Oh, thank God (or Science or Yahweh or Her or, or, or whoever you believe in - May You Be Touched By His Noodly Appendage), it appears Paizo found enough backbone to tone down the far left, MeToo!, extreme political correctness bullshit before they published Pathfinder v2. For a (not so) quick history, parts one, two, and three of this rant. Surprise, surprise, I've talked a lot about this. It is almost as if I get so tired of hearing this crap from all parts of the gaming companies and the folks making it that I have started unfollowing them on social media and skip to the next podcast episode when they start in on yet another Biggest Victim of the Week boohoo cry session. But I digress.
When Paizo was testing the waters for their new rules for the next edition of Pathfinder - that is another rant I am not getting into right now, did we really need another edition considering how much content they made for the first one? (sorry, digressing again) - one of the things that caught my attention was, well, you can read that rant in the first post of this series I linked earlier. Now that version 2 is finally out, I could not help myself, and looked to see if they still had a section about how gaming is for everyone and the social contract and so forth. They do... but it's a lot more times down and commanding. I am still not 100% happy with Paizo, but let us just say this is far better than what they had in the playtest. Enough blathering, let me share what they put in the Core Rulebook for Pathfinder v2. (another aside, I am glad they are distancing themselves just the tiniest bit from their D&D roots by calling this "version 2" instead of "2nd edition", that would get too confusing, too quickly) (nope, check that, Paizo is calling this "2nd edition" and the fans are calling it "v2" because we want to see the separation while they do not... le sigh)
Gaming Is for All
Whether you are the GM or a player, participating in a tabletop roleplaying game includes a social contract: everyone has gathered together to have fun telling a story. For many, roleplaying is a way to escape the troubles of everyday life. Be mindful of everyone at the table and what they want out of the game, so that everyone can have fun. When a group gathers for the first time, they should talk about what they hope to experience at the table, as well as any topics they want to avoid. Everyone should understand that elements might come up that make some players feel uncomfortable or even unwelcome, and everyone should agree to respect those boundaries during play. That way, everyone can enjoy the game together.
Pathfinder is a game for everyone, regardless of their age, gender, race or ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, or any other identities and life experiences. It is the responsibility of all of the players, not just the GM, to make sure the table is fun and welcoming to all.
Again, we see a "social contract" that they can't provide just hint at, but at least we don't see "safe space" rear its ugly head. But honestly, overall, I am far less offended by this rant than I am by the one in the Playtest. Hell, I am less offended by this than by my own version you see in the last post of this series. However, once again, it begs the question, why do we need this in a role-playing game rule book? I understand the very sensitive nature of modern American society... wait, scratch that, I DON'T understand it, but I realize it is here and trying to change us all. Have we become so afraid of having our feelings hurt that we can't talk like rational adults about things that may happen in a made up story?
One of the things that has come up with this tolerance movement is the expectation that just because we have to be tolerant of everyone and every lifestyle out there, we have to include someone from every walk of life out there. Just added a new PC to the group? Are they a minority the group doesn't have yet, be it gender, sexuality, race, or religion, because if you don't have one of everything, how can you show how tolerant you are? Don't you know we don't tolerate intolerance around here, right? Personally, I don't care what gender you are, or your sexuality, race, or religion, the only thing I care about is can you complete the mission? And since what we are talking about playing a game with our friends, if any of the above that makes you special (but still equal, always equal, no matter what our differences!) is distracting enough to keep the table from having fun, the tolerance you demand is creating mission failure for the group. Ah well, what do I know? I do know that I am glad Paizo toned down their diatribe for the published book, but still not completely satisfied with them for not cutting it completely. At the end of it all, I'll take what I can get and call it good.
No comments:
Post a Comment