@BigDTBone:
My comment about being a prima donna if you "expect" your GM to allow type 3 reskins (as I called them above), was written before your last post, and was not meant as a jibe at your expectations of your GM to compromise. I would still hold that it is the GM's "right" (i use that term loosely) to not allow such reskins as they are "technically" against the rules. But in cases like the one you describe, I absolutely think it would be smart of the GM to allow it, at least if the divine/arcane cleft isn't a BIG deal in his campaign (which you would likely have noticed if it was due to the banter between the two of you).
Shandren Out
No worries!
I find those line by line dissected replies very hard to reply to. A couple points:
In the bard example, would you accept that your 'divine bard' would, say, only get to pick spells off of the cleric list instead of the bard one as part of the compromise, or is that sort of restriction a further example of DM 'tyranny'? Part of the flavor impact of bards as an arcane caster is that they have specific spells available that are only on the lists of arcane casters. This can become important depending on the context - for example, a setting where a monotheistic religion treats arcane magic as heresy. If bards can be divine casters, suddenly one side of the conflict has access to magic the story dictates they shouldn't.
I also don't understand at all what you mean by 'Zionist homebodies'. Please clarify? Especially the Zionist part.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If I can reflavor a paladin as an extremely noble samurai in a game set in Kamigawa, then why the heck can't a samurai be reflavored as an extremely loyal knight in a western-fantasy setting?
I played a Duergar Samurai a while ago. Not because he was in any way asian themed, but because he was extremely devoted to his clan and his lord.
The name of a class doesn't have anything to do with how that class fits into the setting material. There is no japan in most fantasy worlds. The entire idea of what a samurai is has to be adapted. The idea that they can only come from an asian-themed culture is pretty stupid. Any caste-based or hierarchical culture that values loyalty and honor would work.
Are there really people out there who don't get this concept?
If I can reflavor a paladin as an extremely noble samurai in a game set in Kamigawa, then why the heck can't a samurai be reflavored as an extremely loyal knight in a western-fantasy setting?
I played a Duergar Samurai a while ago. Not because he was in any way asian themed, but because he was extremely devoted to his clan and his lord.
The name of a class doesn't have anything to do with how that class fits into the setting material. There is no japan in most fantasy worlds. The entire idea of what a samurai is has to be adapted. The idea that they can only come from an asian-themed culture is pretty stupid. Any caste-based or hierarchical culture that values loyalty and honor would work.
Are there really people out there who don't get this concept?
I don't think it is a matter of not getting it. It is a matter of not wanting it.
There are people -- be they GMs or Players -- who dislike certain material. The 'eastern classes and weapons' are one of the big dislikes, along with science fiction stuff, guns, furry races and so on.
For some people, even the idea of it, even if hidden or veiled with a reskin, just irritates them. They see what you want to do but their dislike for the material really makes it hard for them to want to allow it.
This isn't for every case, and certainly isn't an excuse. But it might explain their point of view. This particular POV understands and doesn't care, they don't want it in their game.
I find those line by line dissected replies very hard to reply to. A couple points:
In the bard example, would you accept that your 'divine bard' would, say, only get to pick spells off of the cleric list instead of the bard one as part of the compromise, or is that sort of restriction a further example of DM 'tyranny'? Part of the flavor impact of bards as an arcane caster is that they have specific spells available that are only on the lists of arcane casters. This can become important depending on the context - for example, a setting where a monotheistic religion treats arcane magic as heresy. If bards can be divine casters, suddenly one side of the conflict has access to magic the story dictates they shouldn't.
I also don't understand at all what you mean by 'Zionist homebodies'. Please clarify? Especially the Zionist part.
I would be fine with the cleric list + bard only spells. Inquisitor list may be more appropriate. With as few spells known as the bard gets I would ok with choosing and ok-ing each one individually.
Edit: I would want to know what on the board list is causing an issue for him though.
Zionist - fearful or weary of outsiders. Ie, "the culture should remain pure" no mixing with other races. Homebodies meaning they don't travel (Tolkien hobbits).
With as few spells known as the bard gets I would ok with choosing and ok-ing each one individually.That'd be fine for the spells which they themselves know - but it might become an issue with wands etc. My bard uses all sorts of wands for spells which he doesn't know.
If the GM wanted to approve my choices from the bard list, and wanted to see more "clericy" choices, then I would be willing to except that Nerf as a condition.
