Up front, I'll say that Kender aren't a good export from Dragonlance because out of context, they are just a variant halfling and they loose their niche in the setting they were designed for.
However, I have to agree that the original post really didn't ask anyone to critique Kender. I'm a bit shocked at the vehemence with which I'm seeing people crusade against them.
I know lots of people don't like them. I know they don't work for every campaign and not every player can pull them off. As I said, I don't think they work well out of Dragonlance. But that wasn't what this thread was suppose to be about.
Sure, I get if someone had said "why don't people like Kender?" as a thread topic.
Its starting to smack of the same kind of elitist dog piling that seems to be all the rage across the forum. There is just this growing trend of people knowing exactly how to play the game and why other people are wrong for liking the wrong parts of the game.
Hey, hate Kender, that's fine. But if someone is just wanting advice for how to run one in Pathfinder, maybe the best comment to post isn't "you shouldn't, because you are wrong for liking such a horrible aspect of a campaign setting."
Politics. Religion. Gish. Psionics. Fighter V. Wizard. Kender.
You start a thread on any of these topics in 2010 and don't expect a huge ruckus, either you're extremely naive, or you've been living under a rock for a decade.
Sure, but, a reasonable debate can occur (and has been) without someone trotting out the "troll" label when someone disagrees with them.
Kevin Andrew Murphy: In an attempt to remain on the topic of workable kender in Golarion, using your earlier posted guidelines, how would you stat these guys?
One, might be cute and be the comic sidekick....a whole race and yep they smoked something alright.
|
Politics. Religion. Gish. Psionics. Fighter V. Wizard. Kender.
You start a thread on any of these topics in 2010 and don't expect a huge ruckus, either you're extremely naive, or you've been living under a rock for a decade.
Nitpick: It's no longer 2010. However, I still hate Kender. But to each their own; if Kthulhu wants to have a race of annoying, antisocial kleptos in his game that people tolerate for some reason, that's fine.
Politics. Religion. Gish. Psionics. Fighter V. Wizard. Kender.
You start a thread on any of these topics in 2010 and don't expect a huge ruckus, either you're extremely naive, or you've been living under a rock for a decade.
Sure, but, a reasonable debate can occur (and has been) without someone trotting out the "troll" label when someone disagrees with them.
Kevin Andrew Murphy: In an attempt to remain on the topic of workable kender in Golarion, using your earlier posted guidelines, how would you stat these guys?
I'd likely give them a +2 to Charisma and a +2 to Dexterity to reflect the "cute and nimble" business everyone seems to like, but maybe give them a -2 to Wisdom to keep them a little ditzy. I'd make them Medium size creatures because honestly they're the size of twelve to fourteen year olds, and that's close enough to Medium, especially relative to halflings and gnomes. I'd give them a variant on the gnomish Obsession power, but call it Curiosity instead and make it a +2 of the character's choice to Disable Device or Use Magic Device--that's flavorful without being obnoxious. I'd also put in some note about them sharing both halfling and gnomish blood so they can take the Traits reserved for those races without having to go through and earmark a whole bunch.
I'd make it so that they're a communal culture with a great love for knots, riddles, puzzleboxes and so forth, but mostly leave this as background and flavor, like elves liking forests and dwarves enjoying a good mug of ale--if someone wants to play a kender who's bored with riddles, that should be fine, even if scandalous to the other kender.
Stuff like "cutpurse" being a mortal insult to Kender I would explain in a different fashion: "Cutpurse" translates to "One who's too stupid to unpick a knot and so just cuts it instead." After all, if the race is supposed to be "curious" rather than "thieving," the complication of the knot is just as interesting if not more so than whatever is hidden in the pouch.
I'd completely ditch the business about Kender blurting out secrets and personal information. Yes, I know it's supposed to reflect children doing "Look, mommy! The Emperor has no clothes!" but in reality it would lead to people who should be old enough to know better running around blabbing state secrets, reading people's diaries in public, and spoiling the endings of jokes and plays. This sort of behavior would lead directly to public lynchings unless there were divine intervention, and as there isn't going to be continued divine intervention, easier to just drop it on the cutting room floor.
