I'm interested in purchasing some Wotc D&D products - like Curse of Strahd -, but I want the original products, not the reprinted ones with wokified content.
Is there somewhere on the net some listing of pre- and post-woke products from WotC ?
I think that anything published before 2020 is safe, but I'm not sure of it.
Curse of Strahd and Tomb of Annihilation were the only "problematic" ones that were purified. They were fairly minor changes that don't affect too much. If you're okay with all the random LGBTQ stuff tossed into all their products to collect their Pokemon collection then you'll likely be fine with these ones.
Basically they made the Vistani less "gypsies are bad" and got rid of a lot of the references to "savages" in Chult. Because you know Servants of Strahd and Cannibals get sad when they are called names.
Thanks for the info.
This is fairly important to me. Since WotC has decide to cater to woke sensibilities, I refuse to support them in this regard, so I won't buy their wokified content.
I find particularly abhorrent the revisionism at play in re-editing past products without making it clear that they're doing so. They don't hide it per se, but they don't go out of their way to inform their would-be buyers either.
QuoteIs there somewhere on the net some listing of pre- and post-woke products from WotC ?
They were always woke, sometimes just not woke-enough :P
Quote from: Wicked Woodpecker of West on January 19, 2021, 04:55:09 PM
QuoteIs there somewhere on the net some listing of pre- and post-woke products from WotC ?
They were always woke, sometimes just not woke-enough :P
Not quite. Their early books and modules were lacking in agenda flags other than that paragraph in the PHB which is just Mearls usual ham handed way of saying "you can play any type of character, gender is not an issue." which has been one of D&D and other RPGs sell point for decades. Its just Mearls suffers from chronic foot-n-mouth disease.
But.
After a point various modules I have ALL have tiny little meaningless inserions of something. Curse of Strahd is probably the worst offender. But even that is relatively mild and as have pointed out time and again. Mostly meaningless because the entries have zero backing them up.
Curse of Strahd had a page dedicated to telling you that vampires are "sexual predators" with a hammer over the head. Strahd is now Bi. Theres a completely missable comment that some Vistani's son is dressed as a girl. A male vamp whos one of Strahd's "consorts" and a pair of lesbians tossed in there and also little more than a throwaway comment.
Tomb of Annihilation has one throwaway sentence about a merchant worried about his husband and is completely meaningless. And an evil noble who has a incubus and succubus as consorts.
Essentials has the gnome king who has flipped out and locked up his husband. Again a totally meaningless statement with nothing to back it up.
One of the expansion books, Xanathar maybe? introduces literal "gender fluid" elves if they have a gods blessing and can after a long rest, change gender. This one is iffy on its wokeness since it fits one version of that elven god. But the timing, and its insertion into the Adventurers League rules makes it very suspect.
Those are the ones I have that have things I noticed. None of them are in your face aside from that intro in Strahd and can be ignored, changed, or embellished as you please. There might be others that are more blatant but Have not seen.
Yeah I Right Wing Snowflake over the content sometimes but generally calm down eventually.
Honestly I just tried to sit down and start prep work for Curse of Strahd again and made the mistake of flipping through I6. The "new" campaign is actually just a SUPER padded out version of I6. And not even in like a "Extended Version of Lord of the Rings is vastly better than theatrical". More like in a "take the Hobbit and the Appendices and make 3 movies out of it" (but at least Evangeline Lilly is hot as sin as an elf).
I've run Tomb of Annihilation and that one's really good. I honestly don't think I said savage once the entire 2 years it took to finish (working folks so playing 1/month at best). I don't think you would really miss anything as a result of the wokeness.
QuoteAfter a point various modules I have ALL have tiny little meaningless inserions of something. Curse of Strahd is probably the worst offender. But even that is relatively mild and as have pointed out time and again. Mostly meaningless because the entries have zero backing them up.
QuoteAgain a totally meaningless statement with nothing to back it up.
What do you mean exactly by meaningless in this context?
Quote from: Omega on January 19, 2021, 08:37:21 PM
Not quite. Their early books and modules were lacking in agenda flags other than that paragraph in the PHB which is just Mearls usual ham handed way of saying "you can play any type of character, gender is not an issue." which has been one of D&D and other RPGs sell point for decades. Its just Mearls suffers from chronic foot-n-mouth disease.
