Katarack21

Keep in mind that companion interactions including romances are currently bugged.

Eh. In real life maybe, but in a game it can get to *really* distracting levels. I don't find that to be true about PoE 2, but I *did* find it to be true of Witcher 3. Never played Witcher 1 did you ? Truthfully Witcher 1 turning having sex with characters into a card collecting game was a tad bit tasteless. Witcher 3 was not nearly as bad. No, I didn't, but that sounds....bad lmao To be fair I am also considerably less interested in sex and nudity than seems to be the average in our culture, so it's pretty easy for me to get tired of/be bored by/be generally dismissive of it in games, and my threshold for that is therefore somewhat lower than normal.

Eh. In real life maybe, but in a game it can get to *really* distracting levels. I don't find that to be true about PoE 2, but I *did* find it to be true of Witcher 3. Ah, before I forget it - the cryo-clinic called: your humor is done with its hibernation and wants a reunion. "What war was it, Roland?" "What do you mean?" "The one where you got your sense of humor shot off."

This is your opinion and I have my mine that says I disagree. This is just vapid preaching: verbal fumes - weightless, insubstantial without any explanation/personal theory backed up from reality or otherwise. No, this is scientific fact. "There are differences between men and women when you look in large groups, and these are important for diagnosis and treatment, but there are always more differences within genders. We always need to look at culture, environment, education and a person’s role in society." “There are not two types of brain." https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn28582-scans-prove-theres-no-such-thing-as-a-male-or-female-brain/ "In the popular media, the idea of clearly separate male and female brains is often advocated. However, in reality the issue of gender differences in the brain is more complicated." "There is clear evidence for average gender differences in the brain, ranging from overall size to differences in specific brain regions. However, it is equally clear that the notion of distinct male and female brains, as sometimes suggested in the popular press, is not supported. In the end, gender differences in the brain are not large enough to categorize males and females." "Factors in the social and cultural environments are able to shape the development of both structural and functional aspects of the brain and may even trigger epigenetic changes (e.g. McGowan et al., 2009). This way, the social environment may influence long-term abilities and preferences. For example, if boys spend more time playing ball sports or playing with construction toys (such as building blocks) this may cause the development of their brain areas for spatial reasoning." http://genderandset.open.ac.uk/index.php/genderandset/article/view/305/524 "Here we show that, although there are sex/gender differences in brain and behavior, humans and human brains are comprised of unique “mosaics” of features, some more common in females compared with males, some more common in males compared with females, and some common in both females and males. Our results demonstrate that regardless of the cause of observed sex/gender differences in brain and behavior (nature or nurture), human brains cannot be categorized into two distinct classes: male brain/female brain." http://www.pnas.org/content/112/50/15468 Totally, completely, and *UNEQUIVOCALLY* wrong. Wrong in every way. Wrong in every word *and* in it's totality. This is a reflection of your own selection bias, not of anything related to science...at all....period. They have. They do. Women sometimes walk up to men who are total strangers that they just met two seconds ago and go "Hey, you're hot, wanna ****?" You're just wrong. You're entirely, totally, and completely wrong.

Druids can solve a quest in a very satisfying manner on Motare o Kozi (if they have some stealth at least). This leads to more stuff on Sayuka. Druids also have unique interactions and dialogue options with the wild druid on Port Maje, allowing one to resolve that interaction in a unique manner, and many special interactions during scripted events.

Eh. In real life maybe, but in a game it can get to *really* distracting levels. I don't find that to be true about PoE 2, but I *did* find it to be true of Witcher 3. I know what you mean !!! when I saw THAT..I was like..what they were saying again...couldn't focus anymore.. cose... LMAO In all seriousness, though, the scene that comes to mind when I think of the over-display of sexuality in Witcher 3 is when you first meet Kiera Metz and she's nude in a bathtub showing off her titties, and then continues with her "romance". There is absolutely no need for that whatsoever. It doesn't impact the plot, the character in question is defined entirely by the sex-plot, etc. It's just an excuse to have a bunch of nudity and sex, IMHO.

Weeell... we still don't know for sure she hasn't got a cloaca, right? I guess Hiravias never found out. Apparently their are console commands to remove underwear and unmask genitalia, so....I guess you could find out if you really care that much.

