# Agents of Edgewatch Player's Guide: A Review



## Philip Benz (Aug 3, 2020)

LongGoneWriter said:


> Hey howdy folks, it’s time for another PAIZO REVIEW! We’ve got a bevy of new products ready to see their minute in the spotlight, and it’s up to us to give it to them. Let’s start things off with the *Agents of Edgewatch Player’s Guide*!




Great stuff, and pretty much spot on.
The players-fighting-for-good and against rampant corruption theme reminds me a lot of the old Neverwinter Nights video game official campaign. Except that was written in another time, and it explicitly allowed two divergent paths: the good cop who heroically tries to save everyone, and the bad cop who's only in it for himself (yet still winds up saving a lot of folks, for inexplicable xp-related reasons).

Paizo has already shown us what extremes it has to take to run parallel good and evil campaigns, very effectively. But that gave us two very different adventure paths. It is too much to expect a single adventure path to include material for both good-cop heroes and bad-cop antiheroes. And made all the trickier by current events.

Nice review!


----------



## CapnZapp (Aug 3, 2020)

Thank you for providing balance in your review.


----------



## marroon69 (Aug 3, 2020)

Agreed this topic is very explosive right now. As a company Paizo, has always been forward thinking and inclusive which is why they earn my respect (and money). Eric Mona (Paizo's publisher) has addressed this topic publicly on their blog  it might help to get a little more background.. 

paizo.com - Community / Paizo Blog

My thoughts, one address it with your players before starting, set the tone and what everyone is comfortable with. But remember it is role-playing game and just maybe it will give the heroes a chance to make the right decisions, to stand up against rampart corruption, to win the day and make the world a better place. I mean this what we all want to happen in the real world so letting it happen at the gaming table seems like a good thing. But I can respect that this may not be for everyone.

Good Review on a hard topic

P.S. I am thinking more of a "Guards! Guards!" by Terry Pratchett favor when I run it.


----------



## Stacie GmrGrl (Aug 3, 2020)

The idea that it's wrong to fight against criminals (CRIMINALS who COMMIT CRIMES) wearing a badge is bonkers and shows that there is something off in how many people view this... That it's somehow more okay to side with corruption and criminal behavior than to side with the people who try and protect us from criminal actions. 

And how was Paizo supposed to know a year ago that our political and socialistic climate would have turned to such an extreme left in the year since these adventures were written an organized? We're they supposed to see into some kind of crystal ball that our culture would turn against our defenders of crime? Come on. When Paizo first announced this adventure path they were congratulated for doing something different. They were congratulated for this idea. 

Now they are being condemned for something they have no control over. 

This review is so bogus and biased its baseless leftist propaganda.


----------



## Stone Dog (Aug 3, 2020)

While acknowledging that "hey, timing got really bad on this one," is fine I think this was a missed opportunity for them to go on the high road and emphasize genuine heroics in law enforcement.

Fight not only the criminals on the street, but the criminals in your own ranks.  Combat corruption in the government of the city as well as organizations of nefarious influence.

All the abuses of authority that should be held accountable in the real world?  Fight that in Golarion too.

It would be a great opportunity to highlight the fact that protecting and serving a community is different, harder, and better  than just beating down perceived threats.

But the disclaimer reads like "we shouldn't have even tried," which is pretty lame.


----------



## Philip Benz (Aug 3, 2020)

I don't think it's so much "baseless leftist propaganda" as the reviewer trying to cover all his "political correctness" bases. Just as Paizo is trying to cover theirs.

I think this AP based on "playing the police" isn't bad juju as such. It's not helpful, in that the AP seems like it's too focused on the railroad to give the players meaningful decision-making powers, but that's the nature of APs. Any decent DM running such an adventure is going to be flying by the seat of his pants as he lets the PCs' actions dictate what happens next. That's one of the tricky bits with city adventures, the DM has to adapt and focus events to correspond to the wacky ideas that his players come up with, that haven't been covered by the available material.