I actually took that bit as a sign of things to come and it looks like that was correct. I stopped buying D&D at that point despite having bought just about all the books for all of the previous editions. Why invest money into the early stage of something I'm probably not going to want to use once I see the rest of it? So If you want pre-woke, I'd say go back before 5E.
I just perused Tashas's Cauldron of Everything and the silliness of the illustrations are unmistakable - half of them are candy-colored goody two-shoes Tieflings ; all orcs are nice guys (with feelings, you know); there's a female dwarf who looks more like a shorter human than an altogether different species of humanoid, etc.
I won't buy it, and I'm pretty sure I won't buy the following products either.
I'm sure there are plenty of third parties D&D 5.0 edition products which don't hail from the Passive-Agressive Commune of Wokistan.
Quote from: Wicked Woodpecker of West on January 19, 2021, 09:28:17 PM
What do you mean exactly by meaningless in this context?
Meaningless in that they are a single sentence, or less with just about every time not a thing to back it up or give it impact or meaning other than that intro to Curse of Strahd.
Quick example is one of the events in Tomb of Annihilation. Some guy is worried about his husband and will ask or hire the PCs to save him. And thats it. Just a sentence stating this guy is married to a guy. Nothing more. No reasons, it has zero impact on whats going on or even why the guy got in trouble.
Even the gnome kings in Essentials ends up this same sort of meaningless as here too it impacts nothing backs it up.
In every case I saw so far if you swapped genders of one, or both or even species nothing would be effected by it.
Its even worse with one of the entries in Curse of Strahd where its noted the girl you saved is the leaders son. And thats it. Nothing. Nada. I dont even recall if they gave the kid a name.
I could easily see this upcomming wheelchair thing in Candlekeep ending up being one little throwaway sentence like "The assistant at the table is in a wheelchair." and that is it. And maybe one sentence stating "the path down is wheelchair accessible." or somesuch. And nothing to back it up or give it meaning.
Quote from: Lychee of the Exchequer on January 20, 2021, 12:26:15 PM
I just perused Tashas's Cauldron of Everything and the silliness of the illustrations are unmistakable - half of them are candy-colored goody two-shoes Tieflings ; all orcs are nice guys (with feelings, you know); there's a female dwarf who looks more like a shorter human than an altogether different species of humanoid, etc.
I won't buy it, and I'm pretty sure I won't buy the following products either.
I'm sure there are plenty of third parties D&D 5.0 edition products which don't hail from the Passive-Agressive Commune of Wokistan.
Dont forget the nearly white drow in the book.
QuoteI just perused Tashas's Cauldron of Everything and the silliness of the illustrations are unmistakable - half of them are candy-colored goody two-shoes Tieflings ; all orcs are nice guys (with feelings, you know); there's a female dwarf who looks more like a shorter human than an altogether different species of humanoid, etc.
Yes tiefling art mania need to die in flames.
QuoteQuick example is one of the events in Tomb of Annihilation. Some guy is worried about his husband and will ask or hire the PCs to save him. And thats it. Just a sentence stating this guy is married to a guy. Nothing more. No reasons, it has zero impact on whats going on or even why the guy got in trouble.
Ok, but is this quest even described - or is it just proposition of utterly random side-quest that DM had to invent himself?
Because if quest is there - I'd argue - that sure it's woke, but overall it's classic scheme - PCs are hired to save someone by someone's relatives or significant others. Not terribly impressive quest, but well you need someone to hire PCs so...
QuoteIn every case I saw so far if you swapped genders of one, or both or even species nothing would be effected by it.
Well but isn't it true about most of minor cases - change rescued gnomes to rescued halflings and in most cases, nothing changes.
Dunno really I must say - I mean as a Roman Catholic player I do not crave for diversity in this regard really - but also to some extent many minor details are just sort of description of world without much meaning. You have a mission to save father of eight children, but then you cut limit it to three children and nothing meaningful in quest shall change.
I think that's not avoidable - most of quests are skeletons that can be covered with various kinds of meat that will be mostly irrelevant
Quote from: Wicked Woodpecker of West on January 20, 2021, 03:36:36 PM
Ok, but is this quest even described - or is it just proposition of utterly random side-quest that DM had to invent himself?
Because if quest is there - I'd argue - that sure it's woke, but overall it's classic scheme - PCs are hired to save someone by someone's relatives or significant others. Not terribly impressive quest, but well you need someone to hire PCs so...