That's a mechanics issue. It doesn't get in the way of the flavor of my idea and I would just let it go.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The name of a class, should never restrict flavor.
You are not the name of you class, and the name of your class features, do not dictate flavor.
Sneak Attack, could just as well be "Smiting" for the LG Rogue.
Also, Pathfinder is not a video game, and not Skyrim.
Totally disagree with this. Hitting vital spot is not smiting, and when sneak attacking you should be clear about what's happening so that the opposition can take countemeasures.
If your DM blasted you with a lighting bolt then, after you cast resistance to electricity he says "hey guys it was acid all along" I don't see anything but tables flipping happening for quite a while. Reflavoring has it's place, but you can't just do whatever the hell you please.
The striking of vital spots, could still just be a type of "smiting" for the PC. It's a flavor-only change.
Nobody in-game knows class feature names. That's all meta-game.
Flavor change, is not mechanics change. Changing the energy type, is a mechanical change. Try not to get the two confused.
You could reflavor switchblade knifes, as barber's razors, and nothing mechanical need change.
Curious - what would you guys think of trying to do a reskin such as making the damnation feats not be evil?
The Damnation feats are, for the most part, designed with the mechanics intrinsically tied to the flavor; while you could easily swing the benefits of Soulless Gaze on any alignment (you don't have to be evil to scare the shit out of people), Mask of Virtue only really works as a mundane option for evil characters to hide their alignment. I could see "Salvation" varieties that provide benefits based on good outsiders and a Mask of Virtue that allows you to detect as evil for the purposes of infiltrating evil territory but at that point you're homebrewing, not reflavoring.
|
...a Mask of Virtue that allows you to detect as evil for the purposes of infiltrating evil territory but at that point you're homebrewing, not reflavoring.
If a good character were able to take the feat - it can already do that. The feat just says it lets you shift X # of steps.
The only homebrewing would be allowing non-evil characters to take it.
Damn, teaches me not to go off memory. I wouldn't see any issue with it, then.
|
|
A little reflavoring, and teamwork, can make a number of things work.
As it is the first example, let's go with the Samurai:
Instead of an "Asian flavor", the Samurai could have an "Elven flavor".
A group of Elves have a caste system, similar to the Japanese flavor.
The iconic armor, and weapons, could be slightly reflavored, to have a more fantasy Elf flavor, rather than Japanese.
Even iconic Katana and Wakizashi, could be reflavored as rare Elven weapons, with a slightly different look, and be renamed.
So, now, you have all the mechanical aspects remaining, but now the flavor, may be more appropriate to the setting.
...a Mask of Virtue that allows you to detect as evil for the purposes of infiltrating evil territory but at that point you're homebrewing, not reflavoring.If a good character were able to take the feat - it can already do that. The feat just says it lets you shift X # of steps.
The only homebrewing would be allowing non-evil characters to take it.
Actually, RAW allows you to take them as non-evil characters, without homebrewing or reflavouring:
Upon taking a second damnation feat, the character becomes even more ensnared by his doom. He remains difficult to return from the dead (as noted above), and he can't be affected by breath of life or raise dead, even when these spells are cast by an evil spellcaster. Also, the character's alignment shifts one step toward evil (typically toward the alignment of whatever creature serves as his patron).
(Shift also happens when taking the third and fourth damnation feats.)
Since evil characters can't shift one alignment-step toward evil, it follows that you needn't be evil to take the feats.
A little reflavoring, and teamwork, can make a number of things work.
As it is the first example, let's go with the Samurai:
Instead of an "Asian flavor", the Samurai could have an "Elven flavor".
A group of Elves have a caste system, similar to the Japanese flavor.
The iconic armor, and weapons, could be slightly reflavored, to have a more fantasy Elf flavor, rather than Japanese.
Even iconic Katana and Wakizashi, could be reflavored as rare Elven weapons, with a slightly different look, and be renamed.
So, now, you have all the mechanical aspects remaining, but now the flavor, may be more appropriate to the setting.
B... but... your getting weeboos in my elves!
Seriously, though, every class can be used as a chassis to represent a wide range of characters. If the Samurai is the best chassis to use to represent, say, a dwarf whose intense devotion to his clan and the warrior order that's a part of it allows him to shake off any malady that afflicts him, then use it.
Yes, mechanics are used to tell a story. But they don't have to be limited to just one story.