I really enjoy running city adventures, but as DM I have to play fast and loose with my prepared material, and often the synergy with whatever plans the PCs come up with is pure gold compared to the events I've planned in advance. The same holds true with any AP or published scenario, especially one based on investigations, clues and intrigue.


----------



## MaskedGuy (Aug 3, 2020)

Stone Dog said:


> While acknowledging that "hey, timing got really bad on this one," is fine I think this was a missed opportunity for them to go on the high road and emphasize genuine heroics in law enforcement.
> 
> Fight not only the criminals on the street, but the criminals in your own ranks.  Combat corruption in the government of the city as well as organizations of nefarious influence.
> 
> ...




Eeeh, implication I get from one of shop blurbs for later parts is that reason why backgrounds keep mentioning the corrupt guard force is foreshadowing that in one of later books the corrupt part of guard force turns against the pcs. I have no clue though how far it will go and whether its just one of those cop movie tropes though.


----------



## Teraptus (Aug 3, 2020)

CANCEL POLICE ACADEMY NEXT! WE ARE COMING FOR YOU MAHONEY!!!


----------



## dave2008 (Aug 3, 2020)

Stacie GmrGrl said:


> The idea that it's wrong to fight against criminals (CRIMINALS who COMMIT CRIMES) wearing a badge is bonkers and shows that there is something off in how many people view this... That it's somehow more okay to side with corruption and criminal behavior than to side with the people who try and protect us from criminal actions.



Maybe a missed it, but I don't think they said the general concept is wrong (fighting crime as an official warden of the state. etc.).   Seems to me your being a bit hyperbolic.

The issue for me is they could have done so much more thoughtfully and made a better, more interesting product. If they had embraced reality a little more or more clear diverged from it they would probably mostly avoid a disclaimer and make a better more exciting product.  Honestly, before this AP came to be I never really thought of a town guard / city watch based adventure, but now I think the idea is really interesting. It is just this product specifically doesn't interest me.


----------



## coriolis (Aug 4, 2020)

Stacie GmrGrl said:


> We're they supposed to see into some kind of crystal ball that our culture would turn against our *defenders of crime*?



Nice Freudian slip there! (or is it...)


----------



## GreyLord (Aug 4, 2020)

I think Paizo got stuck between a rock and a hard place.  I don't know their schedules or printing calendar, but if it is like some other places, planning starts over a year or two in ADVANCE of the actual publishing date.  The work on this was done six months ago, it's already been written.  It's could be a year and half completed of work already at this point.  Changing things at the last minute can be incredibly expensive and difficult.  The fact that they included extra notes at the beginning already shows that they took some effort to try to change things (that includes printing plates or presses, etc).

This is not something most publishers can change on a dime.  It takes time, and if this AP was about to be released, it is incredibly hard to change it at a few weeks notice.

Now, some may say they could have just not released it, and that is true.  However, that means an empty gap in their publishing cycle.  The next AP, though written probably was not ready to be released yet, and if I recall, they make a LOT of money off of their subscription model.  Killing 6 months of money is not a good situation for them to be in either (especially this year when many CONS and other outlets for sales have disappeared).

I don't think there was an easy choice in this, and it's a bad road either way they chose.  One way they lose a lot of money and make people mad who are subscribers (and who knows, if it's tight enough, even go into bankruptcy).  The other way, they might not make as much money, they still make some people mad, but they at least make SOME money.

Hard choice, not one that I envy they had to make.


----------



## Derren (Aug 4, 2020)

dave2008 said:


> Maybe a missed it, but I don't think they said the general concept is wrong (fighting crime as an official warden of the state. etc.).   Seems to me your being a bit hyperbolic.
> 
> The issue for me is they could have done so much more thoughtfully and made a better, more interesting product. If they had embraced reality a little more or more clear diverged from it they would probably mostly avoid a disclaimer and make a better more exciting product.  Honestly, before this AP came to be I never really thought of a town guard / city watch based adventure, but now I think the idea is really interesting. It is just this product specifically doesn't interest me.