The Wanderlust I'd downplay and make it more of a cultural convention like the Amish rumspringa, going out to get a taste of the outside world before coming back to settle down with the community.
The taunting I'd give a mechanic like Dazzling Display, but the Kender would have to unleash a verbal tirade against someone and still succeed in an Intimidate check. It should be an alarming display of verbal prowess, not an automatic supernatural thing. Kender would also understand that as with any other use of Intimidate, it generally makes people hate you afterward, so it's not a good idea except in desperate straights.
The fearlessness? I'd explain that as being part of the patronage of Mengkare. The Kender are so used to looking at an ancient gold wyrm and have gotten over the dragon terror to the point of anything less scary than that is simply not going to rate.
That would probably do it. There'd be a few other things to tinker with, of course, but it would give you a race that would be Kender-like enough to satisfy most people and moreover would fit with Golarion.
Oh, as for the lying, Kender can lie, but they do it the same way that everyone else does. They don't have memories that magically reverse and edit so that they automatically believe in an innocent sounding delusion. That's somewhere between painfully lame and deeply frightening, and would not be a survival trait for any race in a sane world.
Pathfinderized Kender
If it must be stated, I approve. Excellent work.
Every 20th time...
I've always had an issue with this statement overall. In this case, however, given standard deviations and the variety of things ones have on their person and math, I think the chances of your sword disappearing increase exponentially with the addition of other things on your person. I would argue your hatred of kender is causing you to be irrational/illogical.
Please any help with this build would be appreciated...
Click on the name for details!
Are you looking to build a new Kender Race or do you want the feats and skills that would make a Halfling more Kender Like?
Answered my own question. Sorry if these have already been posted, but I stopped reading the posts after my last post.
Kender-Like Feats, All from the APG
- Go Unnoticed
- Taunt. This one is almost classic Kender. As a rogue there are other feats that could make this fun. Combined with Dazzling Display and Shatter Defenses, could be fun. This route isn’t as powerful at the standard flanking, dual wielding rogue, but fun to try.
- Well Prepared. Also, classic Kender. Just remember that the items cost you gold, but you could make it up with a decent Sleight of Hand skill. An understanding GM may give you a pass on things like feathers and marbles.
Every 20th time...I've always had an issue with this statement overall. In this case, however, given standard deviations and the variety of things ones have on their person and math, I think the chances of your sword disappearing increase exponentially with the addition of other things on your person. I would argue your hatred of kender is causing you to be irrational/illogical.
Did you not read what Kthulhu wrote?
Borrowing: In a party which includes one or more kender, any time another character goes to find an item he had earlier placed on his person, there is a cumulative chance of 5% per kender in the party (to a maximum of 40%) that the kender borrowed the item.
He didn't say that there's a 5% chance some item is borrowed. He said that there's 5% chance that the item I'm going for is borrowed.
5% chance means a 1 in 20 chance, or every 20th time. Forgive me if I'm simplifying the math.
How exactly am I being irrational or illogical? I'm reading the rules that Kthulhu wrote, and I'm not reading anything extra into it.
The OP was answered within the first page, which is what lead to how can you make kender playable.
Every 20th time...I've always had an issue with this statement overall. In this case, however, given standard deviations and the variety of things ones have on their person and math, I think the chances of your sword disappearing increase exponentially with the addition of other things on your person. I would argue your hatred of kender is causing you to be irrational/illogical.Did you not read what Kthulhu wrote?
Borrowing: In a party which includes one or more kender, any time another character goes to find an item he had earlier placed on his person, there is a cumulative chance of 5% per kender in the party (to a maximum of 40%) that the kender borrowed the item.He didn't say that there's a 5% chance some item is borrowed. He said that there's 5% chance that the item I'm going for is borrowed.
5% chance means a 1 in 20 chance, or every 20th time. Forgive me if I'm simplifying the math.
How exactly am I being irrational or illogical? I'm reading the rules that Kthulhu wrote, and I'm not reading anything extra into it.
I think the entire situation might be simplified/obscured a bit too much here. Perhaps it should be changed so that it is an item that is borrowed, not every time you go for an item that it is borrowed.
[EDIT] In other words, what you said in this post replacing what he said re: borrowing. Does that make sense?
