Feral Child Should Be Unbanned

[OutsiderSubtype]

Feral Child should be unbanned.

The main reason for their ban seems to be that they start as illiterate. This rubs me the wrong way, because they can learn to read and write (and thus make PFS reports) by spending one measly skill point.

True Primitive barbarians, which are illiterate and can never become literate, are PFS legal. This seems incredibly unfair to the Druid archetype.

If necessary, there could be a provision that PFS Feral Child characters must spend one of their starting skill points on Linguistics to overcome their illiteracy.

Benefits of doing this:

1. Consistency with other rules. There are other allowed archetypes that come with illiteracy - indeed, illiteracy that is less easily overcome (True Primitive). There are other allowed archetypes that come from primitive or wilderness backgrounds, or backgrounds that might have trouble fitting in with civilized society (many Barbarian, Druid, and Ranger archetypes). An alternative might be banning those archetypes, but it is better to resolve an inconsistency by giving players more options rather than fewer.

2. We all know Rogues are a little weak. Pathfinder developers have acknowledged as much. Feral Child gives an option to have a Druid character with some rogue-like abilities.

3. Giving players more options in general.

4. Being raised by wolves is a classic trope of heroic legend and fantasy.

Possible drawbacks:

1. There is no precedent for a rule mandating how players must spend one of their skill points. However, in this context, such a rule would actually be giving players more options by opening up a banned archetype. Further, such a rule might not even be necessary since True Primitive barbarians are legal despite their illiteracy.

Please note that nothing in the Feral Child archetype indicates that the character is a child now or changes their starting age. The archetype has to do with the character being raised in the wild, not with their current age. Thus, there is no need to discuss PFS age rules or similar in this thread.

[LazarX]

OutsiderSubtype wrote:

Feral Child should be unbanned.

The main reason for their ban seems to be that they start as illiterate. This rubs me the wrong way, because they can learn to read and write (and thus make PFS reports) by spending one measly skill point.

There's the essential problem that such a character, which by the way would have to start that way from level 1, simply does not make sense as a Pathfinder.

It's not just a matter of "report", it's the explore and cooperate bits that matter as well. A Feral child simply doesn't play well with others.

[Tim Statler]

I honestly think True Primitive barbarian should have been banned also for much the same reason.

[RainyDayNinja]

I think LazarX has the right idea. A True Primitive can't read or write, but might still be quite gregarious and well-socialized. The Feral Child seems like it's just asking for disruptive role-play ("I sniff the diplomat's butt because I was raised by wolves! I take a dump in the potted plant because that's how bears do it in the forest! Aren't I hilarious, guys?")

[OutsiderSubtype]

LazarX wrote:

A Feral child simply doesn't play well with others.

Why? How is that any more true of the Feral Child than many other archetypes which are legal? Say, a True Primitive or Drunken Brute barbarian, or a Fiend Flayer tiefling? Frankly I think the flavor text for those archetypes is potentially much more disruptive than Feral Child. Ultimately the actual level of disruption depends on whether or not the player can play responsibly.

RainyDayNinja wrote:

The Feral Child seems like it's just asking for disruptive role-play

There's already a don't be a jerk rule and an expectation that players cooperate. Again, how is the Feral Child worse than other archetypes which are legal?

Tim Statler has the right idea. Why is Feral Child banned when so many other potentially disruptive archetypes are legal? Either it should be allowed or those other archetypes should also be banned.

[Andreas Forster]

Quote:

True Primitive barbarians, which are illiterate and can never become literate, are PFS legal.

This is something that always puzzled me since I read in 'Seekers of Secrets' that the in-game Pathfinder Society actually has the ability to read and write Common as a prerequisite for adventurers who want to join.

Maybe that is waived for field comissions...

[OutsiderSubtype]

Here's another point:

The Wild Child Brawler archetype from the new ACG has EXACTLY THE SAME flavor as the Feral Child and is legal. So clearly potential for disruptive play isn't the issue.

[Garble Facechomper]

RainyDayNinja wrote:

I think LazarX has the right idea. A True Primitive can't read or write, but might still be quite gregarious and well-socialized. The Feral Child seems like it's just asking for disruptive role-play ("I sniff the diplomat's butt because I was raised by wolves! I take a dump in the potted plant because that's how bears do it in the forest! Aren't I hilarious, guys?")

