Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game

Starfinder


Pathfinder Society


Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Cold Weather VS Natural Fur


Rules Questions


In our Next game, we are going over the crown of the world (Jade Regent). I am playing a Kitsune Cleric and I wanted to know if I am in my Animal Form Such as a Fox Shape or Anthropomorphic fox form. Do I get Bounes vs the cold?


Maybe a circumstance bonus.

Ask your GM.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Rules wise, nothing says that you do.

Personally I wouldn't give a bonus to the humaniod fox form, since Kitsune seem to wear clothes like anyone else.

I would probably consider the fox form to be wearing the equivalent of cold weather gear.

Scarab Sages

dragonfly7022003 wrote:
In our Next game, we are going over the crown of the world (Jade Regent). I am playing a Kitsune Cleric and I wanted to know if I am in my Animal Form Such as a Fox Shape or Anthropomorphic fox form. Do I get Bounes vs the cold?

Does the Fox Shape have seasonal furs? In real life, foxes and most furry creatures, only have their winter coats in the winter. Then they shed their winter coat for a summer coat in the spring, so as to not bake in the summer.

I suppose the bigger question is if the GM is supposed to be applying a circumstance penalty to furry creatures in hot climates? If you want a bonus in cold weather, than a penalty in hot weather would also make sense.


Murdock Mudeater wrote:
dragonfly7022003 wrote:
In our Next game, we are going over the crown of the world (Jade Regent). I am playing a Kitsune Cleric and I wanted to know if I am in my Animal Form Such as a Fox Shape or Anthropomorphic fox form. Do I get Bounes vs the cold?

Does the Fox Shape have seasonal furs? In real life, foxes and most furry creatures, only have their winter coats in the winter. Then they shed their winter coat for a summer coat in the spring, so as to not bake in the summer.

I suppose the bigger question is if the GM is supposed to be applying a circumstance penalty to furry creatures in hot climates? If you want a bonus in cold weather, than a penalty in hot weather would also make sense.

That is all true and it is something I am wondering. Mostly for the cold. I do not think that they get winter coat, seeing as its a magical transformation. Last thing you want is for the party to complane about the char shedding all over the place.


My thought is that a fox (not a shapeshifted humanoid) is inherently tougher (Con 13) than an average human (Con 10.5) and is more likely to survive cold weather, despite being a much smaller creature with a higher than human Surface Area to Volume ratio.

So it seems like a foxes ability to survive cold weather is taken into account via higher Constitution, and shouldn't be modified to count for fur. And thus, it shouldn't be counted for a shapeshifter as well.

Alternatively, just think of it as the change in SA to Volume ratio is offset by the presence of fur.

For the sake of consistency, I'd then wouldn't grant bonuses/penalties based on whether a Kitsune was in human or anthrofox form.


Short answer, no.

Even if they are not related to the campaign, traits like Cold Resilience should do the trick.

Quote:
You gain a +4 trait bonus on saves to avoid nonlethal damage from cold environments. In addition, you begin play with a cold-weather outfit at no cost.

Make that free cold-weather outfit a cute 'winter kimono' and there you go.

Also you said that your character is a cleric, so the Endure Elements spell is another excelent option.


William Werminster wrote:

Short answer, no.

Even if they are not related to the campaign, traits like Cold Resilience should do the trick.

Quote:
You gain a +4 trait bonus on saves to avoid nonlethal damage from cold environments. In addition, you begin play with a cold-weather outfit at no cost.

Make that free cold-weather outfit a cute 'winter kimono' and there you go.

Also you said that your character is a cleric, so the Endure Elements spell is another excellent option.

Yeah I was not talking about Magical Cold. I am talking cold weather. In anthro Fox form I have fur. Would that give me better saves vs cold weather survival.

Dark Archive

dragonfly7022003 wrote:
William Werminster wrote:

Short answer, no.

Even if they are not related to the campaign, traits like Cold Resilience should do the trick.

Quote:
You gain a +4 trait bonus on saves to avoid nonlethal damage from cold environments. In addition, you begin play with a cold-weather outfit at no cost.

Make that free cold-weather outfit a cute 'winter kimono' and there you go.