Why not just remove it? Why hardwire a whole race to be mindless thieves?
I think the entire situation might be simplified/obscured a bit too much here. Perhaps it should be changed so that it is an item that is borrowed, not every time you go for an item that it is borrowed.
[EDIT] In other words, what you said in this post replacing what he said re: borrowing. Does that make sense?
I'm not following.
Are you saying that it should be a 5% chance that AN item is borrowed? [EDIT] I just re-read, yes, you are.
In that case, then it would be up to the DM to determine what item is borrowed, which introduces a TON of bookkeeping for the DM, forcing him to keep track of the ever-changing inventory of all players, and note which items have been borrowed, and which the players still have.
Better for the individual victims of the kender? Yes. Better overall? I'd argue far worse.
"Borrowing" just doesn't work.
Why not just remove it? Why hardwire a whole race to be mindless thieves?
Because unfortunately some people want to play mindless thieves who are not only biologically incapable of taking any personal responsibility for their thieving (and for that matter any of their other personal failings) but also have everyone in the universe inexplicably love them and pardon all their crimes. It's a Mary Sue wish-fulfillment fantasy of the first water.
I think the entire situation might be simplified/obscured a bit too much here. Perhaps it should be changed so that it is an item that is borrowed, not every time you go for an item that it is borrowed.
[EDIT] In other words, what you said in this post replacing what he said re: borrowing. Does that make sense?
I'm not following.
Are you saying that it should be a 5% chance that AN item is borrowed? [EDIT] I just re-read, yes, you are.
In that case, then it would be up to the DM to determine what item is borrowed, which introduces a TON of bookkeeping for the DM, forcing him to keep track of the ever-changing inventory of all players, and note which items have been borrowed, and which the players still have.
Better for the individual victims of the kender? Yes. Better overall? I'd argue far worse.
"Borrowing" just doesn't work.
I think the Kender player and the DM can work together on this one to reduce paperwork on both ends. There should also be an upper limit per individual established- in no work of fiction has a kender taken every single item off of an individual, even when they were in close proximity for a long time. I like this, it perhaps the most believable mechanic I've seen for borrowing in some time- it just needs more work.
Why not just remove it? Why hardwire a whole race to be mindless thieves?Because unfortunately some people want to play mindless thieves who are not only biologically incapable of taking any personal responsibility for their thieving (and for that matter any of their other personal failings) but also have everyone in the universe inexplicably love them and pardon all their crimes. It's a Mary Sue wish-fulfillment fantasy of the first water.
Ah so they do not want a playable race after all. As written kender are not really playable without a crap ton of handwaveing and GM ruling the party can't kill them and must put up with them.
To me you really need to untangle the race from the very things that make it unplayable. But then you really just have a halfling.
Personally, I don't like the "borrowing" aspect of the Kender because it involves metagaming, requiring both the Kender and victim of the borrowing to participate in what is apparently a staged event that has already taken place, by definition of the race's ability. Any racial trait that causes a character to be responsible for something the player didn't say or RP him having done is a load of bull.
Oh, agreed.
The kender would also never survive in a party where the wizard simply takes the expedient of throwing Alarm and Magic Mouth on his backpack so the entire party is woken up in the middle of the night by a siren and a backpacking shrieking "Unhand me, you thief! Help! Thief! Help! Thief!" while the Kender is there attempting to make up some BS explanation which no one will believe except him.
That isn't even going into what happens when your bog standard paranoid wizard writes I PREPARED EXPLOSIVE RUNES TODAY on the frontispiece of his spellbook.
One dead Kender and exploded spellbook later, the party will think twice about ever allowing a Kender to share their camp again.
Why not just remove it? Why hardwire a whole race to be mindless thieves?Because unfortunately some people want to play mindless thieves who are not only biologically incapable of taking any personal responsibility for their thieving (and for that matter any of their other personal failings) but also have everyone in the universe inexplicably love them and pardon all their crimes. It's a Mary Sue wish-fulfillment fantasy of the first water.For what it's worth, in the Twins Trillogy (probably misnaming it, the one set after Caramon had turned into a lush post War of the Lance) Taz DID take responsibility for some of his personal failings.
