I think there's a deeper point here than the wolf in the Skulls & Shackles campaign. Before I write further, I would say that I do play in another campaign that The Sword runs; he's an outstanding DM with a real gift for immersive story. I don't play in the S&S game, largely due to rugby coaching commitments, but I am in another game with the "problem player", who is a nice bloke, but with a very different outlook on the hobby.
The wolf is more the icing on the cake than the actual problem. Like any system, Pathfinder can be abused for winning rather than role-play, and I guess all groups have an agreed acceptable range on that continuum.
If a character background is, for example, "brought up by a ninja trader, then orphaned and adopted by a dwarven smith who specialises in making agile armour and returning shields" is used to attempt to create a particular superhero for the Giants adventure path, as a Captain America with various dwarven traits v giants and no armour check penalties, I do start to struggle with the ability to link characters into a story. It could be a narrow view on my part, and I appreciate the need for all to enjoy their version of the game.
As many posters have said, discussing agreed approaches is certainly a way forward, but it's not always easy to reconcile fundamental differences in philosophy between someone who, for example, enjoys role-playing a paladin as a heroic protector against evil, and another who says paladins should be able to make a will save to ignore suffering!
Final message to The Sword; your Bogenhafen game is truly awesome, totally immersive and long may it continue.
Final message to the player; forget about mechanical advantage and enjoy the game by writing the story with your character.