The scripted interactions make it less "cosmetic", but yes, there are no more "must have" classes because *most* classes get special options in the scripted interactions. Also, taking the race "Amaua" and the origin "Deadfire" opens up so many unique dialogue options that it really changes the flavor and atmosphere of the game, IMHO.

Eh. In real life maybe, but in a game it can get to *really* distracting levels. I don't find that to be true about PoE 2, but I *did* find it to be true of Witcher 3.

The best way to do it by far is in a game with an advantages/disadvantages system, as a perk that triggers certain dialogue options or a small bonus on certain checks, while keeping it totally separate from the core mechanics. Beauty should generally be placed along things like "oh, I have photographic memory," or "oh, I know ALL THE TRIVIA," or, "oh, I'm familiar with military stuff" - miscellaneous character traits that can be independent of combat attributes. I'm agree with you but apparently a fighting penalties for a beautifull woman is a heresy for some. When it's *exclusive to female characters*, yes. When *female characters and only female characters* have a "pretty" stat and inherent penelties to combat...yeah, that's ****ed. It's *really* ****ed. And no, I don't have to tip-toe around it. I don't have to be gentle and conciliatory. I don't have to be diplomatic and concerned about their emotional reaction. I don't have to bend over backwards to make sure I don't offend their delicate sensibilities. If it's a ****ed-off misogynistic **** idea, I'll say so. It is a bad game design. But why it is misogynistic? Honest question. The basic idea is that the PC is often, and especially among casuals, a reflection of the people playing it within the setting at hand. This idea, if implemented, creates a setting where female's are pretty but weak and males are ugly but strong. Within this theoretical setting, women and men are delineated into specific roles based on inherent differences between the sexes which the person making the character has no ability to alter--and these differences create a world where female characters are pretty and thus are delineated into roles based on their sexual attractiveness while men are strong and thus delineated into roles based on physical might. At first this seems seems sexist, but not focused on one or the other, but that's only on the surface. This idea leaves male characters *the same as they've always been*. They receive no bonus and no penalty. There are no changes to male characters with this idea; you make a male character and go on with your day. You don't get the "bonus" with the social interactions and what not, but you don't receive the penalties. Men are left neutral jacks-of-all-trade; not as good as female characters at social interactions but not penalized, with no alterations to their physical capabilities. Women, on the other hand, have their entire interaction with the system altered in a way that defines their genders interaction with the game world. They are inherently good at this but bad at this; they get special options here but special limitations their. And this whole, special, female-defining trait is....physical attractiveness. That's why it's misogynistic instead of simply sexist. In this setting men are the same as men always are in every game, but female characters are uniquely defined by how pretty they are, and penalized in interactions that depend on other stats.

1) It's *REALLY* important to note that there is *no hard line* about male vs female brains; there is nothing in the brain, no pattern of grey matter, no size of a region, *nothing* that you can look at and say "that's exclusively female" or "that's exclusively male". Neural sexual dimorphisms in humans exists only as *averages*, with significant overlap in individual variability, and it is unknown how much of that is due to environmental or social changes, even in adulthood. Forensic scientists generally refuse to make a statement about gender if all they have to go on is a brain, because they simply *can't be sure*. 2) The same is true of "feminine traits" and "masculine traits". There is no trait that is exclusive to one or the other, nor that exists in one to such an extent with a corresponding dearth in the other that is clearly and decisively "feminine" or "masculine". There are things that are slightly more common on one side or the other, but again with averages, individual variability, and significant overlap. Actual scientists do not treat human brains or behaviors as "inherently feminine" nor "inherently masculine" unless they are discussing hormone levels, etc--and even then it's averages not specifics (a significant minority of women, for example, have testosterone levels at a "male" level, producing things like facial hair and a thickened jaw, thanks to very common disorders such as PCOS). 3) Your statement about the social research of attractiveness is accurate if immaterial to the subject at hand. 4) You're use of hard delineators like "men won't", "women never", etc is simply wrong and severely undermines you case. In all these instances, there is *significant* individual variability and variability between cultures and times to such an extent that it simply *does not qualify* for the scientific definition of inherent or intrinsic behavior and the implication of a hard dichotomy is not appropriate.