Its one of a 10 paragraph or less in size side quests that can happen at the main port city in Chult. The one in question opens with this. It is I think the only entry like this in the whole book. And is longer that any from Strahd for example.
Quote9. Save an Innocent Man. Belym (LG male Chultan human commoner) is distraught because his husband, Draza (LG male Chultan commoner), has been sentenced to Executioner's Run for stealing. Belym asserts that his husband was a victim of mistaken identity and sentenced without a proper hearing or trial.
The rest of the paragraph is the bare bones of the situation. Authorities arent listening. Guys about to be tossed into an execution run against velociraptors so the PCs better hurry if want to save him and collect 20gp reward.
Thats it. The guy being married to a guy is meaningless. If it was placed there as a deliberate woke agenda plan then it fails totally because it is meaningless.
Quote from: Omega on January 21, 2021, 06:23:18 AM
...........Thats it. The guy being married to a guy is meaningless. If it was placed there as a deliberate woke agenda plan then it fails totally because it is meaningless.
It's not meaningless at all. It is written there, in print and is another small step in the normalisation of woke sensibilities in D&D, it does not matter that it is an easy swap out, the fact is that it is there and being accepted.
WOTC are not particularly subtle in their pro woke bias, but even they must realise the outcry a full on queer pre-gen character or key NPC would cause amongst the vast majority of their customer base, even though I am sure that is exactly what is intended for the future.
Much better to adopt a slow drip feed of the changes so that each subsequent expansion of the woke content is seen as a very minor issue, an insignificant alteration to the norm, not as a major change of design.
QuoteThats it. The guy being married to a guy is meaningless. If it was placed there as a deliberate woke agenda plan then it fails totally because it is meaningless.
But as I said one of elements of woke agenda is normalisation.
So the fact you can just drop gay marriage in Cthulth like that, without any explanation and background is THEIR WIN.
You seem to assume wokesters care only about BIG MEANINGFUL LGBT STUFF.
No they also care than random unimportant marriage of third-grade NPCs can be gay and it does not raise anyone's brow.
Now TBH considering how utterly hippie (but also kinda more brutal) was original Ed's Faerun I can say this is probably something well within mindset of Greenwood, for bad or worse.
Quote from: Lychee of the Exchequer on January 18, 2021, 04:11:38 AMI'm interested in purchasing some Wotc D&D products - like Curse of Strahd -, but I want the original products, not the reprinted ones with wokified content.
This may be obvious, but for Strahd if you find the hardback it should be okay. The edited version is from the boxed set, and I think the book included there is paperback.
Quote from: Wicked Woodpecker of West on January 21, 2021, 12:34:35 PM
QuoteThats it. The guy being married to a guy is meaningless. If it was placed there as a deliberate woke agenda plan then it fails totally because it is meaningless.
But as I said one of elements of woke agenda is normalisation.
So the fact you can just drop gay marriage in Cthulth like that, without any explanation and background is THEIR WIN.
You seem to assume wokesters care only about BIG MEANINGFUL LGBT STUFF.
No they also care than random unimportant marriage of third-grade NPCs can be gay and it does not raise anyone's brow.
Now TBH considering how utterly hippie (but also kinda more brutal) was original Ed's Faerun I can say this is probably something well within mindset of Greenwood, for bad or worse.
The entertainment industry in general is hugely guilty of historical revisionism and presentism. There are plenty of other anachronisms to get upset over beyond the current woke fad and tokenism.
Why should background NPCs living in a same-sex marriage raise anyone's brow considering that we're dealing with a foreign environment that doesn't elucidate its basic cultural norms?
The
Cthulhu example is a bad example because we know the 1920s weren't a great time to be homosexual due to the preponderance of records attesting to homosexuality being perceived as a mental illness.
With Faerun, we don't know such basic facts as how heterosexual marriage works. Is the dowry paid to the bride's family or the groom's? Is there polygamy? Can women own property independently of men? Are widows burned alive?
The writers just assume that the audience will mentally fill in the gaps, regardless of whether this actually fits into the world building.
QuoteThe entertainment industry in general is hugely guilty of historical revisionism and presentism. There are plenty of other anachronisms to get upset over beyond the current woke fad and tokenism.
TBH I'm not really upset about anachronism of D&D setting because most of them, never made any sense whatsoever.
QuoteThe writers just assume that the audience will mentally fill in the gaps, regardless of whether this actually fits into the world building.
