Figured this was best put in the rules section, as it pertains to what is rules and what is fluff, kinda.
So, as I said, what is "fluff text"?
Example that brought this is up is I suggested on d20pfsrd's Facebook page that since the book plainly states that a winter wolf is a variant of a worg, that it should be listed as such on the worg's page along with the 3rd part "Worg, Elder" that is there.
Someone replied that fluff text tends to get ignored... now granted, he ended with a :) so he was half joking, but that he even said it makes it somewhat of a reason, good or not.
But, my thing is then does that mean ONLY the stat block matters? I understand considering the description under the name as fluff, but is everything else below the stat block fluff too?
A good example of where that idea would cause an issue is Skyrim. There is an axe that does double damage to "elves" this of course includes Bosmer (wood elves), Dunmer (dark elves), and um forget the high elves name.... and Falmer (degenerate mutant underground elves). It does NOT include in the base game the Orsimer (Orcs).
Yet, some players point out that in the LORE of the game Orcs are descended many many many generations ago from elves... so OBVIOUSLY it's a bug that they aren't included and the player patch fixes this obvious bug.
Thing is though, that's lore way back... this isn't first page description of the orc saying "Orcs are an elven variant" you have to really look deep in the lore of the Elder Scrolls world to find out that orcs are descended from elves... so I can see that as fluff a lot easier than if it was right there plain as day in the base description of what an orc is.
that is the only "true" fluff text is below the name.
Everything else is statblock/locale info, some flavor/fluff about residence and quirks of the animal.
pretty much anything with a title in front, ie:
type: humanoid
environment: cold
Treasure: none
is in game stuff (though granted, nothing is set in stone as far as stats)
Anything that has no mechanical impact is fluff text.
As a general rule of thumb, stats trump fluff. This is because, in an RPG system, system is the operative word. It needs to have a concrete and consistent basis to qualify as a system, otherwise it's just the Pathfinder RPG Guidelines. So, if fluff contradicts hard-set rules, go with the hard-set rules by default. If you can manage to go with both, do it in any given opportunity. Fluff takes precedence only for the sake of story flavor and exceptional situations.
Ok, so is the winter wolf a variant of the worg then? If stats trump fluff, there's nothing in the stats that "trump" the idea that a winter wolf is a white worg with ice breath.
Anything that has no mechanical impact is fluff text.
Ok, so then even the winter wolf's name is fluff then. The "Worg, Elder" shouldn't be on the page either then because, like the winter wolf it's very name is fluff. It's NOT a worg... it's an Elder Worg... but without ANY fluff text (again, by your statement, the name, having no mechanical impact, is fluff text therefore can be ignored) there is no way to know they are variants of the same creature.
In the Bestiary, the winter wolf appears on the page for Worg listed as Worg, Winter Wolf. So, yes, it is a variant of Worg the PF system.
As far as what's fluff text and what isn't, fluff text is generally textual description and how the rule information fits into the campaign. Think of it this way - fluff is the stuff you change if you want to write a different campaign in which the collection of mechanical stats may play a different role.
But I think of things this way - fluff provides context for the mechanics to be used in a campaign. And mechanics without context are useless. Stats don't trump fluff. Fluff enables me to apply stats.
You're getting a bit ridiculous. I'm not attacking you. You can stop being so defensive. Names are important for obvious reasons.
For example, if there were an ability with the following:
You jump high into the air and come crashing down with vicious force. If you succeed in a DC 25 Acrobatics check to jump up, you gain the benefit of attack from above. This ability can be used if you only make a single attack during your turn.
The first sentence can be completely ignored. All that really matters in your example is the creature type. How the breeds inter-relate is setting specific. If, in your world, one is descended from the other awesome. If it doesn't work that way in my word then that's awesome too. This is probably what they meant in saying that fluff text can be ignored.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Example of Fluff vs Mechanics that came up in another thread.
Leprechaun
This small humanoid has pointed ears, green eyes, and a wicked grin. He carries a bottle in one hand and a club in the other.
Leprechaun CR 2
XP 600
CN Small fey
Init +7; Senses low-light vision; Perception +17
Defense
AC 14, touch 14, flat-footed 11 (+3 Dex, +1 size)
hp 18 (4d6+4)
Fort +2, Ref +7, Will +6
DR 5/cold iron; SR 13
Offense
Speed 40 ft.
Melee +1 club +7 (1d8–1)
Spell-Like Abilities (CL 4th; concentration +7)
Constant—shillelagh
At will—dancing lights, ghost sound (DC 13), invisibility (self only), mage hand, major image (visual and auditory elements only, DC 16), prestidigitation, ventriloquism (DC 14)
3/day—color spray (DC 14), fabricate (1 cubic foot of material only)
1/day—major creation
Statistics
Str 7, Dex 16, Con 13, Int 14, Wis 15, Cha 16
Base Atk +2; CMB –1; CMD 12
Feats Improved Initiative, Weapon Finesse
Skills Bluff +10, Escape Artist +10, Knowledge (nature) +9, Perception +17, Perform (comedy) +8, Perform (dance) +8, Sense Motive +9, Sleight of Hand +14, Stealth +14; Racial Modifiers +8 Perception, +4 Sleight of Hand
Languages Common, Elven, Halfling, Sylvan
SQ leprechaun magic
Creature Type mechanic
Fluff: "This small humanoid has pointed ears, green eyes, and a wicked grin."