Also... I fail to see how everybody 'inexplicably loves them and pardons all their crimes.' At least in games I'm familiar with, Kender who handle the wrong thing from the wrong person and get caught are forced to hand over the item, and are thrown into jail for a period. If they don't have the item anymore they get thrown in jail for much much longer, or possibly executed if it was valuable enough.
I think part of the problem stems from a misreading of the phrase in the writeup concerning 'the truly wise'
When I read this paragraph, I'm not thinking it's calling everyone who doesn't love Kender a fool. What it's saying are the sages, the philosphical types who ponder this kind of crap for a living for their patrons, feel that if Kender were gone, the world would lose one source of emotional light.
In any party that has a Kender, if it's done right and not done out of a malicious attempt to harrass people, brings laughs and smiles and joy to the players, and in the end, the characters that surround the Kender.
What brings laughs and smiles and joy? The invasion of privacy? The constant lying and/or delusions? The loss of priceless heirlooms, sentimental trinkets, crucial tools, or just personal possessions?
I mean, look at this rationally: this is the signet ring that has been passed down from father to son for nine generations and the paladin now keeps in his pack; this is the earring that the gypsy's mother wore at her wedding and gave her daughter for good luck when she set out on the long road; this is the wand which the wizard bought so he wouldn't have to memorize a particular spell; this is the rogue's left sock of his spare pair that he puts on when he's getting cleaned up in town.
The loss of any of these things is not a cause for laughter, smiles or joy. The emotions, in order, I believe would be anguish for a trust betrayed mixed with despair (for the paladin would remember his promise to his father as well his hope to have one day given the ring to his own son), sadness mixed with anxiety (for the gypsy would think of the earring as not just a token of her mother's love and affection but a charm of protection as well, as well as sympathetic magic to lead her back to her mother again one day as they both wander the world), extreme annoyance if not fury (because that wand was expensive, and the wizard is going to likely be in a fix if it's suddenly missing when he needs it), and annoyance mixed with consternation (because while the rogue can understand the concept of theft, engaging in it himself, what sort of insane person takes just one sock?).
Having the Kender then make up some unbelievable crap about where the missing possessions got to, and worse, absolutely believe this drivel, is not a cause for laughter, smiles, or joy.
Unless the GM metagames to an absurd degree so that the Kender's thefts never manage to harm his allies, emotionally or physically, the recipe for Kender hate is pretty much inevitable if interacting with any character more than pasteboard thin.
Why not just remove it? Why hardwire a whole race to be mindless thieves?Because unfortunately some people want to play mindless thieves who are not only biologically incapable of taking any personal responsibility for their thieving (and for that matter any of their other personal failings) but also have everyone in the universe inexplicably love them and pardon all their crimes. It's a Mary Sue wish-fulfillment fantasy of the first water.For what it's worth, in the Twins Trillogy (probably misnaming it, the one set after Caramon had turned into a lush post War of the Lance) Taz DID take responsibility for some of his personal failings.
Also... I fail to see how everybody 'inexplicably loves them and pardons all their crimes.' At least in games I'm familiar with, Kender who handle the wrong thing from the wrong person and get caught are forced to hand over the item, and are thrown into jail for a period. If they don't have the item anymore they get thrown in jail for much much longer, or possibly executed if it was valuable enough.
I think part of the problem stems from a misreading of the phrase in the writeup concerning 'the truly wise'
When I read this paragraph, I'm not thinking it's calling everyone who doesn't love Kender a fool. What it's saying are the sages, the philosphical types who ponder this kind of crap for a living for their patrons, feel that if Kender were gone, the world would lose one source of emotional light.
In any party that has a Kender, if it's done right and not done out of a malicious attempt to harrass people, brings laughs and smiles and joy to the players, and in the end, the characters that surround the Kender.
What brings laughs and smiles and joy? The invasion of privacy? The constant lying and/or delusions? The loss of priceless heirlooms, sentimental trinkets, crucial tools, or just personal possessions?