Also you said that your character is a cleric, so the Endure Elements spell is another excellent option.

Yeah I was not talking about Magical Cold. I am talking cold weather. In anthro Fox form I have fur. Would that give me better saves vs cold weather survival.

Per the rules, no. Unfortunately neither of your fox forms has any inherent resistance to cold weather. However, this is something you may wish to discuss with your GM if this is a home game, and you may be able to figure something out.

But by the rules as written, unfortunately not...


To be fair, nothing says foxes get any special bonus against cold weather.

+3 fort save, dc 15 followed by dc 16 saves for 1d6 damage each, 5 hp.

Odds are good that any given fox will be dead within 5 minutes of the temperature hitting freezing.

Basically, all of the rules kind of suck for anything that is not 94% person or greater.

Edit: Polar bears could probably last a couple hours!


Bare minimum I'd grant you the benefits of wearing a cold-weather outfit.


Animals can still freeze to death in very cold weather, winter coats or not.

Silver Crusade

Just cast Endure Elements. Buy a bunch of scrolls, or even a wand to split with your group, if you don't want to "waste" the spell slot.

Scarab Sages

dragonfly7022003 wrote:
William Werminster wrote:

Short answer, no.

Even if they are not related to the campaign, traits like Cold Resilience should do the trick.

Quote:
You gain a +4 trait bonus on saves to avoid nonlethal damage from cold environments. In addition, you begin play with a cold-weather outfit at no cost.

Make that free cold-weather outfit a cute 'winter kimono' and there you go.

Also you said that your character is a cleric, so the Endure Elements spell is another excellent option.

Yeah I was not talking about Magical Cold. I am talking cold weather. In anthro Fox form I have fur. Would that give me better saves vs cold weather survival.

Well, I think you have three realistic choices:

First, you could petition the GM that your fox should get a bonus to natural cold weather, and a penalty in natural hot weather.

Second, you could petition the GM that you have a seasonal bonus/penalty from your fox form and that if you cross the crown of the world in your biological winter that you should get a bonus against the cold. This would also mean a penalty if the party/GM decide it is better to cross in your biological summer.

Third, you could not mention this to the GM, and instead use the traditional means of avoiding cold weather (winter gear, endure elements, and so forth). This is the more expensive route, I suppose, but it is also least likely to add penalties later the in the game for the same reasons you are getting bonuses now.


Murdock,

You do understand that fur insulates from heat too. Biggest problem with fur and heat is with metabolic heat, which can't easily escape. This is a bigger problem the bigger the creature. Note that very efficiently insulated animals, like the Siberian Tiger, can quickly overheat, when active, even in sub-zero temperatures.

I would treat a furred creature as always wearing clothes appropriate for its native climate. I would want to add some kind of "Underfur" magic to quickly adapt to colder temperatures, and some kind of heat-wicking magic as well. You know, what the furry factions call resist elements :)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber, Campaign Setting, Companion, Maps, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

So you can make a cold weather outfit out of a bear's pelt, but my skinwalker taking the form of a bearman with fur is going to freeze to death?

I understand that's what the rules say, but how does that make any logical sense?


Oh wait, this is rules forum.
My arguing a sensible approach is not appropriate here.


Cold Dangers wrote:

An unprotected character in cold weather (below 40° F) must make a Fortitude save each hour (DC 15, +1 per previous check) or take 1d6 points of nonlethal damage. A character who has the Survival skill may receive a bonus on this saving throw and might be able to apply this bonus to other characters as well (see the skill description).

In conditions of severe cold or exposure (below 0° F), an unprotected character must make a Fortitude save once every 10 minutes (DC 15, +1 per previous check), taking 1d6 points of nonlethal damage on each failed save. A character who has the Survival skill may receive a bonus on this saving throw and might be able to apply this bonus to other characters as well. Characters wearing a cold weather outfit only need check once per hour for cold and exposure damage.

Per RAW, I think polar bears and penguins die in their natural habitat.


Gray Warden wrote:
Just cast Endure Elements.
Endure Elements wrote:
It can exist comfortably in conditions between –50 and 140 degrees Fahrenheit without having to make Fortitude saves.

