|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
What if I said "My character IS a drow. From Menzoberranzan. Yes, that Menzoberranzan on Abeir-Toril. (or a Night Elf from Azeroth. Or some other Dark Elf from some other world.) You see, I hitched a ride from Space Squid from that planet to this fine one. I like Golarion. I'm going to stay here." Of course I'm not a Golarion drow... mechanics-wise I'm just a regular elf for Golarion but with a peculiar appearance. Who are you to say the Lantern Bearers should have caught up with me before now when I say they didn't?
Honestly, I would veto that backstory a million times harder than I would someone who wanted to play an actual drow. It just comes off as saying that you don't think the canonical Golarion is good enough for your character. If you don't want your character to be a part of the Pathfinder setting, then don't play Pathfinder. Play a game set in the Forgotten Realms, or World of Warcraft, or whatever it is you actually want to play. But don't come into a game of Pathfinder and try to turn it into something it isn't. It's not just disrespectful to the creators of the setting; it's disrespectful to everyone else who sat down expecting to actually play Pathfinder.
Look, I'm not going to criticize you for wanting to combine two things you love, or playing a character inspired by another series. Arturia, my highest level PFS character, is based on an anime character. But I didn't just import the character wholesale and go around claiming my character is totally King Arthur - I researched the Pathfinder setting and adapted her in a way that allowed her to retain the basic character traits I wanted to emulate while still feeling like a natural part of the setting.
It also doesn't expect players or GMs to be familiar with the material you're referencing.
Finally, I'd say the best way to deal with a character who wants to look like a drow without actually being a drow would be to just ignore it. "Sure, fine, your character looks however you want them to look. The NPCs are just going to see your character as a perfectly normal looking (half-)elf." I never picture my kitsune as being a full-out anthro fox; even in her true form, I see her as just having the ears and tail. But I don't try and force everyone to identify her as a strange kitsune sub-variant; I just accept that there's going to be a certain amount of cognitive dissonance.
On the other hand, if the character is going to go around claiming they're an interdimensional traveler, I'd just have the NPCs quietly decide they were insane.
|
Finally, I'd say the best way to deal with a character who wants to look like a drow without actually being a drow would be to just ignore it. "Sure, fine, your character looks however you want them to look. The NPCs are just going to see your character as a perfectly normal looking (half-)elf." I never picture my kitsune as being a full-out anthro fox; even in her true form, I see her as just having the ears and tail. But I don't try and force everyone to identify her as a strange kitsune sub-variant; I just accept that there's going to be a certain amount of cognitive dissonance.
On the other hand, if the character is going to go around claiming they're an interdimensional traveler, I'd just have the NPCs quietly decide they were insane.
This. Exactly this.
If an elf with a weird appearance puts sand in your craw, just heed the above advice.
Don't pick a fight.
Don't veto.
Don't tell the player to get off your table.
FFS don't legislate against it. (looking at you, Mike Brock)
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I just wonder, do you ever go to a home game and say "what are the rules and how can I break them" or is that reserved only for playing with strangers?
|
If you play Skulls and Shackles, then it is reasonable that perhaps your initial 1st level build will not be piratey. Afterall, you are shanghaied.
But if you refuse to eventually make build choices that make you at least somewhat effective as a pirate, then you probably aren't going to enjoy Skulls and Shackles too much.
We aren't playing WoW, where you have goofballs running around as "LORDOFDARKNESS!"
If you are playing Second Darkness, and the GM tells you that anything drow-like is off-limits, and you create a character with Drow stuff, then he has a right to veto that character. Its his campaign. You have a right not to play in his campaign if that really sticks in your craw.
Mike is PFS's GM, for all intents and purposes. He has said, "No Drow."
If you choose options for your character that essentially make you look like a Drow, then that really is your problem. Not the GM's. and they have the right to say no.
Ekujae, by the way, are a Tribe of Wild Elves from the Mwangi.
Per the Wiki, elves are almost always fair skinned. The only exceptions noted are the tanned elves of the deserts of Osirion, and Drow. There is a vague implication that the wild elves of the Mwangi Expanse might have a darker skin tone as well. But that is never explicitly noted.