I mean, look at this rationally: this is the signet ring that has been passed down from father to son for nine generations and the paladin now keeps in his pack; this is the earring that the gypsy's mother wore at her wedding and gave her daughter for good luck when she set out on the long road; this is the wand which the wizard bought so he wouldn't have to memorize a particular spell; this is the rogue's left sock of his spare pair that he puts on when he's getting cleaned up in town.
The loss of any of these things is not a cause for laughter, smiles or joy. The emotions, in order, I believe would be anguish for a trust betrayed mixed with despair (for the paladin would remember his promise to his father as well his hope to have one day given the ring to his own son), sadness mixed with anxiety (for the gypsy would think of the earring as not just a token of her mother's love and affection but a charm of protection as well, as well as sympathetic magic to lead her back to her mother again one day as they both wander the world), extreme annoyance if not fury (because that wand was expensive, and the wizard is going to likely be in a fix if it's suddenly missing when he needs it), and annoyance mixed with consternation (because while the rogue can understand the concept of theft, engaging in it himself, what sort of insane person takes just one sock?).
Having the Kender then make up some unbelievable crap about where the missing possessions got to, and worse, absolutely believe this drivel, is not a cause for laughter, smiles, or joy.
Unless the GM metagames to an absurd degree so that the Kender's thefts never manage to harm his allies, emotionally or physically, the recipe for Kender hate is pretty much inevitable if interacting with any character more than pasteboard thin.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Kthulu suffers from a failure of argument on one other level:
Intense curiosity is a trait ingrained in their souls and minds from their racial creation by the Greystone of Gargath. They cannot be other than what they are - natural thieves.
Dwarves can rise above cultural beliefs about elves, halflings et. al. Kender can't.
To play a 'kender' in Pathfinder, as others have said is to play a halfling with various traits. To play a 'kender as written' in Golarion is to have said creature killed, repeatedly, since no one would put up with such a race.
Hmm, I can think of one Golarion race that is defined by their attitudes and are what they are because of the interference of a god/outsider...
KAM has given some good postings on how to make the kender society functional (or at least less dysfunctional) in a Golarion setting.
I mean, look at this rationally: this is the signet ring that has been passed down from father to son for nine generations and the paladin now keeps in his pack;
The ring would not be stolen if it was worn. While that ring might have sentimental value to the paladin. If it is never used, and just stored in a backpack... it is a luxury item.
Yes it is far game for a kender. The difference between a kender and a thief, is that the thief will never show the ring to the party, and sale it off at first chance. Then kender on the other hand will not sale the ring off, but would wear it on his finger after about a week. The paladin, once he see the kender with the ring, could then get it back.
this is the earring that the gypsy's mother wore at her wedding and gave her daughter for good luck when she set out on the long road;
As long as the ear ring is being used, the kender would not bother with it.
If it is being stored and not used, in a box, then again fair game for a kender. And if you want it back, then just ask for it, when the kender says i do not know, them rummage throw the kender stuff. After all, that is what all kender do to each other.
this is the wand which the wizard bought so he wouldn't have to memorize a particular spell
Ok, first of all, why is the wand not worn, if the wizard is planing on using it. If worn, why would a kender even touch it.
..........
The differnce between a kender and a thief, is that a thief will hid the item and sale it off first chance he gets.
The kender will hide the item, and keep it, until the item is needed. They will not sale the stuff off, unless the party that is present, at which time the party can say NO, and give it back.
.........
If you are not using an item, or if it is a luxury item, and if you are not going to notice that the item is gone, because you do not use it ever day...... Then expect it to be on the kender, if it is missing.
There was a reason after all why Tass would sometimes be held upside down, and shaken to see what all would fall out of his pockets.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
"Besides," He giggled, "The dagger was Flint's."
So he stole Flint's dagger (which it's safe to assume was on his belt, not stowed) and used it, then willingly left it behind, knowing it wasn't his.
Oliver, please cite where the Kender suddenly becomes circumspect in stealing. Specifcially, "Kender will steal anything that is not nailed down (and kender with claw hammers will get those too)."
The ring would not be stolen if it was worn. While that ring might have sentimental value to the paladin. If it is never used, and just stored in a backpack... it is a luxury item.