I've been on both sides of this discussion, and honestly, I'm surprised to see such polar ideas. IMHO, the flavor text behind classes and abilities are much more important than many of us are giving them credit for. There's a reason smite evil only works against evil creatures and characters, and there's a reason sneak attack only applies against flat-footed or flanked opponents. The classes of Pathfinder are supposed to be distinct and the flavor plays a big part in that.
I firmly believe that simply re-skinning a samurai directly opposes this, and isn't something that should be allowed. If you're playing samurai just because you like the Resolve ability, as a GM I would urge you to rethink your character. As many others have pointed out, there are other ways of doing the same thing mechanically. Ultimately, I'm of the school that your character should be based in flavor before it is based in mechanics.
What if the samurai best fits the flavor but the class just has the wrong name? Do you force the player to use a cavalier or paladin or do you let him use the samurai class because it actually matches his concept the best?
If I can reflavor a paladin as an extremely noble samurai in a game set in Kamigawa, then why the heck can't a samurai be reflavored as an extremely loyal knight in a western-fantasy setting?
I played a Duergar Samurai a while ago. Not because he was in any way asian themed, but because he was extremely devoted to his clan and his lord.
The name of a class doesn't have anything to do with how that class fits into the setting material. There is no japan in most fantasy worlds. The entire idea of what a samurai is has to be adapted. The idea that they can only come from an asian-themed culture is pretty stupid. Any caste-based or hierarchical culture that values loyalty and honor would work.
Are there really people out there who don't get this concept?
Some people think you should use the published flavor. If you try to reskin you are a munchkin or you are "doing it wrong" in one form or another. I dont get it but almost every time this topic comes up someone says something similar to that.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Mechanics do not tell stories in games anymore than physics tells stories in the real world. Game mechanics are simple tools to describe how the world works. The stories are the actions that people take within that world.
A Samurai is not Toshirô Mifune. A Samurai is a collection of abilities that can be used to describe any number of character concepts, from the OP's take on Brienne of Tarth to a Dwarf soldier devoted to clan, to a German Landsknechts to Toshirô Mifune.
|
|
Some people think you should use the published flavor. If you try to reskin you are a munchkin or you are "doing it wrong" in one form or another. I dont get it but almost every time this topic comes up someone says something similar to that.If I can reflavor a paladin as an extremely noble samurai in a game set in Kamigawa, then why the heck can't a samurai be reflavored as an extremely loyal knight in a western-fantasy setting?
I played a Duergar Samurai a while ago. Not because he was in any way asian themed, but because he was extremely devoted to his clan and his lord.
The name of a class doesn't have anything to do with how that class fits into the setting material. There is no japan in most fantasy worlds. The entire idea of what a samurai is has to be adapted. The idea that they can only come from an asian-themed culture is pretty stupid. Any caste-based or hierarchical culture that values loyalty and honor would work.
Are there really people out there who don't get this concept?
That should be the time the DM pulls out Pregens.
Pregenerated flavor.
Whereas other wizards are masters of arcane writings, Gilgeam is a master of "gem magic."
This is an example of reflavoring. Literally nothing is different when compared to other wizards with Scribe Scroll save the way certain things are described.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A little reflavoring, and teamwork, can make a number of things work.
As it is the first example, let's go with the Samurai:
Instead of an "Asian flavor", the Samurai could have an "Elven flavor".
A group of Elves have a caste system, similar to the Japanese flavor.
The iconic armor, and weapons, could be slightly reflavored, to have a more fantasy Elf flavor, rather than Japanese.
Even iconic Katana and Wakizashi, could be reflavored as rare Elven weapons, with a slightly different look, and be renamed.
So, now, you have all the mechanical aspects remaining, but now the flavor, may be more appropriate to the setting.
Yup. I even made an Elven Samurai archetype, the Gallowjade to be even more Elven.
I think people just aren't willing to a: get the concept of reflavoring or worse b: are dead set against certain mechanic bundles (AKA class, feats, spells etc) because of REASONS. Which are flimsy, biased, arbitrary and immature. The more they harp on about not wanting to include these mechanic bundles for ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE MECHANICS THEMSELVES, they are exposing themselves as bigoted. Have fun with your games folks, coz otherwise REASONS make the game unfun.