So if you are an elf, with a significantly dark skin tone, then you are most likely a Drow, by Golarion Lore.
Drow are described as having ember-dark skin.
This coloration is significantly different than the ethnicities from the Mwangi Expanse or Garundi. So a half-elf who's human half is Mwangi, would at most have a dark brown skin tone.
Easily identifiable from an ember-dark skin tone.
I honestly don't see what's so hard using the existing lore of the land your character lives in to define what your character looks like. Deviating from that, means you really aren't playing Pathfinder Society in Golarion.
|
|
If you play Skulls and Shackles, then it is reasonable that perhaps your initial 1st level build will not be piratey. Afterall, you are shanghaied.
But if you refuse to eventually make build choices that make you at least somewhat effective as a pirate, then you probably aren't going to enjoy Skulls and Shackles too much.
I believe I see where you're going with this. You have my attention.
We aren't playing WoW, where you have goofballs running around as "LORDOFDARKNESS!"
Ah, but, for some people, we may as well be. I haven't tried registering it so I don't know for sure but yes, yes you can run around in PFS with character names like "Lovestospooge69". Equally inane background stories amounting to nothing more than "Me Cronk. Me fite." are also permitted.
If you are playing Second Darkness, and the GM tells you that anything drow-like is off-limits, and you create a character with Drow stuff, then he has a right to veto that character. Its his campaign. You have a right not to play in his campaign if that really sticks in your craw.
Mike is PFS's GM, for all intents and purposes. He has said, "No Drow."
If you choose options for your character that essentially make you look like a Drow, then that really is your problem. Not the GM's. and they have the right to say no.
Yes, yes he did. He has now established (or is about to establish, depending on how much legal weight you give his post upthread) that character descriptions are now fair game for the PFS Police. When they come for the Drow Fanbois, will you stand by because you aren't one?
(and no, no, I *really* don't think I'm unfairly exaggerating with that comparison. It's a terrible, terrible precedent to open up character descriptions to scrutiny.)
...
Drow are described as having ember-dark skin.
This coloration is significantly different than the ethnicities from the Mwangi Expanse or Garundi. So a half-elf who's human half is Mwangi, would at most have a dark brown skin tone.
Easily identifiable from an ember-dark skin tone.
Not so easy in practice, unfortunately. If I show up with a drow-like elf and you want to lay down the "NO DROW, FANBOI" rule, I'll just dance around you indefinitely. "No, I don't look like a drow. Paizo art proves that golarion drow are blue skinned. My elf is black skinned." The next response is "Oh, Mike says I can't play an elf with black skin? Fine, my elf has nearly black skin."
The only way to force me from playing what I want is to kick me from the table, and that's not good policy.
I honestly don't see what's so hard using the existing lore of the land your character lives in to define what your character looks like. Deviating from that, means you really aren't playing Pathfinder Society in Golarion.
What's so hard is you're saying someone else's version of fun is BadWrong. And that's against the core spirit of PFS. It's also saying, btw, that people can't make up any appearances at all that aren't already canonically established.
Who are you to say that just because there are no elves with grey skin in canon that I can't play one simply because it's too close to blue or black for your comfort?
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Per the Wiki, elves are almost always fair skinned. The only exceptions noted are the tanned elves of the deserts of Osirion, and Drow. There is a vague implication that the wild elves of the Mwangi Expanse might have a darker skin tone as well. But that is never explicitly noted.
Then that wiki article is inaccurate. Ekujae have been repeatedly stated to have the sane skin tone range as their Mwangi human neighbors. Elves are generally fair-skinned in Avistan. In Garund, it's a different story.
Barring people from playing elves with African skin tones is falling into highly questionable territory. I'm not even talking about the drow issue here. Conflating that ban with a ban on dark-skinned elves/half-elves period would be extraordinarily misguided, both in terms of adhering to the campaign setting and presenting an inclusive atmosphere to players.
Then again PFS still has serious problems complying with canon. The aasimar and tiefling age range issue still hasn't been sorted out, with players being stuck with a table that has been explicitly called out as being wrong instead of the ranges suggested by the creative director and shown in actual Golarion products.