Except that in a frenzy to appease the mob Paizo seem to have made the AP even less realistic. 
For example the player guide for this AP says that the PCs automatically do nonlethal damage. But looking at the adventure they are introducing many nonlethal weapons which are completely unneccesary with that rule. That means this rule was added later to appease certain people. Same with the ability to play as something other than guards which as far as I have read doesnt work very well.
It seems that Paizo butchered their own AP out of fear of vocal people who can't differentiate between reality and fantasy and hate all things even remotely connected to police. And thats a shame. Guess its back to murderhoboing monsters in the wild. That way you do not step on anyones toes (unless someone fabricates an connection between the monsters and a minority).


----------



## CapnZapp (Aug 4, 2020)

A bigger problem is that the AP gives exactly zero feeling of playing a cop. (*Edit:* I'm talking about the first installment, _Devil at the Dreaming Palace_)

Ironic, isn't it? Paizo gets flak for real world comparisons... but in my opinion the product is so utterly generic and nonspecific it doesn't merit any comparisons to real life!

You aren't playing cops. There's no procedures to follow. Or rather, there are, but these are created to let you play *exactly as before* not having to worry if you're targeting the wrong people or any such concerns. You even get to loot the monsters when the bust is done!

Furthermore there is zero effort to create a fantasy metropolis, with unearthly morals and standards. The assumption seems to be that the Edgewatch has the same ethics as 21st century America... or rather, that ethics are unimportant and unnecessary, since you're on the regular AP railroad where you can't make mistakes and never have to compromise.

In short, you're playing the same Barbarians and Wizards as always. You might wear uniform, but that comes with zero obligations or responsibilities.

To me, that seems like the real missed opportunity here. If Paizo needed to issue an apology, it should be about creating expectations the actual product doesn't even try to meet.

(If anything, apologizing for evoking images of real world racism and corruption sends the signal the AP is much more detailed and involved than it actually is!)


----------



## Derren (Aug 4, 2020)

CapnZapp said:


> A bigger problem is that the AP gives exactly zero feeling of playing a cop.
> 
> Ironic, isn't it? Paizo gets flak for real world comparisons... but in my opinion the product is so utterly generic and nonspecific it doesn't merit any comparisons to real life!
> 
> ...



As I said, thats imo a result of the anti cop sentiment and that Paizo caved in to it. Thats why they tried to remove anything cop specific and made the AP generic.

For example, thanks to the "everything is nonlethal" rule they introduced in the last moment the solution to hostage situations is now "fireball everybody, sort them out later".
Paizo should just have ignored the protest and released the AP as it was intended to be.


----------



## CapnZapp (Aug 4, 2020)

Derren said:


> As I said, thats imo a result of the anti cop sentiment and that Paizo caved in to it. Thats why they tried to remove anything cop specific and made the AP generic.



No, the actual content of the AP had no actual cop content to begin with, is my argument.

Their strong reaction in blogs and the hastily amended Players Guide makes it _look_ like there was.


----------



## Derren (Aug 4, 2020)

CapnZapp said:


> No, the actual content of the AP had no actual cop content to begin with, is my argument.
> 
> Their strong reaction in blogs and the hastily amended Players Guide makes it _look_ like there was.



I still think that for example without everything being automatically nonlethal the players would use different tactics than before. But thanks to that rule combat in this AP works no different than in other APs. And there is evidence that this rule was a last minute addition. Both because there are a lot of n9nlethal weapons in the adventure and because Paizo had already issued errata to that rule to clarify it.
The adventure itself, I have heard, not seen myself, has a lot more cop specific stuff than the player guide. Can anyone comment on that?


----------



## CapnZapp (Aug 4, 2020)

Derren said:


> Can anyone comment on that?



I just did!


----------



## Derren (Aug 4, 2020)

CapnZapp said:


> I just did!



Sorry. I wasn't aware that you also include the adventure and not just the player guide.