I hate dwarves. I am not a bigot. ;)
Mechanics do not tell stories in games anymore than physics tells stories in the real world. Game mechanics are simple tools to describe how the world works. The stories are the actions that people take within that world.
A Samurai is not Toshirô Mifune. A Samurai is a collection of abilities that can be used to describe any number of character concepts, from the OP's take on Brienne of Tarth to a Dwarf soldier devoted to clan, to a German Landsknechts to Toshirô Mifune.
The samurai is an alternate class to the cavalier, because the mounted western knight image of the cavalier didn't lend itself very well to the Toshiro Mifune image of the samurai..
Then, as they worked on a cavalier archetype for the samurai, they wound up with so many changes that they presented it as an alternate class. That's what the samurai and ninja are: archetypes - designed to Japanify the cavalier and rogue - that got out of hand and ended up being presented as classes.
And cavaliers already have a built-in mechanic reflecting loyalty: the order. But even then (order of the cockatrice, or ronin / knight-errant,) that's not necessarily true either. It certainly means that resolve doesn't reflect loyalty, though.
-----
And one more thing. Suppose we decide, generally, to be ok with having a class that is the samurai in all but name, occupying the same general "space" in a campaign world as the cavalier. Given the choice between "abilities that let me choose to not be debuffed or dead" or "abilities that let me do almost useful combat tricks with a horse," who'd ever choose the cavalier?
Just a minor thing, but one that kinda bugs me.
Given the choice between "abilities that let me choose to not be debuffed or dead" or "abilities that let me do almost useful combat tricks with a horse," who'd ever choose the cavalier?
Just a minor thing, but one that kinda bugs me.
Also the ability to give your partners teamwork feats for a short time versus being deadly with eastern weapons. Also remember that there's also the Daring Champion for those that want a knight that deals in finesse.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
To quote Mark Rosewater from the cardgame MTG: "The flavor is flexible, the mechanics are not."
I personally support refluffing. Sometimes I love the mechanics of a class or archetype yet the fluff behind it isn't my cup of tea. So what do I do? Refluff it while not altering the crunch/mechanics a single bit.
If a person is against refluffing, then they must simply hate the summoner class. The summoner class is practically the definition of a refluffer's perfect dream. Going for an osirion themed summoner character but don't want tentacles to be, tentacles? Refluff it into sand or even a mummy's bandages so it goes better with your character concept.
\Cavalier and Paladin lend themselves much better to this archetype\
I don't really like how this keeps coming up, Paladin's are knights of a holy order, or at least have some fancy divine powers going on. Cavaliers are pretty much knights on horseback or nobles. Samurai actually lend themselves to a foot-knight much more strongly.
also, technically the best thing I see them mechanically favoring is a Mongol horseback-archer.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
\Cavalier and Paladin lend themselves much better to this archetype\I don't really like how this keeps coming up, Paladin's are knights of a holy order, or at least have some fancy divine powers going on. Cavaliers are pretty much knights on horseback or nobles. Samurai actually lend themselves to a foot-knight much more strongly.
also, technically the best thing I see them mechanically favoring is a Mongol horseback-archer.
In addition to that, sometimes I just want to play a character with the resolve mechanic rather than giving out teamwork feats. Likewise, sometimes I want the teamwork feats; I've played both and they're both fun - but sometimes one fits my character better than the other.
I don't aways want to play an Asian character; my dwarf samurai doesn't use a katana, he uses a warhammer and rides a giant lizard. I don't always want every samurai character I play to have to come from the same culture each and every time. Reskinning the flavor of the class allows this.
The striking of vital spots, could still just be a type of "smiting" for the PC. It's a flavor-only change.
Nobody in-game knows class feature names. That's all meta-game.
Flavor change, is not mechanics change. Changing the energy type, is a mechanical change. Try not to get the two confused.
You could reflavor switchblade knifes, as barber's razors, and nothing mechanical need change.
You are missing the point of what he said. He wasn't suggesting a DM who changed a lightning spell to deal acid damage. He was referring to a DM refluffing a spell that deals acid damage to look like lightning. The spell functions exactly the same (say, an acid arrow) but the DM has decided to make it look thematically different.
Similarly, there are real mechanical differences between what a smite can do and what sneak attacks can do. Smiting is often restricted by alignment, is actively invoked by the user, and can be "wasted" without effect if used incorrectly. Sneak attack damage is a passive conditional buff that can only be applied when the target is vulnerable, and is often blocked by things that ignore precision damage or by class features that prevent other creatures from going for your weak point, like uncanny dodge.