Jade Regent:
The weather might get colder than -50, at which point Endure Elements does nothing.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If we start to wander the ways of 'real life' rules there will be no good ending for this topic. Yet there's truth behind Daw and Ravingdork words.

If the OP don't like any of those raw options he can always try to convince his GM to use 3rd party material, or houserule it like Murdock said.

Quote:


Waterkin (Arctic Kitsune)

Native to the frozen wastes, waterkin thrive in the most deadly climates known to mortals. Waterkin are often somber and serious towards outsiders, reserving their cheer and laughter only for close companions and allies. Waterkin spend comparatively more time in their true forms than other kitsune races as a result of their decreased interactions with foreigners. Despite their cold demeanor, waterkin kitsune are generally benign and have been known to save strangers from certain doom on many an occasion. Waterkin are said to have close ties with the scintillating lights that glow in the northern sky and are able to produce similar effects to confound their enemies.

Waterkin appear thicker than kitsune of other clans because of their fur, which is pale gray during the cold months and dark brown during warmer seasons. During the winter, their fur is warm enough that waterkin are able to survive the night in all but the most extreme cold without equipment if needed to.

Waterkin kitsune gain access to the following racial trait.

Aurora Magic (Ex/Sp): Waterkin kitsune treat their caster level as +1 higher when casting pattern spells. Waterkin with a Charisma of 11 or higher gain the following spell-like ability: 1/day—color spray. This racial trait replaces agile.

I hope that you and your GM can reach an agreement.


Dark Midian wrote:
Animals can still freeze to death in very cold weather, winter coats or not.

Polar bears die in less than a day in 40 degree weather... No animals can survive cold weather, according to the rules. The rules are not made with animals in mind.

Scarab Sages

toastedamphibian wrote:
Dark Midian wrote:
Animals can still freeze to death in very cold weather, winter coats or not.
Polar bears die in less than a day in 40 degree weather... No animals can survive cold weather, according to the rules. The rules are not made with animals in mind.

The rules are only designed with PC adventurers in mind. Unless the bear is a player character, or a key plot point, he doesn't need to check.


Murdock Mudeater wrote:
The rules are only designed with PC adventurers in mind. Unless the bear is a player character, or a key plot point, he doesn't need to check.

I disagree. The rules are designed with common sense in mind. Not PC adventurers. Otherwise, animal companion polar bears and familiar penguins and awakened polar bear / penguin PCs would not naturally survive in natural cold weather, and that is absurd.

Per raw, polar bears and penguins die in natural arctic weather. That is also absurd, so we apply common sense and say that the rule doesn't apply to creatures naturally living in cold environments.

What is debatable is whether Fox Shape/Anthropomorphic fox form follow the same chain of common sense. There are several acceptable answers:
- These forms have fur and are just as resistant to cold as polar bears and penguins so they don't have to make Fort saves.
- These forms have fur but are not as resistant to cold, so they gain the same benefit as cold weather gear, possibly + or - some points depending on how the table rules the debate.
- The fur of these forms are not resistant to cold enough to matter, so they gain no benefit at all.

However, there is one unacceptable answer:
- These forms don't gain benefit, because they don't by RAW.

This answer is unacceptable because it follows the same absurd logic that leads polar bears and penguins to die naturally in arctic weather. This chain of logic has similarities to other chains of logic that don't have common sense in mind, such as 'sleeping characters do not fall prone', 'dead characters can still walk and talk', etc.

Blindly following the rules without common sense leads to games that are absurd, and that helps nobody. The point of this thread, then, should be to suggest which common sense is applicable. And I think the thread is quite successful by my reading of the above posts.


Murdock Mudeater wrote:
toastedamphibian wrote:
Dark Midian wrote:
Animals can still freeze to death in very cold weather, winter coats or not.
Polar bears die in less than a day in 40 degree weather... No animals can survive cold weather, according to the rules. The rules are not made with animals in mind.
The rules are only designed with PC adventurers in mind. Unless the bear is a player character, or a key plot point, he doesn't need to check.

They hardly make sense even for humans.

Every winter I work for a full days in -20f(well colder than that but that is where the rules cap out), I suppose I have enough HP to survive something like 400d6 damage(I do step inside every now and then) and that is assuming that I make the save every time.