The best way to do it by far is in a game with an advantages/disadvantages system, as a perk that triggers certain dialogue options or a small bonus on certain checks, while keeping it totally separate from the core mechanics. Beauty should generally be placed along things like "oh, I have photographic memory," or "oh, I know ALL THE TRIVIA," or, "oh, I'm familiar with military stuff" - miscellaneous character traits that can be independent of combat attributes. I'm agree with you but apparently a fighting penalties for a beautifull woman is a heresy for some. When it's *exclusive to female characters*, yes. When *female characters and only female characters* have a "pretty" stat and inherent penelties to combat...yeah, that's ****ed. It's *really* ****ed. And no, I don't have to tip-toe around it. I don't have to be gentle and conciliatory. I don't have to be diplomatic and concerned about their emotional reaction. I don't have to bend over backwards to make sure I don't offend their delicate sensibilities. If it's a ****ed-off misogynistic **** idea, I'll say so.

Total misunderstanding, so deleted post. Carry on.

You started with a good approach and then ruined it all with that one silly sentence. I fail to see how these are appropriate responses for something like this. OP just shared an idea, maybe not very well thought out. Since when is that to be shamed and discouraged? What happened with the notion that there are no dumb questions, only dumb answers? He asked a question and then stated a bunch of ideas. Nobody called out the question, because as you said, there are no dumb questions. But there sure as **** is such a thing as a dumb idea.

to be honest they don't have a good reason at all and i think it doesn't need one. why? it's fantasy and it's just a game. do you really think a few humans (except the watcher with supernatural abilities) can beat dragons, ogres let alone big cats? go throw a few humans in a cage with a lion and see how it turn out Well if I could use my soul-power to send an ogre flying and speed-dash 25m in half a second then yeah, sure. I'll take that bet.

Has nothing to do with being sophisticated. Just...read the post. This idea can be boiled down thusly: "Women are pretty but weak and **** at combat. Beauty does not matter for men; they physically achieve the things they want instead of relying on being pretty."

I've already expressed my opinion about that on the previous page: https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/100754-factions-of-death-aka-why-do-pirates-have-the-moral-high-ground/?p=2039538 And on this one: https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/100754-factions-of-death-aka-why-do-pirates-have-the-moral-high-ground/?p=2039558 Right. But then you keep saying things like this. When the game makes it pretty clear that the Huana people aren't actually very accepting to live within this system and revolt is a very real possibility. As with most groups of oppressed people, as long as things are going ok and everybody has enough food and a decent place to live, they'll grumble but mostly deal with thier lives. But when things get bad, like on Tikawara, they start to question their position and the system. And when things get *really* bad, like in the Gullet, you can almost feel that bitterness and rage welling up. Their is not any particular acceptance of their position among the Roparu, not to any notable extent beyond that of any other oppressed class. In Ondra's Gift, the poorest of the poor mostly went on with their lives and just tried to survive...until they turned into an angry mob and started burning people. Granted that was manipulated by Thaos and mostly had to do with the fear, despair, and anger from Waidwen's Legacy, but those emotions are already present in a deep societal level in places like the Gullet.

Clearly my definition of fascism differs from yours. But I see this word being thrown at most factions here without much thought. And also, before accusing anybody of oppression you should check out Indian Hinduism and its relation to their caste system to get a clearer impression of how Huana people view their life. ...you are aware that the Indian caste system is generally regarded as a great evil that even India is desperately trying to get rid of? That discrimination based on caste is officially outlawed in India and it's only maintained through an informal system of social expectations and taboos? And that the caste system as we know it today traces it's origin to British Colonial rule and isn't actually a historical facet of India? Because all these things are important to know. Did I say I view Indian caste system as good? I said look it up for reference. Because then a person can get a better understanding why the Huana people are accepting to live within this system and not revolting. Though I think it was pretty well explained even within the game. Right, but my point is that the Indian caste system doesn't actually translate very well to the Huana--although the Untouchables are probably the closest thing in the real world to the Roparu. What *I've* been trying to point out is that while their may not be open revolt among the Roparu, the experiences in the Gullet very clearly show deepening anger, resentment, bitterness, and building tensions. Their is no revolt, but the *conditions* for a revolt do exist. If the starvation problem isn't solved, it's a real possibility in the future.

The Rauatains seem less like facist's and more like old-school mercantalists, IMHO. Like the 16th century Dutch, which of course...makes sense.

