An interesting response. A couple thoughts:
I'm not sure why you think Paizo thinks this? They're apologizing and donating part of their proceeds because they know this was a mistake, and are trying to do what they can to mitigate the mistake.
Now, some have suggested that it would be better if Paizo canceled or redid the AP. But the books were already printed a while ago, and Paizo has said that they literally can't afford to cancel the AP, or destroy what they've printed and rewrite it. So they're trying to do the best they can given their financial position. But from what they've said, I don't think anyone at Paizo "think{s} their response is enough to get them into the clear".
I think this one is actually just an unfortunate consequence of the pandemic. The AP's release was supposed to coincide with the release of "Absalom, City of Lost Omens", which answers the questions you're asking. (I think the idea was that by relegating details about the city to the Absalom sourcebook, they could fit more content into the AP itself.) But Erik Mona is the head writer of the book, and he's been fully occupied dealing with issues that have come up as a result of the pandemic, so the book's been delayed.
Yeah, I agree that this was clearly a mistake.
(Somewhat ironic that the one page "nonlethal gear" section was the most tone-deaf part of the book!)
Yeah, I wasn't enthusiastic about this either. I think the original AP's stance on non-lethal options was better (allowing the GM to either (a) use the optional rule of allowing PCs to choose to do non-lethal damage without penalty, or (b) make the avoidance of lethal force a challenge for the players to work round).
Happily, this is trivial to change, since the AP already provides you with these options.
By and large, I think you're right that Paizo was trying to make this AP feel at least somewhat similar to the feel of more standard hack-and-slash APs.
That said, I don't think it's right to say that this is just like any other AP. For example, the percentage of encounters which can be resolved without violence is much, much higher than most APs. And pretty much every encounter with sentient opponents assumes that the party will either de-escalate the situation without resorting to violence or use non-lethal means to subdue them.
(I'll also flag that the those who are uncomfortable with the idea of playing the city watch can also follow the AP's suggestion to play as something like consultants or private investors/detectives. As far as I can tell, the AP should still run pretty smoothly with that substitution.)
I'm disappointed Paizo really think their response is enough to get them into the clear.
I'm not sure why you think Paizo thinks this? They're apologizing and donating part of their proceeds because they know this was a mistake, and are trying to do what they can to mitigate the mistake.
Now, some have suggested that it would be better if Paizo canceled or redid the AP. But the books were already printed a while ago, and Paizo has said that they literally can't afford to cancel the AP, or destroy what they've printed and rewrite it. So they're trying to do the best they can given their financial position. But from what they've said, I don't think anyone at Paizo "think{s} their response is enough to get them into the clear".
First off, the module lets me down in my expectation we would get a real sense of time and place. The imagery of the module is all over the place. There's even pictures that could have been taken straight out of Victorian London (complete with genteelfolk in "modern" fashion).
What's the problem with that?
In order to get a handle on what the morality of the place says about expectations on local law enforcement, the fantasy game needs to tell us, or at least hint us in.
If Absalom gave off strong vibes of Ancient Rome, and was awash in details about who upheld the peace in that great old city (I actually don't know, and now I'm curious - during the Republic, wasn't the Senate nervous about soldiers in their city, and kept the legions as far away from the capital as possible? Later there was the Praetorian Guard, but did they bother with the crimes of regular folks? Anyway, I digress). Or, perhaps Tenochtitlan during the 1400s (religious priest cops?), or maybe Khanbaliq during the Yuan Dynasty (barbarian cops trying to understand a foreign civilization), or, for that matter, the capital of the Moon People that just does things differently. I mean, this is a fantasy game, there need to be no direct analog to any one (or three) historical methods of peacekeeping.
But there needs to be something. What we have now is pretty much nothing and everything. Do you play cops that has to comply with a modern protocol? Or is it the Wild West, where the fastest gun is the law? Or what?
I think this one is actually just an unfortunate consequence of the pandemic. The AP's release was supposed to coincide with the release of "Absalom, City of Lost Omens", which answers the questions you're asking. (I think the idea was that by relegating details about the city to the Absalom sourcebook, they could fit more content into the AP itself.) But Erik Mona is the head writer of the book, and he's been fully occupied dealing with issues that have come up as a result of the pandemic, so the book's been delayed.
They offer nightsticks as a nonlethal option
Yeah, I agree that this was clearly a mistake.
(Somewhat ironic that the one page "nonlethal gear" section was the most tone-deaf part of the book!)
The final piece of the puzzle is the added layer of official rulings in the Player's Guide.
There it says that basically heroes can't cause lethal damage, period. It basically allows players to play heroes fighting monsters, and hero cops fighting monster criminals specifically, but magically nobody gets hurt.
Yeah, I wasn't enthusiastic about this either. I think the original AP's stance on non-lethal options was better (allowing the GM to either (a) use the optional rule of allowing PCs to choose to do non-lethal damage without penalty, or (b) make the avoidance of lethal force a challenge for the players to work round).
Happily, this is trivial to change, since the AP already provides you with these options.
In conclusion, the only way to not be incredibly disappointed by this is to go into Agents of Edgewatch with open eyes: this is just like any other AP except you're in uniform. You still take names, you still fight monsters, you still keep their loot. Nothing changes.
By and large, I think you're right that Paizo was trying to make this AP feel at least somewhat similar to the feel of more standard hack-and-slash APs.
That said, I don't think it's right to say that this is just like any other AP. For example, the percentage of encounters which can be resolved without violence is much, much higher than most APs. And pretty much every encounter with sentient opponents assumes that the party will either de-escalate the situation without resorting to violence or use non-lethal means to subdue them.
(I'll also flag that the those who are uncomfortable with the idea of playing the city watch can also follow the AP's suggestion to play as something like consultants or private investors/detectives. As far as I can tell, the AP should still run pretty smoothly with that substitution.)