----------



## Lylandra (Aug 4, 2020)

sooo they basically took the premise of ZEITGEIST, limited it to one city and cut all the fun stuff? (like nonlinear development in the city adventure parts or the emphasis on consequences and creative PC freedom)


----------



## CapnZapp (Aug 4, 2020)

I might have to check up on that. (I've seen the name thrown around around here, but given the name, always thought it was some kind of modern day psychological rpg...  )


----------



## Lylandra (Aug 4, 2020)

CapnZapp said:


> I might have to check up on that. (I've seen the name thrown around around here, but given the name, always thought it was some kind of modern day psychological rpg...  )



It is fantasy in a setting that's on the brink of industrialization. You start off as sort-of FBI/CIA/special investigation agents per default (but can choose to be mere associates if you like). 

Regarding the criticism of playing as "the police": You're supposed to take prisoners and the rules explicitly ask the DM to allow non-lethal methods without penalty. Morals and corruption are hot topics throughour the campaign, and there is a certain point where the PCs are being audited by superior officers, so abusing their given power will lead to investigations.


----------



## Derren (Aug 4, 2020)

Lylandra said:


> It is fantasy in a setting that's on the brink of industrialization. You start off as sort-of FBI/CIA/special investigation agents per default (but can choose to be mere associates if you like).
> 
> Regarding the criticism of playing as "the police": You're supposed to take prisoners and the rules explicitly ask the DM to allow non-lethal methods without penalty. Morals and corruption are hot topics throughour the campaign, and there is a certain point where the PCs are being audited by superior officers, so abusing their given power will lead to investigations.




Personally I am not a fan of having nonlethal damage without work, either by employing different tactics or use of nonlethal, weaker weapons.
Being the good guy should take work.


----------



## CapnZapp (Aug 4, 2020)

Derren said:


> Personally I am not a fan of having nonlethal damage without work, either by employing different tactics or use of nonlethal, weaker weapons.
> Being the good guy should take work.



I believe Lylandra is now talking about the other campaign. 

Maybe you should go read the AP for yourself before pursuing this further, Derren. Do check out my own thread on Agents too: PF2E - About Agents of Edgewatch


----------



## moriantumr (Aug 4, 2020)

Stacie GmrGrl said:


> The idea that it's wrong to fight against criminals (CRIMINALS who COMMIT CRIMES) wearing a badge is bonkers and shows that there is something off in how many people view this... That it's somehow more okay to side with corruption and criminal behavior than to side with the people who try and protect us from criminal actions.
> 
> And how was Paizo supposed to know a year ago that our political and socialistic climate would have turned to such an extreme left in the year since these adventures were written an organized? We're they supposed to see into some kind of crystal ball that our culture would turn against our defenders of crime? Come on. When Paizo first announced this adventure path they were congratulated for doing something different. They were congratulated for this idea.
> 
> ...




Part of the issue is that fighting criminals is not really what police should be doing. Especially when the police fight unarmed civilians who have committed no crime, and sometimes kill them. Killing anyone, including criminals, is not the purpose or role of the police in most countries either. People recognizing that their “protectors” harm people and get away with it does not mean they support criminals or corruption. It means they want accountability and protection from the groups who claim to provide both.


----------



## Derren (Aug 4, 2020)

CapnZapp said:


> I believe Lylandra is now talking about the other campaign.
> 
> Maybe you should go read the AP for yourself before pursuing this further, Derren. Do check out my own thread on Agents too: PF2E - About Agents of Edgewatch



The context doesn't really matter, be it Agents of Edgewatch, Zeitgeist or the "decide when you drop the enemy to 0 HP" rule you see in newer D20 games.
Not killing someone while using a lethal weapon should be harder. Using nonlethal weapons should be a choice which also includes a drawback, often lower damage.


----------



## Lylandra (Aug 4, 2020)

Why should it be harder or come at a penalty though? HP are just an abstract concept anyway and we see plenty of "damage that's enough to KO people but doesn't kill" even with more lethal weapons like firearms in fiction. I mean, do whatever you want as a GM, but I see no reason to have "kill everyone" as the default option. (Especially if one considers that several kinds of magic are capable of subduing an enemy at the spot, like Hold Person, Dominate, Sleep etc.)