1) But being affected by something doesn't mean I have any greater degree of knowledge or understanding about that thing. A transgendered person quite definitely has a much deeper understanding of what it means to be and live transgendered, but that's it. Being transgendered doesn't even necessarily guarantee the ability to write a transgendered person well. 2) Yeah, Bella is a unique individual, that's for damn sure. Awesome girl. 3) Oh, I get that you hate the writer and their writing. It's just that particular thing wasn't actually being debated. 4) I'm fully willing to admit that there was more to it than *just* angry transphobic basement-dwellers pissed off at inclusion...but there were a lot more angry transphobic basement-dwellers pissed off at inclusion screaming "SJW!" than there was well-thought out, reasonable, detailed explanations from trans people about how this made them feel. I don't have statistics for that or anything, just my own personal experience during the time where half the places I hang on the internet were going nuts with people screaming "SJW!" and their were, like....three things I saw from offended transgendered people. On a tangentially related note, I do feel that a fair number of the reviews that have been posted the last couple of days have had nothing of substance to them beyond misogyny and raw, seething hatred for anything that doesn't fit their world view. I mean, seriously--between this threads thrilling "The male leaders in Deadfire, from what I can recall of these fictional non-entities, tend to be dandyish, vaguely silly and impossible to take seriously." line and the other review earlier today that said a female blacksmith is just ridiculous because nobody would ever hire her because any man could do a better job, I think it's pretty clear that either a group of trolls all showed up simultaneously out of nowhere or there is some tendency in a subset of gamers to take their own warped **** and transpose it onto this game.

> can't really say that the game is disliked because of "leftist propaganda" and "a political agenda" > while saying it's full of changes from a progressive PoV > then claim that anti-SJW wasn't a leading force in the backlash against the game. > That literally makes no sense at all. Yes I agree, what you wrote makes no sense at all. I've read it three times and I still don't get the point you're trying to make. > being a trans person doesn't make them any less a random person from the Internet. It makes them an important voice on the subject considering that the topic being discussed is trans inclusion. > transgendered individuals aren't a homogeneous group Do you think what that person says, about just wanting to blend in and not broadcasting the fact that they're trans, is an uncommon point of view among trans people? > this person wasn't elected to represent their demographic or anything The writer wasn't elected to represent the demographic either, but that didn't stop them from attempting to portray a trans character successfully, and, from an objective point of view, failing miserably. > you just pulled a random persons quote about the game off the Internet because it supports what you are saying about the backlash against the game They're trans. > We each have random every-day people who are not experts and have no greater authority to speak for others but who do back up our positions. So....yay. The difference is, I responded to the arguments contained in your 'random every day' person's quote. You ignored the ones in mine. I'll say it once more, I only posted the quote as evidence of what one trans person thought of Mizhena, nothing more, nothing else. Anything else is just other people putting words in my mouth. 1) The point is that you just confirmed that it is in fact anti-SJW agenda that is backlashing against the game; you said *yourself* that it is when you identified all the components of such, those being "leftist propaganda", a "political agenda", and "changes from a progressive PoV". 2) It makes them *a* voice on the subject; it makes them a voice that is directly *affected* by the topic with some personal and subjective understanding of how it will affect them personally. That's all. It doesn't make them an expert, it doesn't make their opinion more or less right, and it doesn't make them an authority. It just makes them somebody who is directly affected by the subject at hand. That's all. All their actually doing is giving their single, individual opinion about a game. 3) I think it's *their* view about *their* experience of *their* life and can't be extrapolated to anybody else, because they don't have the authority to speak for anybody else. For what it's worth, my friend Isabella--who used to be Al--once held their vaginal expander unit above their head in a crowded airport and yelled out "THIS IS MY VAGINAL EXPANDING MEDICAL DEVICE MOTHER****ERS!". I did not extrapolate that to an authoritative statement that can be applied to other transgendered people, either. Much like everybody else, a transgendered person's opinion is simply their opinion, and has no meaning beyond that. You can't make the assumption that somebody does or does not want to "blend in" or "broadcast the fact that their trans". Because of the safety issue, it's best to default to "don't say ****", but unless they've communicated to you personally what their desires are *you don't actually know* and you can't assume that you do just because some other transgendered person that you talked to online said something. 4) The writer was *hired to write a character* and then *wrote the character how they wanted*. I don't really know why you decided to throw that in their, though, as it doesn't actually make a point of any sort. 5) Yeah. I get that their transgendered. I also get the feeling that you think that somehow makes them an expert on everything related to transgendered affairs and means that their opinion about anything involving transgendered characters--including fictional ones--is automatically more knowledgeable, more important, more authoritative, and should be given greater weight just because their transgendered, even though it is literally just their opinion and their opinion alone.

