Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Henry" data-source="post: 833484" data-attributes="member: 158">FIRST OF ALLThis can certainly do with out name-calling -- &quot;Harcore Conservative Pansy&quot; or otherwise. There are ways to tell someone that you diagree with someone other than insulting their ideals or their stance on an issue.By the same token, those who want more mature content are not &quot;gratuitous or unoriginal&quot; necessarily. There is such a thing as naming a graphic action without going into gruesome detail.If this discussion is to continue without blowing up and being closed, everybody here needs to GIVE A DOSE OF RESPECT TO THE OPPOSING SIDE.However, those who are against more vile content have a large point I want to explore. A magazine which changes its content focus needs to state it outright a few months BEFORE it does so. This is because there are many subscribers out there who want an advance warning before resubscribing to a magazine they may not be interested in buying any more. Furthermore, content that does not appeal to the subscriber is ALWAYS an issue in subscriptions, whether its vile content, or a balance of underwater adventures. If your campaigns always take place on dry land, how is a magazine full of underwater-dependent adventures going to help you, other than for a few raw ideas?A subscriber balances the reduced cost of the magazine with the possiblity of getting material in each that he or she will not use. Now, if there are enough readers who want more adult-oriented content, Paizo needs to do something to categorize it as such, without flashy &quot;vile&quot; logos, or they apparently risk turning off the readers that do want the content. I'm kind of favorable of an iconic system, similar to the ones hotels use for rating their establishments - maybe the latest adventure has icons for underwater scenario; low level; roleplay-intenstive; adult content? Or some such system?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Henry, post: 833484, member: 158"] FIRST OF ALL This can certainly do with out name-calling -- "Harcore Conservative Pansy" or otherwise. There are ways to tell someone that you diagree with someone other than insulting their ideals or their stance on an issue. By the same token, those who want more mature content are not "gratuitous or unoriginal" necessarily. There is such a thing as naming a graphic action without going into gruesome detail. If this discussion is to continue without blowing up and being closed, everybody here needs to GIVE A DOSE OF RESPECT TO THE OPPOSING SIDE. However, those who are against more vile content have a large point I want to explore. A magazine which changes its content focus needs to state it outright a few months BEFORE it does so. This is because there are many subscribers out there who want an advance warning before resubscribing to a magazine they may not be interested in buying any more. Furthermore, content that does not appeal to the subscriber is ALWAYS an issue in subscriptions, whether its vile content, or a balance of underwater adventures. If your campaigns always take place on dry land, how is a magazine full of underwater-dependent adventures going to help you, other than for a few raw ideas? A subscriber balances the reduced cost of the magazine with the possiblity of getting material in each that he or she will not use. Now, if there are enough readers who want more adult-oriented content, Paizo needs to do something to categorize it as such, without flashy "vile" logos, or they apparently risk turning off the readers that do want the content. I'm kind of favorable of an iconic system, similar to the ones hotels use for rating their establishments - maybe the latest adventure has icons for underwater scenario; low level; roleplay-intenstive; adult content? Or some such system? [/QUOTE]

Verification