Heat is not a whole lot better, I can easily do half an hour in 180F sauna, and the heat rules cap out at 140. So 30d6 minium there.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
voideternal wrote:
Murdock Mudeater wrote:
The rules are only designed with PC adventurers in mind. Unless the bear is a player character, or a key plot point, he doesn't need to check.
I disagree. The rules are designed with common sense in mind. Not PC adventurers. Otherwise, animal companion polar bears and familiar penguins and awakened polar bear / penguin PCs would not naturally survive in natural cold weather, and that is absurd.

I think you're taking a different meaning from my quote than I intended. I just mean that in the RPG, there's a "spotlight" centered on the PCs and what they do or interact with. As the GM, you aren't really testing any creatures until they enter the "spotlight" because there's just too much to keep track of. So the bears in the snow are handwaiving their fortitude saves until they encounter the PCs. And then the PCs interact. And then the GM decides if they need saves or not.

Regarding common sense, you could do that, I suppose. I'd rather stick to the plot. So if there's a cave nearby that I want the PCs to seek shelter in, and they befriend the bear, I might have the bear be cold and communicate that it wants to seek shelter from the cold and knows a good spot. On the other hand, if the bear being cold likely will derail the players, as they focus on warming the bear for 20 minutes in real life, I'd consider handwaiving the cold for the bear.

And once the bear and the PCs part ways, I'm not going to continue tracking the Bear's progress. I might update him for a future session, but I'm not doing daily encounters and roleplaying for the NPC bear that the PCs aren't interacting with or observing.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Murdock Mudeater wrote:
I think you're taking a different meaning from my quote than I intended. I just mean that in the RPG, there's a "spotlight" centered on the PCs and what they do or interact with...

I think I am taking a different meaning from your quote. Thank you for clarifying.


OK, you all aren't even trying are you?

The rules say that an UNPROTECTED character.....

Are you saying that a creature adapted to the cold, with insulating layers of fat/fur/feathers counts as unprotected? I'm sorry for pointing out the obvious, but that is a bloody stupid assumption for you all. This isn't a stupid rule problem, it is a stupid read problem.

Since the majority of you have over time shown yourself to be better than this, what, exactly are we really trying to achieve here?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Daw wrote:
what, exactly are we really trying to achieve here?

Killing off Golarion's polar bear and penguin population, of course.

...Did we have another goal? If so, I forgot it.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Wultram wrote:
Murdock Mudeater wrote:
toastedamphibian wrote:
Dark Midian wrote:
Animals can still freeze to death in very cold weather, winter coats or not.
Polar bears die in less than a day in 40 degree weather... No animals can survive cold weather, according to the rules. The rules are not made with animals in mind.
The rules are only designed with PC adventurers in mind. Unless the bear is a player character, or a key plot point, he doesn't need to check.

They hardly make sense even for humans.

Every winter I work for a full days in -20f(well colder than that but that is where the rules cap out), I suppose I have enough HP to survive something like 400d6 damage(I do step inside every now and then) and that is assuming that I make the save every time.

Heat is not a whole lot better, I can easily do half an hour in 180F sauna, and the heat rules cap out at 140. So 30d6 minium there.

You are unprotected? I.e. in the nude or wearing a summer outfit?

Or you are wearing a modern cold weather outfit?

The in game cold weather outfit make you protected and give you a bonus to the saves. For simplicity sake the rules don't go in the detail of the different level of protection, how it increase your personal temperature and so on. For that you need the old 3.5 hardbound Frostburn, a whole manual dedicated to the danger of a cold environment.


Cold weather outfit only gives +5 to the save. And for the lethal damage you do not get a save. So no it does not make you protected. I am pretty sure protected is intended to mean shelter.

Cold weather outfit wrote:

This outfit includes a wool coat, linen shirt, wool cap, heavy cloak, thick pants or skirt, and boots. This outfit grants a +5 circumstance bonus on Fortitude saving throws against exposure to cold weather.

Even ignoring that, you can easily be 10-15 minutes in those temperatures when ice swimming.

And in sauna yes you are in the nude.