You could reflavor your "smite" to fit the limitations of sneak attack damage. You could also reflavor a greatsword to seem like a dagger. But there is a point where reflavoring becomes impractical without fiddling with the rules a bit or adding an increasingly long list of explanations about why your magical lightning deals acid damage over time. Sneak attacks can be something a zealous warrior does in the name of his god, but they are thematically impractical as a divine smite unless your god has a very specific code.
The striking of vital spots, could still just be a type of "smiting" for the PC. It's a flavor-only change.
Nobody in-game knows class feature names. That's all meta-game.
Flavor change, is not mechanics change. Changing the energy type, is a mechanical change. Try not to get the two confused.
You could reflavor switchblade knifes, as barber's razors, and nothing mechanical need change.
You are missing the point of what he said. He wasn't suggesting a DM who changed a lightning spell to deal acid damage. He was referring to a DM refluffing a spell that deals acid damage to look like lightning. The spell functions exactly the same (say, an acid arrow) but the DM has decided to make it look thematically different.
Similarly, there are real mechanical differences between what a smite can do and what sneak attacks can do. Smiting is often restricted by alignment, is actively invoked by the user, and can be "wasted" without effect if used incorrectly. Sneak attack damage is a passive conditional buff that can only be applied when the target is vulnerable, and is often blocked by things that ignore precision damage or by class features that prevent other creatures from going for your weak point, like uncanny dodge.
You could reflavor your "smite" to fit the limitations of sneak attack damage. You could also reflavor a greatsword to seem like a dagger. But there is a point where reflavoring becomes impractical without fiddling with the rules a bit or adding an increasingly long list of explanations about why your magical lightning deals acid damage over time. Sneak attacks can be something a zealous warrior does in the name of his god, but they are thematically impractical as a divine smite unless your god has a very specific code.
So I asked this earlier and it went unanswered by the poster I posed it to; so I will ask you. What is it about +2 STR and +2 CON that inherently says "RAGE!!" and not "ZEN"?
Or specifically, what mechanic in the samurai class do you feel in inherently eastern?
So I asked this earlier and it went unanswered by the poster I posed it to; so I will ask you. What is it about +2 STR and +2 CON that inherently says "RAGE!!" and not "ZEN"?
I *really* like this. I've been meaning to find a way to reflavor the rage mechanic as something else for the purposes of character development, and this fits very nicely with what I've been looking for.
I've aso been compiling a database of reflavoring classes for my upcoming guide on how to reflavor; mind if I steal it (with appropriate due credit)?
On the samurai class? No, I have no problem with it being reflavored to be Western. My response was only to that specific poster; I am not an opponent of any kind of reflavoring, I just believe it has its limits in terms of thematic practicality and consistency.
And, without further context, +2 Str and +2 Con are neither rage nor zen, just flat bonuses. I mean, I think you're talking about a barbarian's rage? But that's more than +2 Str and Con. Is this some archetype rage-like ability?
So I asked this earlier and it went unanswered by the poster I posed it to; so I will ask you. What is it about +2 STR and +2 CON that inherently says "RAGE!!" and not "ZEN"?I *really* like this. I've been meaning to find a way to reflavor the rage mechanic as something else for the purposes of character development, and this fits very nicely with what I've been looking for.
I've aso been compiling a database of reflavoring classes for my upcoming guide on how to reflavor; mind if I steal it (with appropriate due credit)?
Go to town, no attribution required. :)
On the samurai class? No, I have no problem with it being reflavored to be Western. My response was only to that specific poster; I am not an opponent of any kind of reflavoring, I just believe it has its limits in terms of thematic practicality and consistency.
And, without further context, +2 Str and +2 Con are neither rage nor zen, just flat bonuses. I mean, I think you're talking about a barbarian's rage? But that's more than +2 Str and Con. Is this some archetype rage-like ability?
Rage spell.
*looks*
Well, I do think it's odd that a spell that brings enlightenment in combat would make you more likely to be hit, but that's reflavoring I'd probably let pass in my games. There's plenty in the middle that can be hotly debated and would vary from table to table even if we did agree on general rules of what should and should not be reflavored.