Mechanic: CN Small fey
Charm person will not work on this because it is the Fey type and not Humanoid. The fluff says humanoid, but that has no bearing in the mechanical regard
|
You're getting a bit ridiculous. I'm not attacking you. You can stop being so defensive. Names are important for obvious reasons.
For example, if there were an ability with the following:
You jump high into the air and come crashing down with vicious force. If you succeed in a DC 25 Acrobatics check to jump up, you gain the benefit of attack from above. This ability can be used if you only make a single attack during your turn.
The first sentence can be completely ignored. All that really matters in your example is the creature type. How the breeds inter-relate is setting specific. If, in your world, one is descended from the other awesome. If it doesn't work that way in my word then that's awesome too. This is probably what they meant in saying that fluff text can be ignored.
Except that the fluff text can help indicate when something can't work.
In your example, if you were fighting in a room with a six foot ceiling, if I were GM, I would rule that that ability cannot be used, based on that first sentence.
I agree that system trumps fluff, but IME there is very little that is pure fluff -- it almost all has at least slight system implications.
The DC implies how high you have to jump via the acrobatics skill. That comes to a hair over 6 feet. Assuming a 6' foot tall person you need approximately 12 feet total. Any ceiling lower than that automatically prevent the usage of that ability.
For shorter characters they'd need total clearance less than that, though.
|
|
There are always going to be situations where RAW will not work to max effect due to environmental variables. That is where the GM will needs to come in and provide the customization needed for those action and any limits on their effects. I used to be a stickler for running total RAW, but sometimes, it doesn't always fly well or just becomes awkward. The maximum effects of many skills is dependent on optimal situations, and sometimes they just won't work to max effect.
|
A good "bad" case is the dire badger; in the Ecology part it states that:
Dire badgers reside in deep burrows and warrens dug with their monstrous claws—but unlike typical badgers, a dire badger’s claws are capable of tunneling through solid rock.
So does a dire badger have this ability? If a druid wildshapes into a dire badger, and gains burrow speed, does the druid gain that ability? In this case I'm not sure.
|
|
Example of Fluff vs Mechanics that came up in another thread.
Creature Type mechanic
Fluff: "This small humanoid has pointed ears, green eyes, and a wicked grin."
Mechanic: CN Small fey
Charm person will not work on this because it is the Fey type and not Humanoid. The fluff says humanoid, but that has no bearing in the mechanical regard
This is a bit unfortunate writing by the book's author, but I think he meant humanoid in the sense of having two arms, legs, one head and all that; not in the sense of the Humanoid creature type. That's a risk when using keywords that also appear in everyday language.
That doesn't make it into entirely inconsequential fluff, just changes the meaning. It doesn't mean it's a Humanoid-type creature, but that it's a humanoid-shape creature.
---
I think this is symptomatic of a wider confusion: if something accidentally references a keyword ("humanoid"), does that have rule consequences? I think you need to look at the context; in this case it's a description of shape, not of type. The actual type is mentioned in the normal part of the creature's stat block. "Humanoid" is just description, "fluff" if you will, although not entirely irrelevant. A humanoid-shaped creature can do certain things (somatic spell components) that not all shapes can.
And there's the reverse: the assumption that the lack of keywording means that a piece of text has no game effects. I direct your attention to
Cackle (Su): A witch can cackle madly as a move action. Any creature that is within 30 feet that is under the effects of an agony hex, charm hex, evil eye hex, fortune hex, or misfortune hex caused by the witch has the duration of that hex extended by 1 round.
Some people argue that because there's no mention of Verbal components (a keyword), you don't actually have to make a sound when cackling; or that you can cackle even when you can't speak, such as when you're being strangled by a Choker.
I disagree with that; I think the meaning of the text was perfectly clear, despite the absence of a keyword. "You can do X as a Move action. This results in Y." The meaning of X is pretty clear; cackling madly is something everyone can imagine, and it implies being noisy.
Now it might have been more informative to mention "Verbal component" in that rule text, but the price is making it less readable. A watertight text filled with keywords starts to look like a legal document, not a free-time book you can sell to people.
So now we rely on textual interpretation. The general meaning is obvious; cackling madly will be audible to monsters. You can't cackle if you can't speak. But some questions remain unanswered: what happens in a Silence spell? Here the Verbal keyword would've been handy. This definitely comes down to GM ruling. I'd rule that Silence stops the cackling, because it also stops audio-Bardic Performance and Verbal spells, so that's apparently the most normal way of handling these things in PF.
The DC implies how high you have to jump via the acrobatics skill. That comes to a hair over 6 feet. Assuming a 6' foot tall person you need approximately 12 feet total. Any ceiling lower than that automatically prevent the usage of that ability.
For shorter characters they'd need total clearance less than that, though.
At this point you are house ruling the mechanics based on your reading of the fluff. RAW says make the check, there is no minimum distance or height required but you are enforcing something more than the mechanics say due to your opinion on how it supposedly should work.
Not saying it is badwrongnofun, just that the mechanics are spelled out and your bias on the subject is being reinforced in your mind due to the fluff. You are using the fluff to justify your attempt to alter the way the mechanics function. The mechanics say roll die, get result over X, get benefit. Fluff says it could look like 'this.' Strip away the fluff and the mechanics still function and can be described in multiple other ways.