Silver Crusade

Matthew Downie wrote:
Gray Warden wrote:
Just cast Endure Elements.
Endure Elements wrote:
It can exist comfortably in conditions between –50 and 140 degrees Fahrenheit without having to make Fortitude saves.
The weather might get colder than -50, at which point Endure Elements does nothing.

While having fur does a lot instead...


What I was trying to accomplish was to point out that the rules often do not make sense when applied directly to sufficiently non-human creatures, and that the player should seek to discuss it with their DM while keeping in mind the fact that, RAW, polarbears and penguins freeze to death in winter. In Florida. IE, strict RAW is silly here.


Wultram wrote:

Even ignoring that, you can easily be 10-15 minutes in those temperatures when ice swimming.

And in sauna yes you are in the nude.

Sure, 10 minutes in not quite freezing water is survivable. Thats one check, on a fail you take 1d6 nonlethal and become hypothermic. Sound about right, in your personal experience?

I would also assume someone made the proper preparation choices ahead of time (whatever those might be) increasing your odds of not getting dangerously chilled.


Toast,
RAW is stupid if you chose to read it stupid.
Do you really believe the polar bear and penguin should count as unprotected?

Not saying there aren't holes and flaws you could ride a mammoth through, but building ones that aren't really there doesn't help anything.

Do you know what kills most untrained people in cold weather? Sweat.

How should harsh climates hit you? Exhaustion...
... which leads to fails, bad decisions, depression, accidents.......

The rules also fail to deal with the fact that you can actually just die from extreme exhaustion.

Mechanically, exhaustion's final phase should be Constitution damage with Dex and Str taking bigger hits than base exhaustion hits you for.


Daw wrote:

Oh wait, this is rules forum.

My arguing a sensible approach is not appropriate here.

The sensible approach would've been the devs writing better cold/hot weather rules and giving certain creatures bonuses/penalties in certain environments.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Níðhöggr wrote:
Daw wrote:

Oh wait, this is rules forum.

My arguing a sensible approach is not appropriate here.
The sensible approach would've been the devs writing better cold/hot weather rules and giving certain creatures bonuses/penalties in certain environments.

Check Frostburn in the Internet. You can find some scanned copy. Or better, buy it. It is 3.5 but it is compatible, 243 pages of rules about cold and high altitude dangers.

There are other similar books for 3.5: Stormwrack and Sandstorm. I own all three and they are good surcebooks.
As they already exist probably Paizo don't want to redo them, as their version of the rules would be similar and prone to copyright infringements.


Not gonna argue anybody's point because they are right on their own. But I don't know why the need of trying to point out 'in real life consequences' for lack of explicit ruling.

When I was running a few shots in Irrisen never crossed my mind (nor my players) the idea of killing the druid's polar bear companion due to extreme cold. All of them instantly took traits/feats/class archetypes from the very beginning to help them fight extreme cold weather, and one was a werewolf.

Apart from PCs, living beings born in that habitat are suposed to be inherently prepared. IMO this is GM's concern and, as other pointed, you apply common sense and don't need to start filling with numbers non written rules.

Giving 'furry races' the same bonus as a cold outfit is fair, but personally I wouln't.

Because firstly you have enough tools given. And secondly, and most dangerous, you are precedenting future issues.


toastedamphibian wrote:
Wultram wrote:

Even ignoring that, you can easily be 10-15 minutes in those temperatures when ice swimming.

And in sauna yes you are in the nude.

Sure, 10 minutes in not quite freezing water is survivable. Thats one check, on a fail you take 1d6 nonlethal and become hypothermic. Sound about right, in your personal experience?

I would also assume someone made the proper preparation choices ahead of time (whatever those might be) increasing your odds of not getting dangerously chilled.

That was the time outside of water Which can be below the extreme cold by PF rules. So 10-15d6 lethal damage assuming you make all the saves. The statement was afterthought because of argument of modern winter clothes, as you are wearing swimwear, flipflops and towel at most. And even if we assume 1d6 nonlethal, well considering that lot of elders practice it as well, who would most likely have negative modifiers on their Con(at least some of them) and unconcious is not a thing that happens...(well not without some medical condition.) But yes there are things that are done to migate the effects, but nothing that the rules would cover.

Point being that the numbers are totally out of whack and even minimal research would have shown that there are populations that live just fine at what the game calls extreme tempatures.