:D

[Swiftbrook]

RainyDayNinja wrote:

I think LazarX has the right idea. A True Primitive can't read or write, but might still be quite gregarious and well-socialized. The Feral Child seems like it's just asking for disruptive role-play ("I sniff the diplomat's butt because I was raised by wolves! I take a dump in the potted plant because that's how bears do it in the forest! Aren't I hilarious, guys?")

An player can play their Cha 5 or 7 PC just as anti-social. It really does come down to "Don't be a Jerk". I think Feral Child should be legal in PFS. I also think that any class or archetype that starts out illiterate should be required to take at least one skill rank in linguistics at first level to be literate for the Pathfinder Society.

I don't see the Feral Child having an issue with being overpowered. It seems to be a PFS flavor issue. But, in a society with dozens of legal races, gunslingers, and super optimized PCs, a Feral Child doesn't stick out as being out of whack for PFS.

As far as I can recall, Feral Child is the only Druid archetype without wildshape and has a good animal companion. That was something that I was interested in.

[Andreas Forster]

Swiftbrook wrote:

I also think that any class or archetype that starts out illiterate should be required to take at least one skill rank in linguistics at first level to be literate for the Pathfinder Society.

I actually find the idea of mission reports "written" in a series of pictures funny. The Decemvirate send their agents out to "read" a lot of cave paintings, so why shouldn't they do some interpretation work themselves :P

[Snorter]

I don't see any guidance covering what happens if a player multiclasses into Feral Child, as there is no indication that the class and archetype must only be taken at character level 1.

Though I assume most GMs would roll their eyes at a player doing such a thing.

"Hey guys! Now we're buddies, did I ever tell you I was raised by wolves?"

[RainyDayNinja]

Andreas Forster wrote:

Swiftbrook wrote:

I also think that any class or archetype that starts out illiterate should be required to take at least one skill rank in linguistics at first level to be literate for the Pathfinder Society.

I actually find the idea of mission reports "written" in a series of pictures funny. The Decemvirate send their agents out to "read" a lot of cave paintings, so why shouldn't they do some interpretation work themselves :P

My brother did that in The Confirmation, but he was a half-orc bomber alchemist, so his pictures were mainly of explosions, and not terribly illuminating.

[Dhjika]

Andreas Forster wrote:

Swiftbrook wrote:

I also think that any class or archetype that starts out illiterate should be required to take at least one skill rank in linguistics at first level to be literate for the Pathfinder Society.

I actually find the idea of mission reports "written" in a series of pictures funny. The Decemvirate send their agents out to "read" a lot of cave paintings, so why shouldn't they do some interpretation work themselves :P

there are also a few dozen goblin pathfinders that perhaps have something around this on their allowing chronicle, but I doubt those goblin pathfinders do much writing or reading of reports

[Nikolaus Athas]

Perhaps the Wild Child can convey the meaning of their reports by the power of ... INTERPRETIVE DANCE!!!!
(sorry Im just joking - that would be a bard dip ....)

[Trixie the Goblin]

Dhjika wrote:

there are also a few dozen goblin pathfinders that perhaps have something around this on their allowing chronicle, but I doubt those goblin pathfinders do much writing or reading of reports

No, no Trixie write and read reports like good Pathfinder. Colson Madriss tell Trixie writing not steal words from head, it just borrow them.

[OutsiderSubtype]

I think this thread is definitely making my case that Feral Child is no more disruptive (or necessarily illiterate) than many of the other options allowed to Pathfinders, such as goblins, half-orc bomber alchemists, fiend-flayer tieflings, fox people, etc.

Wild Child has the EXACT SAME background flavor as Feral Child and is allowed. I think this is an unanswerable argument for un-banning Feral Child or banning Wild Child and other illiterate or potentially disruptive archetypes.

It's time to un-ban Feral Child, or perhaps become more conservative about allowing potentially disruptive backgrounds. Is Wild Child just allowed because it's the new hotness?

Let's avoid the appearance of arbitrary decision-making; there's enough arbitrary rules in D20 games already.

Edit: Swiftbrook makes an excellent point about Feral Child allowing some unique mechanical options. That's the main reason I was interested myself; I wanted a more rogue-like druid.