Yes, mostly. And in many cases there is no proper worldbuilding.
I mean most are just sinkholes.
Other who could be cool like Eberron suffers because they needed to find place for all Core Elements of D&D existing in this setting.
Quote from: robh on January 21, 2021, 08:46:33 AM
WOTC are not particularly subtle in their pro woke bias, but even they must realise the outcry a full on queer pre-gen character or key NPC would cause amongst the vast majority of their customer base, even though I am sure that is exactly what is intended for the future.
I don't think "the vast majority of their customer base" see the issue the same way you do.
I'm pretty apathetic myself. Simple tokenism isn't sufficient to get my attention, because that long predates wokeness. The company would have to write pretty obnoxious political screed to get my attention. I'm talking stuff like advocating re-education camps, death camps, censorship, corrective rape, genital mutilation, and all the other horrifying fantasies I've seen come out of the woke cesspit.
Or at the very least come out and say "anyone who isn't woke is evil", "whiteness is the original sin," or "don't buy our product you fascist!" like certain other companies have.
Quote from: HappyDaze on January 21, 2021, 05:38:58 PM
Quote from: robh on January 21, 2021, 08:46:33 AM
WOTC are not particularly subtle in their pro woke bias, but even they must realise the outcry a full on queer pre-gen character or key NPC would cause amongst the vast majority of their customer base, even though I am sure that is exactly what is intended for the future.
I don't think "the vast majority of their customer base" see the issue the same way you do.
Nor the way you do, either.
The fact is that
no one knows what the " vast majority of their customer base" thinks about any issue, because there's no way to know. Posts on the internet are 1% of the customer base (if that) and the most vocal and driven part. Even industry surveys have a less than 10% response rate (something many companies lament all the time, and it's from the same group that has already screamed at them on Twitter). So the only real way to know what your customers think is to see if they keep buying. And not the "issue" or "book" with the change in it. The one after the change, where your brand loyalty already has been destroyed. Just ask the producers of
Solo how that works...
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on January 22, 2021, 08:16:07 AM
I'm pretty apathetic myself. Simple tokenism isn't sufficient to get my attention, because that long predates wokeness. The company would have to write pretty obnoxious political screed to get my attention. I'm talking stuff like advocating re-education camps, death camps, censorship, corrective rape, genital mutilation, and all the other horrifying fantasies I've seen come out of the woke cesspit.
Or at the very least come out and say "anyone who isn't woke is evil", "whiteness is the original sin," or "don't buy our product you fascist!" like certain other companies have.
That's a reasonable stance, and similar to mine. It is a ratio of "ease of use" to "need to change." When I start having to change a bunch of crap in their published materials and it loses its ease of use, then I'll move to something with a better ratio...
Quote from: Eirikrautha on January 22, 2021, 09:29:13 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze on January 21, 2021, 05:38:58 PM
Quote from: robh on January 21, 2021, 08:46:33 AM
WOTC are not particularly subtle in their pro woke bias, but even they must realise the outcry a full on queer pre-gen character or key NPC would cause amongst the vast majority of their customer base, even though I am sure that is exactly what is intended for the future.
I don't think "the vast majority of their customer base" see the issue the same way you do.
Nor the way you do, either.
The fact is that no one knows what the " vast majority of their customer base" thinks about any issue, because there's no way to know. Posts on the internet are 1% of the customer base (if that) and the most vocal and driven part. Even industry surveys have a less than 10% response rate (something many companies lament all the time, and it's from the same group that has already screamed at them on Twitter). So the only real way to know what your customers think is to see if they keep buying. And not the "issue" or "book" with the change in it. The one after the change, where your brand loyalty already has been destroyed. Just ask the producers of Solo how that works...
I never claimed they see it the way I do. I never even mentioned how I see it.
QuoteWOTC are not particularly subtle in their pro woke bias, but even they must realise the outcry a full on queer pre-gen character or key NPC would cause amongst the vast majority of their customer base, even though I am sure that is exactly what is intended for the future.
The answer is - just like with Pathfinder - openly queer pre-gens and iconics will mean nothing for fanbase, aside of few very puritanical conservatists.
Most others are either lefties - or as me for instance - if I like the system I cannot care less - I'd gladly adjust their woke agendas to my Catholic Fascist sensibilities.