Seriously, if an Ekujae elf that looks like this is banned, something has gone seriously wrong somewhere.
|
|
(and no, no, I *really* don't think I'm unfairly exaggerating with that comparison. It's a terrible, terrible precedent to open up character descriptions to scrutiny.)
I'm going to proactively dial back my own rhetoric here a bit.
While I do believe in what I said, want to explicitly state that I don't wish to or intend to slander Mike or Paizo.
His fiat upthread was succinct for the sake of clarity. I am withholding judgement to see what form his clarification will ultimately take.
My posts about him and his opinion are meant to be nothing more than a warning of his toying with a dangerously slippery slope.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
(and no, no, I *really* don't think I'm unfairly exaggerating with that comparison. It's a terrible, terrible precedent to open up character descriptions to scrutiny.)
I'm going to proactively dial back my own rhetoric here a bit.
While I do believe in what I said, want to explicitly state that I don't wish to or intend to slander Mike or Paizo.
His fiat upthread was succinct for the sake of clarity. I am withholding judgement to see what form his clarification will ultimately take.
My posts about him and his opinion are meant to be nothing more than a warning of his toying with a dangerously slippery slope.
Just... Just stop.
Look at what you're doing.
And just stop.
|
|
Just... Just stop.Look at what you're doing.
And just stop.
Pointing out that as of yesterday, a PFS character's legality was solely a question of what rules are allowed from what sources, and now it's potentially poised to include what you say your character looks like?
It's really all that bad to point that out or think that's a dangerous thing?
Just... Just stop.Look at what you're doing.
And just stop.
Pointing out that as of yesterday, a PFS character's legality was solely a question of what rules are allowed from what sources, and now it's potentially poised to include what you say your character looks like?
It's really all that bad to point that out or think that's a dangerous thing?
You make me sad.
|
|
I just wonder, do you ever go to a home game and say "what are the rules and how can I break them" or is that reserved only for playing with strangers?
You make me sad.
I forgive you, because you have demonstrated a fundamental misunderstanding of where I'm coming from. An ironically profound misunderstanding, even.
I'm not participating in the discussion to advocate player empowerment to find ways to bring drow to the table.
I'm participating insistently because I believe in GM empowerment. I believe in the "GM, May I?" paradigm of telling players what's what and deal with it if you don't like it. And even with that attitude, because of that attitude, I don't believe PFS GMs should have the power to, or be in the business of, telling players what their characters are not allowed to look like. Or what their names are allowed to be. Or what their backgrounds are allowed to be like.
It can't end well for PFS to let that genie out of the bottle.
I just wonder, do you ever go to a home game and say "what are the rules and how can I break them" or is that reserved only for playing with strangers?You make me sad.I forgive you, because you have demonstrated a fundamental misunderstanding of where I'm coming from. An ironically profound misunderstanding, even.
I'm not participating in the discussion to advocate player empowerment to find ways to bring drow to the table.
I'm participating insistently because I believe in GM empowerment. I believe in the "GM, May I?" paradigm of telling players what's what and deal with it if you don't like it. And even with that attitude, because of that attitude, I don't believe PFS GMs should have the power to, or be in the business of, telling players what their characters are not allowed to look like. Or what their names are allowed to be. Or what their backgrounds are allowed to be like.
It can't end well for PFS to let that genie out of the bottle.
You are a bad person and you should feel bad about yourself.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I want to draw attention to the point that there is a big difference between "Your policy has unintentional racist implications" and "you are a racist". No one is saying the latter, and saying the former does not constitute an accusation of being racist against anyone. "That thing you're doing is racist" and "you're a racist" are not equivalent.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Per the Wiki, elves are almost always fair skinned. The only exceptions noted are the tanned elves of the deserts of Osirion, and Drow. There is a vague implication that the wild elves of the Mwangi Expanse might have a darker skin tone as well. But that is never explicitly noted.Then that wiki article is inaccurate. Ekujae have been repeatedly stated to have the sane skin tone range as their Mwangi human neighbors. Elves are generally fair-skinned in Avistan. In Garund, it's a different story.