I mean, look at this rationally: this is the signet ring that has been passed down from father to son for nine generations and the paladin now keeps in his pack;
Sorry to jump in here, but I've been following this thread. My friends and I, in our campaign last night, got into this kind of conversation. One of our players is a veteran of the Dragonlance campaign setting, so, he had a lot to say.
But with the Kender racial description, nowhere does it say that if it's worn, it's not going to be handled. In fact, the racial description says:
"The unquenchable curiosity of the kender drives them to investigate everything--including other peoples' personal possessions. Kender appropriate absolutely anything that catches their eye. Physical boundaries or notions of personal privacy are both alien concepts to them..."
This seems like they wouldn't care if it's worn or not.
Can you use this racial description to prove your point? As a person new to the Krynn campaign world, this is all I have to go on (besides links to the earlier Dragon magazine articles which seem to say the same thing).
Yes it is far game for a kender. The difference between a kender and a thief, is that the thief will never show the ring to the party, and sale it off at first chance. Then kender on the other hand will not sale the ring off, but would wear it on his finger after about a week. The paladin, once he see the kender with the ring, could then get it back.
Does this make it any less annoying or heartbreaking to the paladin, just because it's "fair" game? Does it excuse the kender's actions? "Well, silly me. I should have known not to carry that with a kender around! It's all my fault. Oh well. Perhaps I'll have another ring made, and will be more careful with it when kender are around!"
As long as the ear ring is being used, the kender would not bother with it.
Seriously. I'm not being snarky. Can you cite evidence that they won't take something that's worn? I mean, clothes are one thing. I don't expect a kender to filch someone's worn underwear, except maybe if there was gold thread in it, or a glimpse of a heart shape on the white fabric would make one curious as to what other patterns are on it. They could easily wait until the person is distracted enough to not really notice the kender "handling" it. A moment of lost vigilance and POOF!
If it is being stored and not used, in a box, then again fair game for a kender. And if you want it back, then just ask for it, when the kender says i do not know, them rummage throw the kender stuff. After all, that is what all kender do to each other.
Fair game for kender, but it may be "lost" in the handling. And why should the people let him off simply because he's a kender? Seems more like blaming the victim.
Ok, first of all, why is the wand not worn, if the wizard is planing on using it. If worn, why would a kender even touch it.
Again, please show me where it says that something worn wouldn't be investigated?
The differnce between a kender and a thief, is that a thief will hid the item and sale it off first chance he gets.
The kender will hide the item, and keep it, until the item is needed. They will not sale the stuff off, unless the party that is present, at which time the party can say NO, and give it back.
Things are more likely to be lost and/or forgotten. Asking it back from the kender is not a guarantee that it will be available. This is, of course, according to the write up from official Dragonlance sources.
If you are not using an item, or if it is a luxury item, and if you are not going to notice that the item is gone, because you do not use it ever day...... Then expect it to be on the kender, if it is missing.
There was a...
You can expect it to be on the kender. But that doesn't mean it's actually on the kender's being.
How does any of this excuse the kender's actions?
The long and short of kender were in 1 E they had a racial write-up that first stated one thing and then had the word but, or something else....
Haven't seen it. Is anyone able to give me a link or something to help me find it? In the meantime, all I have is the most recent information, which as someone pointed out, had to get the approval from somewhere. Judging from the information provided by the original creators, the newest racial write-up doesn't have any different information, though it apparently does have the horrible mary-sue-ness others have discussed.
For example kender will steal from other PC's, what if that hurts the friends feelings, and the kender might lose a friend, but kender treasure their friends...
Then there's the part about them probing insecurities. Friend gets offended, the kender could be all "what's got your tidy-whities in a bunch?" And that's just the polite way of speaking. He could have lost the friend right there.
Which contradiction wins out? That is the RP challenge of playing a kender.
Kender learns from friends, but can not comprehend personal property, or do they learn it from friends over the course of time....
Well, we'll leave the anthropological debate of the effects of cultural contact aside.
Not to be (hyperbolic or snarky) but if kender must have their hands in others pouchs all the time would they not forgo eating sleeping etc, and soon die of starvation?
People can work themselves into exhaustion. People obey their bodies and their brains will override certain impulses. It could be better stated as "When they're not eating, sleeping, micturating or defecating, they will be 'exploring' whatever catches their interest."
