created to take advantage of the IT remake hitting theaters. It's not King Pennywise the clown the similarities are too much of a coincidence. Considering how much they preach about being Woke and too many of their fans on their forum are the same the Folca was huge mistake on their part imo.

DnD including popular tropes? **cough**hobbits**cough** Well that certainly would be unusual to include a famous Demon Clown.

Look if sureshot accuses Paizo of being woke and then Paizo turns around and produce a pedo demon clown then you can not then call them on their hypocrisy of not meeting your expectations of their wokeness.

QuoteShasarak a question you can answer do you know why some of the creatures in the 2E PF Bestiary have had their names changed? Derro is spelled Dero. The Ankheg seems to have another name as well.

That is so that Paizo can make Dero miniatures without having to worry if WotC is going to sue them for infringing on their IP if they make Derro miniatures.  There is a non zero chance a lawyer may argue that the OGL only covers written material.

I still think Paizo are hypocrites  imo but that is just me. Woke just not that much when it comes to wanting to lose money. Thanks for answering  my question. Hopefully Paizo can pull it off. Or at least smart enough to make the Dero minis and other similar monster minis different. The whole it looks like a Derro but nudge nudge wink wink it's Dero may cause IP issues. I'm  no expert and am probably wrong.

Quote from: Brad;1119773Persistent...it's 600+ pages, and it crops up constantly. The mechanics are Skillskape, essentially, with Rebirth sensibilities. Again, I am not a fan, but there COULD be a decent game in here. Honestly, though, if you're going to play C&S, go full 1st/2nd, or just play something like Lion & Dragon. Trying to modernize this game is futile because you're gonna lose all the flavor.

If anyone is interested, I can post an actual review.

I suppose I could tollerate it if the system was good.  I'd need specifics on the mechanical changes.  I already have third edition so if there isn't more good material in there I don't need it.

I've written my own medievalish rpg anyhow.   What I like about C&S is its dedication to being an rpg, campaign system, and wargame all integrated.  Third failed in this.  Maybe I'll get up to Sentry Box and see if they still have the 2e box sometime.

Quote from: Brad;1119223This thread basically has no point RE: RPGs other than pointing out the ridiculousness of trying to be inclusive to the point of ridiculous when presenting an implied campaign setting. Modern stupidity about "diversity" makes zero fucking sense when applied to the real world.

We could have a fantasy world where "races" are distinguished mostly by hair colour.

Elves are blonde, of course. Humans are brown-haired. Hobbits are black-haired. Orcs are gingers.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1119784Elves are blonde, of course.

#AllElvesAreRacistNazis

Change my mind.

Well, in The Hobbit, they did kidnap dwarves and hold them for ransom in a dungeon. We could have an Elf Crime Tribunal.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1119786Well, in The Hobbit, they did kidnap dwarves and hold them for ransom in a dungeon. We could have an Elf Crime Tribunal.

Well in Dwarf Forterss an elf did eat an entire army... He became the elf king after that I believe. :eek:

But take a look at the history for Thunder Rift. In that elves and dwarves hated eachother. But during a long emergency joint operation quest a dwarf and elf fell in love. Got married. And had a kid. This cause various elves and dwarves totally against this to band together and kill the family. The abject shame of this act actually shocked both races into peace with eachother. Uneasy as it is sometimes. This is how you present stuff like this without bludgeoning the reader over the head.

Quote from: David Johansen;1119782I've written my own medievalish rpg anyhow.

Is that the one linked in your sig?

Quote from: Brad;1119773If anyone is interested, I can post an actual review.

I'd read that.