----------



## dave2008 (Aug 4, 2020)

Derren said:


> Personally I am not a fan of having nonlethal damage without work, either by employing different tactics or use of nonlethal, weaker weapons.
> Being the good guy should take work.



He/she was talking about Zeitgeist and mentioned the campaign was *asking* the DM to *allow* non-lethal damage without penalty.  So they are optional in that campaign.


----------



## Derren (Aug 4, 2020)

Lylandra said:


> Why should it be harder or come at a penalty though? HP are just an abstract concept anyway and we see plenty of "damage that's enough to KO people but doesn't kill" even with more lethal weapons like firearms in fiction. I mean, do whatever you want as a GM, but I see no reason to have "kill everyone" as the default option. (Especially if one considers that several kinds of magic are capable of subduing an enemy at the spot, like Hold Person, Dominate, Sleep etc.)



Because weapons made to kill people are good at killing and not so good at leaving them alive, at least reliably. Thus not killing someone when you use a greatsword should be harder. 
And to just knock out someone you need a more delicate weapon, hence the lower damage. Also if nonlethal weapons would deal the same damage as lethal ones there would not be a need for the latter. You can always kill anyone after the combat once you knocked out, so why use a lethal weapon in the first place?


----------



## Teraptus (Aug 4, 2020)

Derren said:


> As I said, thats imo a result of the anti cop sentiment and that Paizo caved in to it. Thats why they tried to remove anything cop specific and made the AP generic.
> 
> For example, thanks to the "everything is nonlethal" rule they introduced in the last moment the solution to hostage situations is now "fireball everybody, sort them out later".
> Paizo should just have ignored the protest and released the AP as it was intended to be.



Agreed... funny how the mob they caved in to are the most hate spewing POT's (Persons of Twitter). 1 simple search of the Orc Boy will reveal his troupe of Anti-White / Anti Police  hating twitter mob.


----------



## Stone Dog (Aug 4, 2020)

Non-Lethal damage supposing to be a mitigator is also pretty laughable.  

Even with it, even before the renewed focus on police brutality, the solution involved still boils down to "hit the problem in the face until it is neutralized."   That wouldn't have really gone over well In 2016 either.

Another idea (and more of a challenge, really) would be to take hit points out of the equation for most conflicts.  Encourage and provide incentives for apprehension without injury.  The Watch wants people alive and able to testify/face justice, not bleed out in the streets or look battered and pitiful at court.

Scale rewards based on the condition of your captives.  If you can restrain and arrest people with no more than, say, half HP dealt through non lethal damage, then you get better commendations and rewards, more resources donated to your unit from sympathetic churches and other such things.  And the loot that you recover may officially be repurposed for your use.

You start doing lethal damage to people at all and you get the bare minimum of your pay, no scenario specific XP rewards and if you keep any items then you are stealing from the Watch.

If anyone dies on your watch... You might not only have the Watch leaning closer on your necks, but inquisitors from neutral and chaotic good factions wondering if they need to turn their eyes to you as new and upcoming tyrants.


As an aside, take the recent Age of Sigmar rpg, Soulbound.  There is a rule in there where improving your community refills the meta-currency of Soulfire a bit.

Even if you fill the party with the sketchiest of literal murder cultists, they have signed on with Sigmar to defend civilization.

Blood thirsty murder elves still gain more power by making sure that the world is a nicer place to live than if they just slaughter all the bad people.


----------



## Stone Dog (Aug 4, 2020)

Granted, said murder elves can do both things, slaughter bad people AND make the world a nicer place to live, but that is more a black ops set up than actual law enforcement.


----------



## Cthulhugh (Aug 5, 2020)

If Paizo starts modifying our "pretend game" to cater to the minority woke left so blatantly, then insulting the Player base by adding this unnecessary warning about the good guys in the AP and modifying the AP they will find there company will go the way of all the other companies pandering to minorities. Get woke - go broke.


----------



## Morrus (Aug 6, 2020)

Cthulhugh said:


> If Paizo starts modifying our "pretend game" to cater to the minority woke left so blatantly, then insulting the Player base by adding this unnecessary warning about the good guys in the AP and modifying the AP they will find there company will go the way of all the other companies pandering to minorities. Get woke - go broke.



