I'm starting up a PF game, homebrew setting, at level 1. One of the players has rolled up a very setting-appropriate halfling paladin with Mounted Combat as her level 1 feat. She bought a riding dog, which cost around half her starting gold allotment. This dog will very likely become her Paladin Mount at level 5; the character is close to it.
The PC has Handle Animal +8 (including one of her precious paladin skill ranks), and from a story point of view, would have had the opportunity to have trained the dog herself.
I'd like to get any thoughts on allowing her to spend the much-reduced gold value for a non-riding dog (25 vs. 150 gold if I remember correctly) and let her train it herself in background. I'll note that the player has not asked for this. I don't think it's unreasonable to ask the player to spend the gold (and clearly the player doesn't), but I'm wondering whether it sets a problematic precedent or goes against the intent of a set "starting gold" value to allow things like this.
Thanks in advance for your input.
You run the risk that other players will want some similar love:
"My guy was a blacksmith for 5 years. I have ranks in craft and profession skills. Couldn't I make myself a masterwork sword before I became an adventurer?"
"My guy lived as a cutpurse on the streets for years growing up and he's a big saver. I have ranks in Sleight of Hand. Wouldn't I have hundreds of gold from all those years of cutting purses and saving my coin?"
"My guy was a gladiator who fought almost daily in the slave arena, constantly injured, beaten, whipped, bloody, and in constant pain. Wouldn't his hard life qualify him for the Toughness feat as a free bonus feat?"
And so on.
It's easy to write a background that's interesting. And nobody ever writes "Well, I worked as an iternerant farm hand without 2 coppers to my name, until I found this sword one day and became an adventurer." OK, actually, once in a while someone does write something like that.
My point is, if you're going to give bonuses for interesting bacgrounds, then everyone will write an interesting background. And then everyone will get bonus stuff. And after you're done haggling and counter-offering and settling on exactly what those bonuses will be, each player will be starting with an advantage that makes them somehow more powerful than the normal starting character.
If you're OK with that, then do it. In fact, I recommend it. If nothing else, it encourages every player to actually come up with an interesting back-story rather than just showing up on day one with a character sheet with no name on it...
As a compromise, I would treat the character-trained war animal in the same manner as a PC-created magic item, and charge her half-price (75 gp). I would also do this if a player with a decent Craft skill wanted to start the game with any masterwork items.
what about doing this with a trait? Create a homebrew trait called dog trainer, where you start play with a riding dog but dont pay for it? There are traits where you start off with a horse, so why not a riding dog?
As a compromise, I would treat the character-trained war animal in the same manner as a PC-created magic item, and charge her half-price (75 gp). I would also do this if a player with a decent Craft skill wanted to start the game with any masterwork items.
I concur with this...a fair and balanced approach if anyone else wants similar treatment.
I think the point of a PC's starting wealth is to represent the value of equipment it has at the beginning of the campaign, without regard to how said equipment was acquired. It's not a big bag of gold that the PC gets on its 18th birthday and goes to by first-level gear with.
On the other hand, if every character had some small advantage to even things out, it would probably be fine.
I did almost the exact same thing for the Kingmaker AP.
I play a ranger with the pioneer trait, which gives you a horse to begin with. The GM permitted me to combat-train the horse in background, in exchange for paying the price difference between a riding horse and a combat-trained light horse.
I will most likely pick a horse as my animal companion, and if the horse I have now is still alive by then, it will probably be that one, which just gets a boost to it's stats. The GM suggested this himself.
In my view, doing things this way rewards players who build a believable and detailed character background, which in turn increases the chance for good roleplaying. Both as a player and a GM, I feel that this is worth a small advantage to starting gear, as long as it is nothing gamebreaking.
Well, I'm clearly in the minority here, but I always allow starting characters to craft or train anything that their starting skills allow. I even encourage it. And it has never led to any problems whatsoever. Skill points, especially for classes that have the most to gain from crafting their starting items, are rare and precious enough that spending them on skills that have little or no direct application to combat, IMHO, should be rewarded.
It's easy to write a background that's interesting. And nobody ever writes "Well, I worked as an iternerant farm hand without 2 coppers to my name, until I found this sword one day and became an adventurer." OK, actually, once in a while someone does write something like that.
That was my sorcerer's background :D
Joe the sorcerer. Always jealous of adventurers and the gold they so casually threw around while getting all the women in town. One day he accidentally shot fire out of his hands, decided that farming was for suckers, and went out to make a name for himself.
I agree with Mynameisjake. If the players are willing to spend skill points on skills that are not combat oriented, then I like to reward them for it.
If a player spends the time to write out a detailed background for their character, I usually reward them for it and incorporate some of that background into the storyline.
I would definitely inform the rest of the party that background might provide bonuses such as this, if you choose to go with it based on the points made in the thread.
If you give people special treatment, regardless of reason, others might have a problem with it. It can be annoying for people to try to metagame a bonus ("I don't care about my backstory." -> "There might be a reward for a good one." -> "My character has done SO MUCH."), but in the end, you might still get people more attached to who they're playing, even if the original attempt is half-arsed and based off of a mechanical advantage.