Scarab Sages

Daw wrote:

How should harsh climates hit you? Exhaustion...

... which leads to fails, bad decisions, depression, accidents.......

That's the Crux of it, the real effects would result in loss of control over your character and, more so, force them to make bad decisions. Just like using diplomacy on player characters, players dislike the idea of being forced to do anything (like be friendly the jerk player with good charisma and social skills in-character only). The player needs control and the ability to make their own decisions for their player character.

If you really set up an RPG with real life reactions that forced players to respond realistically, you'd end up with a solitare version of the RPG, where the GM was the only player needed, since the players wouldn't have any real control. I will note that in reality, people don't always respond realistically, so such a system still wouldn't reflect reality.


Good points Murdock, wouldn't increasing skill penalties, particularly knowledge work better than just saying you give up? I suppose the demoralize/fear chain could have a part in this as well.

^-^
Also, bad decisions by players/characters is at least half the game for some tables, in my experience, you don't have to force it, just let them watch Bear Grylls.

Scarab Sages

Daw wrote:
Good points Murdock, wouldn't increasing skill penalties, particularly knowledge work better than just saying you give up?

Better.... but then you have to start looking at other aspects of reality that affect decision making and decide what penalties those bring. And you'll probably find that you don't want to keep track of them.

For example, being hungry or thirsty, despite not actually starving or parched, can affect descisions. Do you really want to play the RPG that keeps track of the character's dietary needs? Another example, and a good one, is restroom usage which certainly effects decision making. Do you really want game mechanics to determine when your character needs to go pee?

Not to mention that most people in the adventurer lifestyle are likely showing signs of mental instability, just do to the stresses of the lifestyle. For example, how many encounters where friends died to Mimics do you think it would take before you started becoming paranoid about every object potentially being a creature out to get you?

Instead, don't treat RPGs as realistic. Think of it as a cartoon. The game just works better as a cartoon.


Valid preference Murdock.

Considering that we are 40 posts into this thread, not everyone shares that preference. I am throwing out ideas for people that would like a different approach. Personally, if I wanted to play a Cartoon, I would play Toon.

Most parties will be above all that, until things start going wrong. Lack of sleep because of cold, bug bites or whatever stops casters from recharging, penalties affect everyone, things get desperate, tensions rise... This may not be your cup of tea, but it is just as valid a preference. If that is your preference, having an approach that doesn't break the illusion is to the good.

As to how far you want to take it, that is preference as well. Playing the gun-shy paranoid is fun for some, and often fun to watch.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Daw wrote:


Most parties will be above all that, until things start going wrong. Lack of sleep because of cold, bug bites or whatever stops casters from recharging, penalties affect everyone, things get desperate, tensions rise... This may not be your cup of tea, but it is just as valid a preference. If that is your preference, having an approach that doesn't break the illusion is to the good.

By cartoon, I just mean that the game focuses on what matters to the group, and ignores the rest of reality. In a cartoon, everything is drawn or voiced in purposely, everything included exists for a reason. The plot leads somewhere, often without loose ends. The setting is clean, unless it needs to be dirty. The weather is nice, unless it needs to be bad. In essence, anything not intended to be in the cartoon, isn't. RPGs are like this.

And that's why you can derail an RPG.

The polar bear isn't dying in their native environment because the polar bear doesn't exist until the party encounters it. Sure, it is spawned with a backstory that says the polar bear is a native and has existed prior, but it really only came into being when the GM added it to the story.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber, Campaign Setting, Companion, Maps, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Murdock Mudeater wrote:
Daw wrote:


Most parties will be above all that, until things start going wrong. Lack of sleep because of cold, bug bites or whatever stops casters from recharging, penalties affect everyone, things get desperate, tensions rise... This may not be your cup of tea, but it is just as valid a preference. If that is your preference, having an approach that doesn't break the illusion is to the good.

By cartoon, I just mean that the game focuses on what matters to the group, and ignores the rest of reality. In a cartoon, everything is drawn or voiced in purposely, everything included exists for a reason. The plot leads somewhere, often without loose ends. The setting is clean, unless it needs to be dirty. The weather is nice, unless it needs to be bad. In essence, anything not intended to be in the cartoon, isn't. RPGs are like this.

