Should DM's enforce the Child Characters ruleset?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

401 to 420 of 420 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>

Ashiel wrote:
Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:
Ashiel wrote:

I agree actually. I imagine that if it DID reveal any sort of underlying erotic fantasy, it would actually be something completely different from a psychological perspective. A girl I socialize with (who shall forever remain nameless in these discussions) has told me that she wants to be a little loli-girl, and she enjoys the idea of being submissive and/or adult things in that context, but with her as the object of the, uh, "problem".

I would hardly call her a pedophile. She's not attracted to kids, she wants to be one. The fact she's also super subby plays into that in a way that would probably confuse and bother most people.

That is actually the other issue that I wanted to address but didn't.

I've found that "weird" is actually the true normal. I'm not sure why some people feel comfortable opening up to me in these ways (one of my other girl friends I hung out with as a teenager was a bit embarrassed when I asked about a story she was writing, which she quietly told me was a forced-fantasy which was kind of an odd thought to me as a teenager). Meanwhile, there's my submissive wannabe-loli girl friend, and I've played D&D with her plenty of times (and her D&D interests include lolis, vampires, succubi, and things with fluffy tails, sometimes in combinatons thereof, and that can get kind of weird sometimes; especially since she absolutely loves the fact that her current character is a legal target for planar binding and has informed me that she has great faith in me being enough of a dick as a GM to make use of that fact).

As someone that has had to wrestle with being the "victim"* of a SO myself and coming to terms with that, I've realized that people are a diverse lot, and judging people at face value or what you may even think isn't face value is a bad idea. People are complex. It takes a lot more than a fantasy to make someone cross a line that's considered unacceptable, and what it takes varies from person to person, but...

May be a communication here. I meant I wanted to address how roleplaying a child has little to do pedophilia, even if one is roleplaying a child to satisfy a fetish.


Sorry, I got off on a tangent about how just weird doesn't necessarily equate to someone who's going to go out and harm somebody. I agree 100% that roleplaying a child, fetish or otherwise, has little to do with being a pedophile. It'd probably be an interesting discussion.
EDIT: Also that you might be incredibly surprised as to who the SO might be. My SO (wow, that sounds weird) certainly didn't fit into any of the "iconic" images to say the least. So you can't (and shouldn't) judge a book by its cover or else you might find yourself barring lots of good people and completely missing what you're actually looking for.

*sits down, takes notepad and adjusts spectacles*

"Tell me about your fantasy-childhood..."

Paizo Glitterati Robot

Removed a couple posts. Please don't single out other community members; this often opens a door to pile-ons that we're not comfortable with here. Additionally, I think some of this discussion has spiraled somewhat outside the realms of the Pathfinder General Discussion forum, and might be better suited in Gamer Talk or Off-Topic. It may be a good idea to start new threads there if the comments aren't addressing the original post/topic. Thanks!

Dark Archive

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Wow. This discussion quickly went from:

"This optional rule results in broken/useless characters until it is no longer being applied, and that is BAD" vs "AND We're okay with that." to an unusual discussion about whether wanting/trying to play a child character has horrible connotations for who you are as a person.

Very weird.

As for Ashiel's point; I agree. Someone can be easily unusual without being dangerous or immoral - I've dated some women over the years who would definitely fall into that category.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Darkholme wrote:

Wow. This discussion quickly went from:

"This optional rule results in broken/useless characters until it is no longer being applied, and that is BAD" vs "AND We're okay with that." to an unusual discussion about whether wanting/trying to play a child character has horrible connotations for who you are as a person.

Very weird.

As for Ashiel's point; I agree. Someone can be easily unusual without being dangerous or immoral - I've dated some women over the years who would definitely fall into that category.

My personal 2 coppers on the whole thing is that I don't generally want children in my games unless there is a legitimately good reason for it because it causes an immersion issue, and I feel like most people aren't really going to deal with the issues of actually being a child (as has been my experiences with the majority of child characters I've interacted with over the years, which has been more than I'd have expected).