What about the line that says "Handling is a natural extension of a kender's day-to-day life."? (emphasis mine)
In short:
The paladin keeps the seal ring in his backpack because it's a family heirloom and he's a larger man than any of his ancestors so it doesn't even fit him as a pinky ring. This doesn't mean he still can't use it to seal documents as his family's seal, or that it might not eventually fit his son or grandson.
The gypsy wears the earring in her ear, in a standard piercing, and as with most hoop earrings, it would be easy enough to slip out while she slept, if she doesn't take it off at night so it doesn't snag while she sleeps.
The wizard keeps the wand in his pocket, in leather case, the same as you might keep a fancy pen.
All the crap about these being "fair game" for the kender--hogwash. It's only fair game if you put the kender's desire to "handle" above other people's desire to keep their things.
Whether the seal ring is a luxury item is immaterial. The paladin doesn't care that it's made from a few GP worth of gold. He cares that it has the seal of his house and was entrusted to him by his father, and his father before him, and so on, and he holds it in trust for his son, when and if he has one. After three hundred + years of use, it's probably a dinged-up battered old thing, but that doesn't matter. For him it symbolizes the honor of his ancestors and his hope for a son to carry on the family line.
For the kender? It's a piece of frippery of transitory interest he will probably forget by the side of the road when it falls off his finger, because even if it's too small for the paladin, it's too large for the kender and would fly off the instant he skips and giggles and prances about for his own amusement.
But the point is that the kender will have brought sorrow to the paladin instead of joy.
Saying that a ring sized for an average-size human fits a kender so perfectly that he can wear it for a week without it falling off so the paladin can see it and ask for it back? That's GM contrivance and metagaming to protect the kender from being the author of tragedy.
As a GM, I will ask a player what it is he does and decide logically from there. If the ring flies off into the tall grass while the kender turns cartwheels, so be it. If it derails the plot, so be that as well.
As a GM, all I control are the NPCs. If I have one of them steal the seal ring, I'll do it on my own schedule and follow my own logic.
|
Wait, I didn't think there were any paladins in Dragonlance...
False dilemma!
Hehehehe...
But, seriously, after reading all of the "pro" posts, which all seem to require playing against type to actually make a table friendly kender, could someone tell me what the point of not just playing a halfling with some bravery type feature would be?
|
|
I saw the phrase meta-gaming again.....
In role-playing games, a player is metagaming when they use knowledge that is not available to their character in order to change the way they play their character (usually to give them an advantage within the game), such as knowledge of the mathematical nature of character statistics, or the statistics of a creature that the player is familiar with but the character has never encountered. In general, it refers to any gaps between player knowledge and character knowledge which the player acts upon.
How is it meta-gaming to say my PC does as I decide he does rather than some actions dictated by other people's interpretations of the variable rules......
(I pointed out the variations all the way back to 1E previously..........)Actually the whole point of this thread was a halfling mechanically with some kender-like feats etc!
Well, playing a kender in a way that doesn't infuriate 99% of the gaming world would qualify as "meta". The character may not know a bunch of gamers on Earth rue the day his race was penned into existence, but the player does. Staying alive is "advantageous" after all! ;-)
Well, playing a kender in a way that doesn't infuriate 99% of the gaming world would qualify as "meta". The character may not know a bunch of gamers on Earth rue the day his race was penned into existence, but the player does. Staying alive is "advantageous" after all! ;-)I saw the phrase meta-gaming again.....
In role-playing games, a player is metagaming when they use knowledge that is not available to their character in order to change the way they play their character (usually to give them an advantage within the game), such as knowledge of the mathematical nature of character statistics, or the statistics of a creature that the player is familiar with but the character has never encountered. In general, it refers to any gaps between player knowledge and character knowledge which the player acts upon.
How is it meta-gaming to say my PC does as I decide he does rather than some actions dictated by other people's interpretations of the variable rules......
(I pointed out the variations all the way back to 1E previously..........)Actually the whole point of this thread was a halfling mechanically with some kender-like feats etc!