Clearly my definition of fascism differs from yours. But I see this word being thrown at most factions here without much thought. And also, before accusing anybody of oppression you should check out Indian Hinduism and its relation to their caste system to get a clearer impression of how Huana people view their life. ...you are aware that the Indian caste system is generally regarded as a great evil that even India is desperately trying to get rid of? That discrimination based on caste is officially outlawed in India and it's only maintained through an informal system of social expectations and taboos? And that the caste system as we know it today traces it's origin to British Colonial rule and isn't actually a historical facet of India? Because all these things are important to know.

An oversight by the ruling caste that is not defendable, sure, but this situation in the Gullet is not normal and wasn't like that before. It was caused by a recent influx of region's population gathering in the city, which clearly is unable to accommodate so many new people. It is clearly a major problem, which locals are unable to solve without outside help, and will continue to be so, because the influx does not stop. Funny thing is, the influx itself is caused by foreigners invading the region and now only with foreigners help this situation can be resolved. But I'm not gonna make any statements that the Roparu there are being mistreated out of malice or need to oppress them. On the contrary, generally it is expected that the Roparu are provided for by the ruling caste. Similar problem happened in Tikawara when the tribe was forced to relocate there, a barren island, where it is hard to grow food. For them there is also no other way but to scatter and leave the island or stay by accepting outside help. So yeah, these abnormal situations clearly show how the caste system is flawed and given more of these situations it's not hard to imagine something revolutionary could have happened on its own. Alas, with all the factions crap going on and discovery of Ukaizo it's probably not meant to be even if Huana are up top, as they probably will improve food shortage problem by making themselves rich and influential by ruling Ukaizo, while keeping the caste system as is. There's a real difference between Tikawara and Neketaka: In Tikawara, *everybody* is starving, the Roparu are just starving more. Even the Ranga is thin with a hungry, noisy belly. In Neketaka, *ONLY* the Roparu are starving, while the Motaru eat fat. The Roparu live in dilapidated vermin-infest huts in a crack in the ground; the Motaru live in estates on top of a mountain. The Roparu are regularly thrown into a monster-infested hole to be eaten alive for any crime major, minor, or made up; the Motaru are...not. And, again...the Roparu are *NOT OKAY WITH THIS*. The situation between the two islands isn't really comparable. The Roparu are not treated with malice, that's true; but malice isn't required to be oppression.

> random people Not a random person, specifically a trans person, the very person that the character is supposed to be written for and about. > to prove what the SoD fiasco was about I never once claimed that the quote I posted 'proved what the SoD fiasco was about'. > Leftist propaganda It's one of the reasons that the character wasn't liked. Most of the trans content takes the form of a lecture, and the responses range from 'Bye' to 'I agree completely'. So it's not entirely unreasonable to paint this content as propaganda. > political agenda weaved into it It absolutely does, from Mizhena herself, to Minsc's content, to the revision of pre-existing characters to make them more palatable from a 'progressive' point of view, including NPCs commenting on relationships from a modern feminist perspective, and probably more things that I can't recall off the top of my head. You may not perceive it as such, probably because it seems the norm to you, but there absolutely is a political agenda weaved into SoD. You can't really say that the game is disliked because of "leftist propaganda" and "a political agenda" while saying it's full of changes from a progressive PoV and then claim that anti-SJW wasn't a leading force in the backlash against the game. That literally makes no sense at all. And by the way, being a trans person doesn't make them any less a random person from the Internet. For one thing, transgendered individuals aren't a homogeneous group; for another, this person wasn't elected to represent their demographic or anything. They only represent themselves and their opinions; you just pulled a random persons quote about the game off the Internet because it supports what you are saying about the backlash against the game. I did the same; the person I quoted *also* only represents their own opinion. We each have random every-day people who are not experts and have no greater authority to speak for others but who do back up our positions. So....yay.