Barring people from playing elves with African skin tones is falling into highly questionable territory. I'm not even talking about the drow issue here. Conflating that ban with a ban on dark-skinned elves/half-elves period would be extraordinarily misguided, both in terms of adhering to the campaign setting and presenting an inclusive atmosphere to players.
Then again PFS still has serious problems complying with canon. The aasimar and tiefling age range issue still hasn't been sorted out, with players being stuck with a table that has been explicitly called out as being wrong instead of the ranges suggested by the creative director and shown in actual Golarion products.
Seriously, if an Ekujae elf that looks like this is banned, something has gone seriously wrong somewhere.
The wiki uses language directly from the books.
Nobody said that mwangi skin tone was out. Nobody.
Just no Drow. Pure and simple.
Enforcing a rule is not bullying. Its part of a DMs duties.You say "enforce", I say "bully". *shrug*
As a GM it is your job to enforce PFS rules. How you feel about it is not relevant with regard to the actual rules. The same authority that a GM has in PFS to change the rules is the same authority he has to ignore them.
In both cases this = "none".
People need to remember that PFS is not your home game. The whole idea is to get everyone to have the same experience, as much as possible anyway.
PLAYER: "My character has black skin, long white hair, and pupil-less eyes"
GM: "So you're playing a drow elf?"
PLAYER: "No, the rules say I can't so I just LOOK like a drow"
GM: "Okay, so you're an elf. Got it. Elves are extremely common in Golarion so I'll set the DC to identify them at DC 5, easy for any commoner with a take 10. You will be treated like any other elf (or human or whatever) with skin/hair color variations"
This is another option I would consider. I would ignore the player's flavor as if it did not exist.
Player description of character: I have black skin, and white hair.
NPC in game: I like how black and shiny your hair is.
edit: Well if Mike Brock had just made it 100% clear there were no drow that is.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Here's the cold, hard truth:
You do not have an unalienable right to play whatever character you want in a Pathfinder game.
If you can find a GM to run a campaign for you, and if that GM decides to allow your character concept, then you can play X class of Y race.
If, on the other hand, your GM tells you "you can play whatever you want, but no goblins" and you show up with a green-skinned, feral gnome with sharp teeth and an unhealthy obsession with fire, you're being a jerk. And the GM and the other players should think very carefully about whether they want to continue playing with you, because you've clearly put doing what you want to do above playing nicely with others.
If PFS is your only option for Pathfinder, for whatever reason, then you've got to play within the rules set out by the campaign coordinators. If you don't like the rules, you're free to lobby for changes, and here's the place to do so. But if your petition goes unanswered, you're going to have to live with the rules in place or play in a different campaign.
And if you show up with your green-skinned, feral gnome as some form of protest of the rules you don't like, you should know that the people who make the rules will likely never see it, while the people who will suffer are the poor, unsuspecting GM and players who showed up to your table intending to play by both the spirit and letter of the rules, only to encounter you and your RP civil disobedience.
And if you don't agree with me and think you do have some unalienable right to play whatever you want to play and as long as it has no mechanical effect then who does it harm, please consider this:
If it has no mechanical effect, and it doesn't matter, why do you feel the need to say it?
Why can't you just say "this is my elf, he has shocking white hair" and then to yourself say ?
Global Organized Play Coordinator
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
This question has been answered. To reiterate, you can't reskin a character to look like a drow. You also can not play a character who is descended from a Drow, including a half-elf with drow ancestry. Since this is, unfortunately, not clear, I will make sure it is documented where it needs to be.
Drow are evil. Drow are despised and hated. Drow are essentially kill on sight because they are considered a monster for all intent and purposes. The Society would likely not accept a character that looks like a Drow due to the problems that come with it.
If you want to use a disguise kit or a hat of disguise or whatever to try to look like a Drow, then it is an option. However, the reactions of NPCs will likely cause grief for the other characters and the GM is well within his or her rights to have NPCs act accordingly if they fail their perception and think the character is a Drow.
This topic is now closed.