Still, my noble foe, this gets into moving goalposts when it comes to the way Kender are described(pro- and anti-kender bias play a role here as well). In the most recent edition, they get very different writeups in the Bestiary, Races, and Core books, although their abilities rarely differ(which is where editions come in to play).
|
|
Still, my noble foe, this gets into moving goalposts when it comes to the way Kender are described(pro- and anti-kender bias play a role here as well). In the most recent edition, they get very different writeups in the Bestiary, Races, and Core books, although their abilities rarely differ(which is where editions come in to play).Well, playing a kender in a way that doesn't infuriate 99% of the gaming world would qualify as "meta". The character may not know a bunch of gamers on Earth rue the day his race was penned into existence, but the player does. Staying alive is "advantageous" after all! ;-)I saw the phrase meta-gaming again.....
In role-playing games, a player is metagaming when they use knowledge that is not available to their character in order to change the way they play their character (usually to give them an advantage within the game), such as knowledge of the mathematical nature of character statistics, or the statistics of a creature that the player is familiar with but the character has never encountered. In general, it refers to any gaps between player knowledge and character knowledge which the player acts upon.
How is it meta-gaming to say my PC does as I decide he does rather than some actions dictated by other people's interpretations of the variable rules......
(I pointed out the variations all the way back to 1E previously..........)Actually the whole point of this thread was a halfling mechanically with some kender-like feats etc!
Look, I wasn't the one who gave that kender the screwdriver. Blame him for moving the goalposts (into his pocket)...
;-)
Still, my noble foe, this gets into moving goalposts when it comes to the way Kender are described(pro- and anti-kender bias play a role here as well). In the most recent edition, they get very different writeups in the Bestiary, Races, and Core books, although their abilities rarely differ(which is where editions come in to play).Well, playing a kender in a way that doesn't infuriate 99% of the gaming world would qualify as "meta". The character may not know a bunch of gamers on Earth rue the day his race was penned into existence, but the player does. Staying alive is "advantageous" after all! ;-)I saw the phrase meta-gaming again.....
In role-playing games, a player is metagaming when they use knowledge that is not available to their character in order to change the way they play their character (usually to give them an advantage within the game), such as knowledge of the mathematical nature of character statistics, or the statistics of a creature that the player is familiar with but the character has never encountered. In general, it refers to any gaps between player knowledge and character knowledge which the player acts upon.
How is it meta-gaming to say my PC does as I decide he does rather than some actions dictated by other people's interpretations of the variable rules......
(I pointed out the variations all the way back to 1E previously..........)Actually the whole point of this thread was a halfling mechanically with some kender-like feats etc!
Look, I wasn't the one who gave that kender the screwdriver. Blame him for moving the goalposts (into his pocket)...
;-)
Okay, I'd pay GOOD money to see a Kender actually steal goalposts, fit them into his pocket, and walk away with them!
|
|
Okay, I'd pay GOOD money to see a Kender actually steal goalposts, fit them into his pocket, and walk away with them!Still, my noble foe, this gets into moving goalposts when it comes to the way Kender are described(pro- and anti-kender bias play a role here as well). In the most recent edition, they get very different writeups in the Bestiary, Races, and Core books, although their abilities rarely differ(which is where editions come in to play).Well, playing a kender in a way that doesn't infuriate 99% of the gaming world would qualify as "meta". The character may not know a bunch of gamers on Earth rue the day his race was penned into existence, but the player does. Staying alive is "advantageous" after all! ;-)I saw the phrase meta-gaming again.....
In role-playing games, a player is metagaming when they use knowledge that is not available to their character in order to change the way they play their character (usually to give them an advantage within the game), such as knowledge of the mathematical nature of character statistics, or the statistics of a creature that the player is familiar with but the character has never encountered. In general, it refers to any gaps between player knowledge and character knowledge which the player acts upon.
How is it meta-gaming to say my PC does as I decide he does rather than some actions dictated by other people's interpretations of the variable rules......
(I pointed out the variations all the way back to 1E previously..........)Actually the whole point of this thread was a halfling mechanically with some kender-like feats etc!
Look, I wasn't the one who gave that kender the screwdriver. Blame him for moving the goalposts (into his pocket)...
;-)
One level in sorcerer, cast reduce, place in pouch. ;-)