The life of a D&D character tends to be one fraught with danger and peril. They face nightmarish horrors and come back for more. Many of them die, and some of them are unfortunate enough to live through some of the more chilling ordeals. Putting aside the fact that such things are a big deal in their own right, there's a different feel when a child is subject to the horrors of the D&D world. Or when a child is melted into a puddle of liquid by a dragon, or torn in half by a troll. Somehow to watch a youth, something that we seem to instinctively imagine as being brighter and more pure be snuffed makes it seem all the darker afterwords.

That said, in the right context, I can support it. My character Alina was in a game with a young (like 13-14ish) dhampir that was essentially caught up in adventure out of circumstance rather than choice (essentially she was wanted by some crazy cultists and was in protective custody of some paladins and clerics of Imoadae, and my PC ended up tagging along her own reasons), and I enjoyed that character. She had a legitimate reason for getting caught up with the rest of the PCs which made it more plausible.

I've also seen the opposite, with really annoying child characters who seemed to think that being a child meant that they should receive special social treatment while more or less being taken seriously when they wanted to be, often with the added bonus of being completely insane. Like throwing magic missiles at people as part of a tantrum and expecting people to just accept lethal-damage attacks that could kill a normal person as childish antics rather than an imbalanced child with the fantasy-equivalent of a gun.

Despite my reservations, I've been willing to work with players who are interested in including child PCs or NPCs (I encourage players to have characters with friends, families, and similar ties, which means things like younger siblings or even their own children could be a thing), including my friend who enjoys playing the lolis (whose current character in one of my campaigns is a demon born into a mortal body as part of an evil scheme, lost her memory in the process, lived life as a mortal and thus recoloring her experiences, and now is awakening to her past memories and rebelling against the master plan as it would bring ruin to the world that is now hers; and she didn't ask for this). I can also understand that part of being a child can mean lack of the skill and/or experience needed for adventuring, and you don't necessarily want to start them out on the same footing as regular PCs for immersive reasons.

Generally I'd work something out on a case-by-case basis with the person interested in playing a child. In general I'd be loath to start them off in different classes than they would eventually enter anyway since that comes with lots of weirdness (your adept "wizard" suddenly forgot how to cast spells in armor and use cure light wounds Mr. Potter), but if they were young enough I'd probably suggest a pseudo-negative level (a flat -1 age penalty to attacks, saves, ability checks, and skill checks, to represent their inexperience) for the first session or so and then have them remove it after they had experienced some big-boy/girl things, to represent their rising to the occasion.

If they were simply teenagers rather than actual children, I'd generally just hope that the player had a good reason for them to be fairly skilled and assume they had to "grow up fast" due to their ordeals. In the case of classes like sorcerers, psions, bards, and other classes that might spontaneously end up with magic powers, it's pretty easy to write it off as early bloomers or natural talent. In other cases, something like a young boy or girl who took up the sword to rescue their sibling / parent / loved one despite their apparent age or inexperience could be a thing as well (if they learned swordplay from someone in particular that would be a plus and would make for a nice mentor-contact to play with during downtime and such).

As a general rule, playing a child isn't going to make you stronger than if you weren't. No advanced templates, you get the same point buy as everyone else, I'd even be fairly slow to make you take on any sort of adjustments other than those that might come with dropping a size category if you're indeed that young (but again, the younger, the less inclined I'd be to accept the character without some thought put into it); so worrying about someone trying to squeeze extra points out of the age thing isn't a worry of mine.

I guess overall, this was a long winded post that could be summed up as "maybe", with most of it hinging on what the player was willing to invest into the game and how open they would be to us working together to achieve something that is immersive and rewarding. I'm generally willing to try to help with unusual character concepts if possible, and there are plenty of players I'd rather not play some more traditional roles either (everyone knows that one guy who seems to think that neutral is just a cover for sociopath or something), so just give me some reasons to believe that you can take the torch and run with it.

^_^

Shadow Lodge

Hey even Berserk has child characters, one of which is almost as powerful as the main character (and yes she is child a wizard)

Note: Berserk is famous a manga with a hardcore grim dark setting full of eldritch abominations, wars, masacres and gratitious rape


Ashiel wrote:

My personal 2 coppers on the whole thing is that I don't generally want children in my games unless there is a legitimately good reason for it because it causes an immersion issue, and I feel like most people aren't really going to deal with the issues of actually being a child (as has been my experiences with the majority of child characters I've interacted with over the years, which has been more than I'd have expected).