My only issue with "rage-as-zen" is that neither the AC penalty nor the skill/action restriction feel particularly "zen" to me. I wouldn't mind hearing an argument or two, though, if someone will humor me. :)
Intense focus required to maintain the heightened state prevents doing other activities requiring concentration. Also the intense focus reduces your awareness of incoming strikes (however slightly) and lowers your AC.
Contributor
|
Hmm. Inability to Stealth is still a little weird, but if I recall, there's feats and/or traits that will cover that gap.
I think I like the urban barbarian's controlled rage a bit better for "rage-as-zen"... but an archetype that stacks with few others and is unavailable to bloodragers might not be ideal. :)
Thank you for your responses.
The Urban Barbarian stacks with the Invulnerable Rager, which is really the only archetype that matters.
Mechanics do not tell stories in games anymore than physics tells stories in the real world. Game mechanics are simple tools to describe how the world works. The stories are the actions that people take within that world.
A Samurai is not Toshirô Mifune. A Samurai is a collection of abilities that can be used to describe any number of character concepts, from the OP's take on Brienne of Tarth to a Dwarf soldier devoted to clan, to a German Landsknechts to Toshirô Mifune.
The samurai is an alternate class to the cavalier, because the mounted western knight image of the cavalier didn't lend itself very well to the Toshiro Mifune image of the samurai..
Then, as they worked on a cavalier archetype for the samurai, they wound up with so many changes that they presented it as an alternate class. That's what the samurai and ninja are: archetypes - designed to Japanify the cavalier and rogue - that got out of hand and ended up being presented as classes.
And cavaliers already have a built-in mechanic reflecting loyalty: the order. But even then (order of the cockatrice, or ronin / knight-errant,) that's not necessarily true either. It certainly means that resolve doesn't reflect loyalty, though.
-----
And one more thing. Suppose we decide, generally, to be ok with having a class that is the samurai in all but name, occupying the same general "space" in a campaign world as the cavalier. Given the choice between "abilities that let me choose to not be debuffed or dead" or "abilities that let me do almost useful combat tricks with a horse," who'd ever choose the cavalier?
Just a minor thing, but one that kinda bugs me.
Someone who wants to offer party buffs in addition to martial ability would choose the Cavalier, to answer your last question. Tactician is a powerful ability if used right, as my Jade Regent group is learning from my Carolus Rex inspired Cavalier.
It is not, however, terribly appropriate for one of the most common archetypes of knight in fiction: the Knight Errant of Chivalric Romance is better modeled by the Samurai class than the Cavalier.
After thinking about this a bit more, I think I can summarize maybe what the real objection to a lot of the more extreme reskinning proposals comes down to - the player is essentially inviting him/herself into participating in the actual design of the campaign world, and I think a lot of DMs prefer that to be an uncrossed line in terms of where they keep control of things.
The conversation around narrative control of a game and where the balance of that should sit between players and DM and so on is a complicated one and I think the reskinning question often sits squarely in that area.
Taking the earlier elf-samurai-reskin idea - there's certainly nothing wrong with the idea in a vacuum, and if an elf culture that works like that is already in the setting, it seems easy to run with. The problem can come in when a player brings that to the DM and says 'this is what I want to do, fit it into your game' when there isn't already a place for it. This kind of puts you on the spot where you're choosing between telling your player 'no' and making them (hopefully only temporarily) unhappy, or making a change to something you may have spent a lot of effort on, where you already have defined how elf culture works in the context of the world, filled in all your maps, etc. This can be especially true when you've got a new player walking into a long-standing game.
The 'best' answer to it is to make sure your players know what the main assumptions about things like that are well before they start working on characters and fall in love with a concept that just doesn't work with what you've set up, or whatever. And then once you've played with that group in that setting for a while, the drama just doesn't happen anymore - once they have 'mastery' of the lore/setting/whatever, the things they want to play will hopefully come from that understanding ("I think next I want to play a Knight of Arglebargle, they seem cool in the interactions we've had with them") rather than purely mechanical or pop culture type stuff.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think it's ridiculous to assert that a barbarian could be a Norseman, a fantasy Conanarian, or a dwarf berserker, but a samurai absolutely must be an orientalist stereotype of an 18th century Japanese aristocrat in 16th century Japanese warrior drag.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
After thinking about this a bit more, I think I can summarize maybe what the real objection to a lot of the more extreme reskinning proposals comes down to - the player is essentially inviting him/herself into participating in the actual design of the campaign world, and I think a lot of DMs prefer that to be an uncrossed line in terms of where they keep control of things.