[Andreas Forster]

Dhjika wrote:

but I doubt those goblin pathfinders do much writing or reading of reports

Maybe they do some eating of reports...

As an almost unrelated point, I once played a goblin in a home game. I designed his background as such that he had secretly learned how to read and write and discovered it is harmless, then fled his tribe before they could find out. He overcame standard goblin fears and proudly showed that. For example, he had what he called a "fearsome Warmount" (a pony).

[DrakeRoberts]

OutsiderSubtype wrote:

Wild Child has the EXACT SAME background flavor as Feral Child...

Um. I don't find this to be an accurate statement. Wild child focuses on your bond with an animal, potentially from growing up with an exotic pet. Feral Child states that you have become feral and suspicious of civilized society.

I'm not saying it should or shouldn't be banned, but the background flavors are definitely not the "EXACT SAME".

[OutsiderSubtype]

DrakeRoberts wrote:

OutsiderSubtype wrote:

Wild Child has the EXACT SAME background flavor as Feral Child...

I'm not saying it should or shouldn't be banned, but the background flavors are definitely not the "EXACT SAME".

Posters supporting the ban have said that "raised by animals" flavors equals potential for disruptive play and sniffing diplomats' butts. The "raised by animals" aspect is present in both archetypes, one of which is banned and one of which is not.

[DrakeRoberts]

Posters are not John or Mike. Fact is that the flavor of Wild Child is a bond with an animal (something many classes have). The flavor of Feral Child is that they are animalistic/base (aka feral... which is where butt-sniffing might come in) and that they are suspicious of civilized society (aka the Pathfinder Society). I can see where management would say that an archetype that explicitly mistrusts civilization (aka groups of people) would be inappropriate as a member of an organization like the Pathfinder Society. Can't you?

[OutsiderSubtype]

DrakeRoberts wrote:

Posters are not John or Mike. Fact is that the flavor of Wild Child is a bond with an animal (something many classes have). The flavor of Feral Child is that they are animalistic/base (aka feral... which is where butt-sniffing might come in) and that they are suspicious of civilized society (aka the Pathfinder Society). I can see where management would say that an archetype that explicitly mistrusts civilization (aka groups of people) would be inappropriate as a member of an organization like the Pathfinder Society. Can't you?

That's a fair argument, and I might accept it if the True Primitive was also banned. It is presented as mistrusting civilization even more than the Feral Child, to the point of refusing to learn to read and write under any circumstances in language that is typically reserved for paladin codes and the like.

Why is True Primitive okay when Feral Child is not?

People have of course played True Primitives in keeping with the ideals of the Society, but you could do the same with a Feral Child.

[DrakeRoberts]

OutsiderSubtype wrote:

DrakeRoberts wrote:

Posters are not John or Mike. Fact is that the flavor of Wild Child is a bond with an animal (something many classes have). The flavor of Feral Child is that they are animalistic/base (aka feral... which is where butt-sniffing might come in) and that they are suspicious of civilized society (aka the Pathfinder Society). I can see where management would say that an archetype that explicitly mistrusts civilization (aka groups of people) would be inappropriate as a member of an organization like the Pathfinder Society. Can't you?

That's a fair argument, and I might accept it if the True Primitive was also banned. It is presented as mistrusting civilization even more than the Feral Child, to the point of refusing to learn to read and write under any circumstances in language that is typically reserved for paladin codes and the like.

Why is True Primitive okay when Feral Child is not?

People have of course played True Primitives in keeping with the ideals of the Society, but you could do the same with a Feral Child.

Only thing I can think of is that it is because there is a "forced to mingle with civilization" line in True Primitive. Honestly, for flavor it too should probably be banned. Beyond the anti-society flavor, it also has the illiteracy issue. Hard to report that way... I guess maybe orally?

[-Amadeus Bastion-]

DrakeRoberts wrote:

Only thing I can think of is that it is because there is a "forced to mingle with civilization" line in True Primitive. Honestly, for flavor it too should probably be banned. Beyond the anti-society flavor, it also has the illiteracy issue. Hard to report that way... I guess maybe orally?

Probably. Many cultures passed stories and kept records by word of mouth.