<snip>

As a general rule, playing a child isn't going to make you stronger than if you weren't. No advanced templates, you get the same point buy as everyone else, I'd even be fairly slow to make you take on any sort of adjustments other than those that might come with dropping a size category if you're indeed that young (but again, the younger, the less inclined I'd be to accept the character without some thought put into it); so worrying about someone trying to squeeze extra points out of the age thing isn't a worry of mine.

I guess overall, this was a long winded post that could be summed up as "maybe", with most of it hinging on what the player was willing to invest into the game and how open they would be to us working together to achieve something that is immersive and rewarding. I'm generally willing to try to help with unusual character concepts if possible, and there are plenty of players I'd rather not play some more traditional roles either (everyone knows that one guy who seems to think that neutral is just a cover for sociopath or something), so just give me some reasons to believe that you can take the torch and run with it.

Pretty much all of this. I am a big believer in having a party that works together as characters and players both; most of the groups I've been lucky enough to have been a GM for have worked together very well.

I'm more likely to discuss this with interest with a long-term player than someone who is newer to the table. I want to know that the player is coming at this, for lack of a better word, honestly. I want the player to be able to explain what they are planning and why they want/need to play this character with this group. I want to know that the other players are OK with it too. There are issues with young characters in these sorts of worlds, as some have pointed out above, and for other players there are triggers involved.

Heck, "maybe" is an answer on a great deal of things that come up. While I have base rules I am usually willing to discuss things that seem to interest the player *if* they aren't a problem for the rest of the players and do not break my or their immersion in the game. A kid PC? Maybe. A bulette character? Probably not.


ElementalXX wrote:

Hey even Berserk has child characters, one of which is almost as powerful as the main character (and yes she is child a wizard)

Note: Berserk is famous a manga with a hardcore grim dark setting full of eldritch abominations, wars, masacres and gratitious rape

Well the young teenager dhampir I mentioned in one some of my recent posts around the boards was unquestionably contending for most powerful PC, if not THE most powerful PC in the group. She was a summoner, and I laughed my butt off watching her throw eagles at people until they fell down. She wasn't so young to the point that I would have asked to reduce her statistics or class choices in my games anyway (no, that'd be more for super-young children like pre-teens, like the 8 year old barbarian from the D&D cartoon).

I'm more interested in at least giving it a good go of playing it strait.
^_^


ElementalXX wrote:

Hey even Berserk has child characters, one of which is almost as powerful as the main character (and yes she is child a wizard)

Note: Berserk is famous a manga with a hardcore grim dark setting full of eldritch abominations, wars, masacres and gratitious rape

She was young for a witch.

Berserk is a very dark setting about one of the darker stories in that setting. In Berserk there is no "good" outsiders. The closest thing to a good outsider is Griffith, and he makes most depictions of Satan look like Big Bird from sesame street.

It's a setting in which the holy is evil, the demonic is evil, and Good is either a facade or exemplified by the weak.

The protagonist is the paragon of human virtue and strength, but in this setting that means he is a murderhobo who doesn't randomly kill people, for the most part.

I've seen darker settings, but Berserk is definitely one of those stories meant to make you feel uncomfortable.


I've never actually seen/read any of this Berserk you mention. O.o


Ashiel wrote:
I've never actually seen/read any of this Berserk you mention. O.o

Fix that

EDIT: Wiki Link. It started in 1990

Dark Archive

Berserk, IIRC is also a setting where there is no resurrection, but you run into people you saw die anyways; cloned with their memories up to a certain point re-implanted. So you could meet people who look, sound, and act like your old friend, but you know your old friend is still dead.

I have a friend who really likes it that talks about it all the time. He says the Manga is much better than the Anime.


Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
I've never actually seen/read any of this Berserk you mention. O.o
Fix that

This will likely be a drastic change from Monster Musume... lol

Shadow Lodge

Ashiel wrote:
I've never actually seen/read any of this Berserk you mention. O.o

You should check it is really good, there is even an anime adaptation of a part of the story.