And that's why you can derail an RPG.

The polar bear isn't dying in their native environment because the polar bear doesn't exist until the party encounters it. Sure, it is spawned with a backstory that says the polar bear is a native and has existed prior, but it really only came into being when the GM added it to the story.

I really like this explanation.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Murdock Mudeater wrote:


Not to mention that most people in the adventurer lifestyle are likely showing signs of mental instability, just do to the stresses of the lifestyle. For example, how many encounters where friends died to Mimics do you think it would take before you started becoming paranoid about every object potentially being a creature out to get you?

That is our in game justification of why the divination wizard is always ready to act in the surprise round. ;-)

My players often doubt about innocuous or not so innocuous features. Last Sunday: "There is a spherical room with white walls so smooth that they reflect a somewhat distorted image of the area."
"Mirrors are always dangerous, we cast detect magic from outside."
"There is magic, but you are unable to determine what it is" (very high CL and "only" a 22 when trying to identify the aura)
After some testing from outside only one of the characters has entered the room to test the magic, while the others waited outside. It was a very powerful scrying room.

Depicting the real life effects of some environmental or psychological effect isn't easy without the collaboration of the players.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Daw, you seem intent to take my example out of context from this thread.

Do foxes, kitsune in fox shape, or polarbears have anything in their stat block that says they are protected from cold weather?

You seem to be of the opinion that the RAW obviously implies that some creatures have an unstated ability in this regard. I'm of the opinion that the rules obviously just are not intended to be applied to them in this case.

Functionally, we agree, with neither of us believing arctic animals should freeze to death.

Your way, the DM needs to decide if that same unlisted bonus applies to animal shaped pcs.

My way, the DM needs to decide if the RAW cold weather entry applies to animal shaped pcs.

Insist on RAW rules and RAW stat listings give stupid results, so shouldn't be done.

Scarab Sages

Diego Rossi wrote:


My players often doubt about innocuous or not so innocuous features. Last Sunday: "There is a spherical room with white walls so smooth that they reflect a somewhat distorted image of the area."
"Mirrors are always dangerous, we cast detect magic from outside."
"There is magic, but you are unable to determine what it is" (very high CL and "only" a 22 when trying to identify the aura)
After some testing from outside only one of the characters has entered the room to test the magic, while the others waited outside. It was a very powerful scrying room.

Depicting the real life effects of some environmental or psychological effect isn't easy without the collaboration of the players.

One of the local PFS GMs started adding a random object to each room in the scenario. Nothing that isn't part of the offical map, but he adds it as an offical miniature. Like a barrel, chair, or stature. Really helps to get the PCs less jumpy about every item encountered. Also makes things like gargoyles much harder to predict.

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Also, fur isn't the only deciding factor in whether or not an animal is good at insulating against cold weather. For instance, many animals have evolutionary strategies that effectively reduce the surface area of their body that makes contact with cold weather, reducing heat transference. (For example, arctic foxes not only have seasonal coats, but they have shorter ears to reduce the amount of heat they lose from their head. In contrast, fennecs have massive ears in addition to sunlight-refracting fur that aids in heat lost so they don't get heat stroke in the desert.) Also, as others have said even the furriest, blubberiest animals use strategies to minimize their exposure to the cold because they're just as susceptible to heat transference and subsequent hypothermia as the rest of us living beings. (See polar bears, who burrow into ice sheets for shelter.)

Mechanically, you don't get something if the rules don't give it to you. I could get behind a house rule that when you polymorph, your new form is adapted to whatever environment that it is native to, but that would likely mean that you would need to talk to your GM about whether you could pick a natively arctic fox for your Fox Shape feat, since you have a specific, static form with that feat.

Hope this helps!


So, long story short:

derpdidruid wrote:

Maybe a circumstance bonus.

Ask your GM.

Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / Rules Questions / Cold Weather VS Natural Fur All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002-2017 Paizo Inc.® | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours, Monday through Friday, 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM Pacific time.

Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, Starfinder, the Starfinder logo, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc. The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Legends, Pathfinder Online, Starfinder Adventure Path, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.