Oh god, yaaaaawn. You lot need some original lines. Also, don’t post in this thread agsin.


----------



## MaskedGuy (Aug 6, 2020)

Is this the part where I point out that in 5e you can just decide on moment of striking final blow whether you tried to kill them or not?

Like umm. I do think there is evidence of player's guide non lethal thing being "okay let's just in case change this because wow we didn't predict this happening", but umm... Even if it is, why does it make some posters really angry?


----------



## CapnZapp (Aug 6, 2020)

My guess is how "no lethal damage" easily reads as neutering the game, removing the player's agency (to go lethal or not).

It might be something else but that's my guess.


----------



## Stone Dog (Aug 6, 2020)

For me it is that non-lethal damage has never really been a satisfying angle.  It still takes a lot of work to neutralize somebody and it isn't like you aren't beating the crap out of them.

What the game needs for this is good take down techniques that don't involve bludgeoning somebody into unconsciousness if they aren't actual hostiles.

A city watch in a fantasy setting should be ready to deal out death and destruction against beasts and monsters and other clear and present active threats, but there should be better options for capture for normal criminals.


----------



## Stone Dog (Aug 6, 2020)

Yes, I know that nets and sleep spells and things exist, but mechanically the best way to keep somebody down is still mostly to hit them until they stop.


----------



## CapnZapp (Aug 6, 2020)

Look, if options that bypass the perp's hit point pool exist, these methods need either be more efficient, less or exactly the same.

If more, the game breaks down since warriors start to use them on everything.

If exactly the same, what's the difference?

If less effective, there's a cost to non-lethal that affects some character builds more than others.

The only way to preserve balance exactly as if you're hunting and killing monsters, is by... using that same mechanism.

Just saying that "there should better options for capture for normal criminals" is not easy or uncontroversial to achieve.

Not saying you're wrong.


----------



## billd91 (Aug 6, 2020)

Stacie GmrGrl said:


> And how was Paizo supposed to know a year ago that our political and socialistic climate would have turned to such an extreme left in the year since these adventures were written an organized? We're they supposed to see into some kind of crystal ball that our culture would turn against our defenders of crime? Come on. When Paizo first announced this adventure path they were congratulated for doing something different. They were congratulated for this idea.
> 
> Now they are being condemned for something they have no control over.




Arguably, it's only the timing in which enough people were so fed up with police corruption that it exploded into massive, widespread protests that was unpredictable. Everything being protested about with respect to police corruption, violence, and racism has been *well known* and documented for years. 

That said, I actually like the idea of a city watch AP. It fits a well-trod niche in media.


----------



## CapnZapp (Aug 7, 2020)

I too like the idea.

I'm saying this maybe isn't that idea. This is the experience of playing a wizard or barbarian, just like always, though this time you don't get to pick your own wardrobe. You still use greataxes and fireballs to defeat your enemies, just like before.

Which is pretty franking far from an actual City Watch experience, at least how I understand it. (My only experience with law enforcement is what television has taught me  )

Could it be the controversy and outrage is much more against what people thought the AP would be like, than what it actually is?

(I'm not trying to slight the protestors, I'm trying to say maybe Paizo didn't create a product that's worthy of our attention)


----------



## WayneLigon (Aug 8, 2020)

Stacie GmrGrl said:


> The idea that it's wrong to fight against criminals (CRIMINALS who COMMIT CRIMES) wearing a badge is bonkers and shows that there is something off in how many people view this... That it's somehow more okay to side with corruption and criminal behavior than to side with the people who try and protect us from criminal actions.
> 
> And how was Paizo supposed to know a year ago that our political and socialistic climate would have turned to such an extreme left in the year since these adventures were written an organized? We're they supposed to see into some kind of crystal ball that our culture would turn against our defenders of crime? Come on. When Paizo first announced this adventure path they were congratulated for doing something different. They were congratulated for this idea.
> 
> ...




Holding people accountable for their actions is not 'leftist'.


----------