To be fair the child wizard age is not stated anywhere altought its generally asumed she is very young. On the other hand, people usually look older than what they are here (since its a crapstack world). I mean this man is suppoused to be 20

edit: ninja´d by marcus


hey, i am a little loli girl, cosmetically at least. my boyfriend loves me anyway.


I just started reading it, and I have to say that on page 2 (from the first pages with panals or page 8-9 on Mangahere), my thoughts were "Well that escalated quickly". >_>


Is discussion went far from the original purpose...

Vagabonds. wrote:

So, recently, while attempting to sign up for a campaign online, I proposed a 11 year old half-Elf Wizard who taught herself magic from the ground up from the age of six (Int 20), but was denied due to her being too young, and said that if I wanted to play a child, I would have to use the Young Characters ruleset.

This, predictably, is annoying, primarily due to forcing me to take NPC class levels, rather than actual wizard levels. My question is, should DM's enforce the child ruleset on their players?

A note: I would be the only child there.

Should he? No. Each setting/group/dm is different, and it's not mandatory to do it that way. Can he? It's PFS so yeah, unfortunately.

In your case, it's quite a bad build for a child. Wizard is probably the class that require the longer time to get to level 1. Even a prodigy should not get it that fast (its nearly 10 years to soon). Would be a sorcerer, witch, oracle, druid or even barbarian, i would not say anything. But a wizard...

For the rule in itself, the npc thing should be scrapped, the stat modifier and the trait penalties are enough for the difference in strength, and it don't hurt the concept.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Saigo Takamori wrote:

Is discussion went far from the original purpose...

Vagabonds. wrote:

So, recently, while attempting to sign up for a campaign online, I proposed a 11 year old half-Elf Wizard who taught herself magic from the ground up from the age of six (Int 20), but was denied due to her being too young, and said that if I wanted to play a child, I would have to use the Young Characters ruleset.

This, predictably, is annoying, primarily due to forcing me to take NPC class levels, rather than actual wizard levels. My question is, should DM's enforce the child ruleset on their players?

A note: I would be the only child there.

Should he? No. Each setting/group/dm is different, and it's not mandatory to do it that way. Can he? It's PFS so yeah, unfortunately.

Wait. Where did he say this was a PFS character? I never saw that.

If it is PFS, it changes this discussion quite a bit. PFS either requires children to use the young character rules or requires PCs to be of the minimum starting age. I forget which, but know it is one of the two. If it is the first, the GM is completely in the right, given that PFS rules are non-negotiable. If it is the second, the GM is in the wrong and should not have allowed a child character at all, again because the rules of PFS are non-negotiable.


Ashiel wrote:
I just started reading it, and I have to say that on page 2 (from the first pages with panals or page 8-9 on Mangahere), my thoughts were "Well that escalated quickly". >_>

Oh man I forgot that the opening scene is a honeypot maneuver.


Kelsey Arwen MacAilbert wrote:
Saigo Takamori wrote:

Is discussion went far from the original purpose...

Vagabonds. wrote:

So, recently, while attempting to sign up for a campaign online, I proposed a 11 year old half-Elf Wizard who taught herself magic from the ground up from the age of six (Int 20), but was denied due to her being too young, and said that if I wanted to play a child, I would have to use the Young Characters ruleset.

This, predictably, is annoying, primarily due to forcing me to take NPC class levels, rather than actual wizard levels. My question is, should DM's enforce the child ruleset on their players?

A note: I would be the only child there.

Should he? No. Each setting/group/dm is different, and it's not mandatory to do it that way. Can he? It's PFS so yeah, unfortunately.

Wait. Where did he say this was a PFS character? I never saw that.

If it is PFS, it changes this discussion quite a bit. PFS either requires children to use the young character rules or requires PCs to be of the minimum starting age. I forget which, but know it is one of the two. If it is the first, the GM is completely in the right, given that PFS rules are non-negotiable. If it is the second, the GM is in the wrong and should not have allowed a child character at all, again because the rules of PFS are non-negotiable.

Sorry, my mistake. When I saw all the " sing up for campaing online" i tought about a pfs, but it's not written.

401 to 420 of 420 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Should DM's enforce the Child Characters ruleset? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.