One day I'm gonna buy iHunt and do full on redneck version of it, where Reptilians will be truly Jewish :P and then I'm gonna stream it all over internet ;)
QuoteThe fact is that no one knows what the " vast majority of their customer base" thinks about any issue, because there's no way to know. Posts on the internet are 1% of the customer base (if that) and the most vocal and driven part. Even industry surveys have a less than 10% response rate (something many companies lament all the time, and it's from the same group that has already screamed at them on Twitter). So the only real way to know what your customers think is to see if they keep buying. And not the "issue" or "book" with the change in it. The one after the change, where your brand loyalty already has been destroyed. Just ask the producers of Solo how that works...
D&D have nice experimenting ground - in form of PAIZO, and they can check if being woke really hurts your sales so much.
Answer is: if your content is woke and good game - then it won't hurt you - new Star Wars were additionally ill-planned incoherent mess - that's why they failed, not because of Laura Dern's pink wig.
Quote from: HappyDaze on January 22, 2021, 05:43:01 PM
Quote from: Eirikrautha on January 22, 2021, 09:29:13 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze on January 21, 2021, 05:38:58 PM
Quote from: robh on January 21, 2021, 08:46:33 AM
WOTC are not particularly subtle in their pro woke bias, but even they must realise the outcry a full on queer pre-gen character or key NPC would cause amongst the vast majority of their customer base, even though I am sure that is exactly what is intended for the future.
I don't think "the vast majority of their customer base" see the issue the same way you do.
Nor the way you do, either.
The fact is that no one knows what the " vast majority of their customer base" thinks about any issue, because there's no way to know. Posts on the internet are 1% of the customer base (if that) and the most vocal and driven part. Even industry surveys have a less than 10% response rate (something many companies lament all the time, and it's from the same group that has already screamed at them on Twitter). So the only real way to know what your customers think is to see if they keep buying. And not the "issue" or "book" with the change in it. The one after the change, where your brand loyalty already has been destroyed. Just ask the producers of Solo how that works...
I never claimed they see it the way I do. I never even mentioned how I see it.
My point was that, no matter how you see it or don't, you'd have no way to to know how the majority of the customer base sees things. To the point where you can't say they don't see it his way, anymore than he can say they do...
Quote from: Wicked Woodpecker of West on January 22, 2021, 07:14:35 PM
QuoteWOTC are not particularly subtle in their pro woke bias, but even they must realise the outcry a full on queer pre-gen character or key NPC would cause amongst the vast majority of their customer base, even though I am sure that is exactly what is intended for the future.
The answer is - just like with Pathfinder - openly queer pre-gens and iconics will mean nothing for fanbase, aside of few very puritanical conservatists.
Most others are either lefties - or as me for instance - if I like the system I cannot care less - I'd gladly adjust their woke agendas to my Catholic Fascist sensibilities.
One day I'm gonna buy iHunt and do full on redneck version of it, where Reptilians will be truly Jewish :P and then I'm gonna stream it all over internet ;)
QuoteThe fact is that no one knows what the " vast majority of their customer base" thinks about any issue, because there's no way to know. Posts on the internet are 1% of the customer base (if that) and the most vocal and driven part. Even industry surveys have a less than 10% response rate (something many companies lament all the time, and it's from the same group that has already screamed at them on Twitter). So the only real way to know what your customers think is to see if they keep buying. And not the "issue" or "book" with the change in it. The one after the change, where your brand loyalty already has been destroyed. Just ask the producers of Solo how that works...
D&D have nice experimenting ground - in form of PAIZO, and they can check if being woke really hurts your sales so much.
Answer is: if your content is woke and good game - then it won't hurt you - new Star Wars were additionally ill-planned incoherent mess - that's why they failed, not because of Laura Dern's pink wig.
Yeah, because PF2 is just killing it right now...
QuoteYeah, because PF2 is just killing it right now...
Well but that's not matter of wokism - but like with 4edition - fact that many people were disheartened with change of beloved system, while writers WANTED DO SOMETHING NEW.
Which is understandable dillema. (Plus of course 5e as simpler game took some chunk of original PF).
But I'd argue PF2 is not more woke than PF1, so overall that's not the point.
Especially since PF was basically home for 3,5 orphans - so ditching 3,5-ness of this - clearly ticked some people off.
Quote from: Wicked Woodpecker of West on January 23, 2021, 08:28:11 AM
QuoteYeah, because PF2 is just killing it right now...