The conversation around narrative control of a game and where the balance of that should sit between players and DM and so on is a complicated one and I think the reskinning question often sits squarely in that area.
Taking the earlier elf-samurai-reskin idea - there's certainly nothing wrong with the idea in a vacuum, and if an elf culture that works like that is already in the setting, it seems easy to run with. The problem can come in when a player brings that to the DM and says 'this is what I want to do, fit it into your game' when there isn't already a place for it. This kind of puts you on the spot where you're choosing between telling your player 'no' and making them (hopefully only temporarily) unhappy, or making a change to something you may have spent a lot of effort on, where you already have defined how elf culture works in the context of the world, filled in all your maps, etc. This can be especially true when you've got a new player walking into a long-standing game.
The 'best' answer to it is to make sure your players know what the main assumptions about things like that are well before they start working on characters and fall in love with a concept that just doesn't work with what you've set up, or whatever. And then once you've played with that group in that setting for a while, the drama just doesn't happen anymore - once they have 'mastery' of the lore/setting/whatever, the things they want to play will hopefully come from that understanding ("I think next I want to play a Knight of Arglebargle, they seem cool in the interactions we've had with them") rather than purely mechanical or pop culture type stuff.
Resskinning doesn't do this at all.
You choose all of your character parameters based on the DM's restrictions for setting and flavor.
THEN, you decide "I want to play a guy that shrugs off status conditions, maybe a few times a day he could ignore shaken and nauseated and stuff. Maybe it could scale up as I level, and help with saves and critical hits and stuff. That would be cool! OH! And I should have a badass horse! It would also be neat to have some small party buff stuff that I can do."
THEN, you look at the Samurai class and you say, "heck yes! This does all the things I want!"
THEN, you never worry about "reskinning" or anything related to flavor at all. You already worked all that out with the DM. You didn't step on anyone's design toes. The mechanics are literally causing no impact to the setting.
Zen as Rage is not hard to refluff. In fact it was already done as a 3rd party Archetype.
Let me just post the flavor/fluff for the Serene Barbarian archetype.
When most barbarians rage, they draw upon nature’s ferocity, relying on the instincts of a mother bear protecting her cubs or a hungry lion on the hunt. Nature, however, is not always so blunt. Like snakes waiting patiently, then striking suddenly, some barbarians lose themselves to a state of absolute calm.
Barbarians have tons of Paizo-related archetypes and rage powers that allow them to do other stuff while raging. Climbing, swimming, stealthing, intimidating, etc. Take for example the Primal Hunter barbarian archetype. It alters the rage of a barbarian so the barbarian can stealth while raging but does not gain a bonus on Will Rolls.
So I asked this earlier and it went unanswered by the poster I posed it to; so I will ask you. What is it about +2 STR and +2 CON that inherently says "RAGE!!" and not "ZEN"?I'm of the opinion that refluffing comes hand-in-hand with house-ruling. Sometimes, the refluff is very minor and requries no rules changes. Sometimes the house-ruling is very minor and requires no fluff changes. But many times, a change to one begs a change in the other.
For the above case, how would you handle the scenario where a (mechanically) Raging barbarian who is barely above consciousness through the +2 Con bonus is hit by a Calm Emotions spell and fails the Will save?
Normally, their Emotions would be calmed, and the "Raging" barbarian would fall out of Rage, lose the +2 Con bonus, and begin dying.
But what if the "Rage" is refluffed by "Zen"? I'm not too familiar of the Zen concept, but I imagine that being more calm would help Zen-ness than hurt it. Would you have the Zen barbarian suddenly not be Zen when his emotions are more calm? Would that push the Zen barbarian to the Dying state?
I could see it either way. If a DM didn't want to accept any rules changes then the Zen state could be flavored as a highly focused and directed emotion. That the character wells up with an onslaught of fierce feelings and just as quickly channels them to her focus (which could be a physical thing [cool totem reflavor] or could be a 'focused mind') to enhance her physical self. Calming those emotions would remove the fuel and pull her out of her zen state.
Or, the DM could say that the "rage" spell will have the regular effects of "calm emotions," for that character.
I would assume the first option because it doesn't require fiddling with mechanics at all, but I'd roll with it if the DM wanted to go the other way.