Well but that's not matter of wokism - but like with 4edition - fact that many people were disheartened with change of beloved system, while writers WANTED DO SOMETHING NEW.
Which is understandable dillema. (Plus of course 5e as simpler game took some chunk of original PF).
But I'd argue PF2 is not more woke than PF1, so overall that's not the point.
Especially since PF was basically home for 3,5 orphans - so ditching 3,5-ness of this - clearly ticked some people off.
Sorry, but you can't arbitrarily decide that woke doesn't hurt PF1 because of its sales figures, and then suddenly ignore PF2's sales figures and its woke content. Note, I'm not arguing that woke is the only, or even primary, reason PF2 is floundering. But I will argue that you can't reduce a complex situation (PF1's success) to a simple "people don't care about woke," only to reject that simplistic interpretation when it doesn't fit the next set of data.
PF1 may not have suffered at the beginning from its woke, simply because it was the only major alternative to 4e. But as the woke grew, the loyalty to PF1 may have decreased until the wokeness played a role in PF2 not being as successful. This is not an either-or proposition. The level of woke is a scale, and Baizuo has been consistently sliding the scale upwards. People who were "pot-committed" (to use a poker term) may have grimaced but continued on with PF1, but drawn the line with PF2 because they had no investment in it.
Once again, I don't think wokism is the primary reason for PF2 struggling. But your argument is foundationally flawed, and doesn't support either of your contentions...
Quote from: Wicked Woodpecker of West on January 22, 2021, 07:14:35 PM
...new Star Wars were additionally ill-planned incoherent mess - that's why they failed, not because of Laura Dern's pink wig.
I can't tell if you are just missing the obvious or willfully obtuse. The reason that the sequels were an "ill-planned incoherent mess" was the same reason for the pink wig. They were planned as a repudiation of everything Star Wars originally stood for. You can't have the writers tweeting out "the Force is female!" and assert that woke wasn't the foundation of the whole plot line...
QuoteSorry, but you can't arbitrarily decide that woke doesn't hurt PF1 because of its sales figures, and then suddenly ignore PF2's sales figures and its woke content. Note, I'm not arguing that woke is the only, or even primary, reason PF2 is floundering. But I will argue that you can't reduce a complex situation (PF1's success) to a simple "people don't care about woke," only to reject that simplistic interpretation when it doesn't fit the next set of data.
If amount of woke content would change significantly up from PF1 to PF2 then yes.
But as according to my observation it's generally high from the get go and reached really woke level years ago - then yes I shall not include it in set of data explaining why PF2 sells way way worse than PF1.
Also I have not claimed it's a reason of PF1 success. Reason of PF1 success was foremostly - orphan population of 3,5 players that hated 4e - they wanted more of the same game - ergo 3,5 - that's most crucial element. And it was enough.
So if PF1 and PF2 are simmilarily woke, then difference between their results lie beyond question "woke or not woke".
QuotePF1 may not have suffered at the beginning from its woke, simply because it was the only major alternative to 4e. But as the woke grew, the loyalty to PF1 may have decreased until the wokeness played a role in PF2 not being as successful. This is not an either-or proposition. The level of woke is a scale, and Baizuo has been consistently sliding the scale upwards. People who were "pot-committed" (to use a poker term) may have grimaced but continued on with PF1, but drawn the line with PF2 because they had no investment in it.
It is possible - but then again that points to new mechanics as a reason of failure. Even anti-woke players bought PF1 because they wanted 3,5 style game, so obviously not reason to follow when they changed into utterly new itteration of D&D-oid.
QuoteI can't tell if you are just missing the obvious or willfully obtuse. The reason that the sequels were an "ill-planned incoherent mess" was the same reason for the pink wig. They were planned as a repudiation of everything Star Wars originally stood for. You can't have the writers tweeting out "the Force is female!" and assert that woke wasn't the foundation of the whole plot line...
While I consider wokism to seriously increase chances for bad plot - those are not essentialy connected.
There is no WOKE reason for not planning trilogy from the get go, for allowing screenwriters of 3 parts to write them ultimately separatedly which leads to utter disjunction of all story.
That is just shoddy planning, and shoddy storytelling.
Would be just as bad - if they put Akbar in place of Holdo.
Quote from: Eirikrautha on January 23, 2021, 09:26:31 PM
PF1 may not have suffered at the beginning from its woke, simply because it was the only major alternative to 4e. But as the woke grew, the loyalty to PF1 may have decreased until the wokeness played a role in PF2 not being as successful. This is not an either-or proposition. The level of woke is a scale, and Baizuo has been consistently sliding the scale upwards. People who were "pot-committed" (to use a poker term) may have grimaced but continued on with PF1, but drawn the line with PF2 because they had no investment in it.
I think there's probably a lot of truth in this. I didn't think of PF1 2007-10 as offensively woke, more standard Seattle left-liberal (which in 2021 means insane-woke, but did not back then). 2011-12 material is still not aggressively woke though there is some drift. By 2013 they're retconning Erastil, Jessica Price is in full swing on the message boards, and I'm beginnning to detach - ironically my one and only Pathfinder campaign was Curse of the Crimson Throne (converted 3.5 2008 version) prepped in 2013 and run 2014-15. Then I used 5e D&D to run Rise of the Runelords (2012 edn) mixed with Shattered Star (also 2012). I still may run Jade Regent and Skull & Shackles some day. They have some issues of minor wokeness, but they don't stink of it.
Quote from: Wicked Woodpecker of West on January 23, 2021, 09:40:30 PM
There is no WOKE reason for not planning trilogy from the get go, for allowing screenwriters of 3 parts to write them ultimately separatedly which leads to utter disjunction of all story.
Sure there's a woke reason for it. The people involved were screened for Woke Purity rather than actual Competence or Work Ethic. It's the same reason why so much of the latest output from WotC, Marvel, DC, Hollyweird are so bad. Hiring for Demographic Categories and Ideological Fanaticism.
Paizo woke? Insert raucous laughter here.
There are several monsters whose shtick involves some manner of rape, sexism, or disgusting fetish. "Female or male monster that rapes and eats humanoids of the opposite sex" and "monster that pretends to be an attractive man/women to lure horny adventures to eat" and "sexy female monster with animal bits" are cliches.
Oh, and ogres have the "rapist hillbilly" stereotype.
Paizo treats sexual assault so flippantly. That's not woke unless you count the rape threats the woke throw at TERFs.
Well there are various aspects of WOKE.
Sure PAIZO use some cliches that are sort of icky - though it's hard to avoid really sexual predator monster - succubus style, so I think it's fine (what wasn't fine was of course REDEMPTION arcs for both Queen of Succubi and Runelord of Lust in CE sexy babes alternative style, because no hot lady can stay evil).
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on January 25, 2021, 01:28:26 PM
Paizo woke? Insert raucous laughter here.
There are several monsters whose shtick involves some manner of rape, sexism, or disgusting fetish. "Female or male monster that rapes and eats humanoids of the opposite sex" and "monster that pretends to be an attractive man/women to lure horny adventures to eat" and "sexy female monster with animal bits" are cliches.
Oh, and ogres have the "rapist hillbilly" stereotype.
Paizo treats sexual assault so flippantly. That's not woke unless you count the rape threats the woke throw at TERFs.
You're behind the times. They have retconned a bunch of stuff. The Paizo of the last 3 years is not the Paizo of 5-7 years ago...
Quote from: Eirikrautha on January 25, 2021, 04:03:38 PM
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on January 25, 2021, 01:28:26 PM
Paizo woke? Insert raucous laughter here.
There are several monsters whose shtick involves some manner of rape, sexism, or disgusting fetish. "Female or male monster that rapes and eats humanoids of the opposite sex" and "monster that pretends to be an attractive man/women to lure horny adventures to eat" and "sexy female monster with animal bits" are cliches.
Oh, and ogres have the "rapist hillbilly" stereotype.
Paizo treats sexual assault so flippantly. That's not woke unless you count the rape threats the woke throw at TERFs.
You're behind the times. They have retconned a bunch of stuff. The Paizo of the last 3 years is not the Paizo of 5-7 years ago...
Feel free to fill me in. Are they saying that lesbians should suck ladydick, that gays should eat manbox, or that drow/goblins/beastmen/whatever are an oppressed minority while the light races are evil white supremacists? Because those are pretty much my lines in the sand.
They make goblins playable race and core, but it was sort of inevitable as their take on goblins was probably widely accepted as awesome - even though I prefer Faerun "evolved carnivar furry mammals" goblinoids.
Anything else?