|
I'm sure that there are some that would argue that RAW would prevent you from not taking them. I don't see anything in the game that could/would prevent a player from not utilizing all the options available to them. Whether that be taking no traits, using a reduced point-buy, donating your gold to a "worthy" cause, etc. In most cases, the rules are more a limitation of how much you can do. Think of them like speed limits; no going too fast, but going below the limit (within reason) is accepted and even encouraged by "leadership" (read: law enforcement).
But, as Timothy said, why would *you* want to do such a thing? Character limitations already create challenges to overcome so you can be effective vs. whatever encounters come your way. Why would anyone intentionally "nerf" their character any more than the rules already do?
Please let's not turn this into yet another optimizer vs. non-optimizer, or role vs. roll playing thread.
|
|
Step 7: Traits
Pathfinder Society characters begin play with two traits— minor in-game advantages tied to their background in the campaign world. Complete trait rules can be found in the Advanced Player’s Guide or online in the free Character Traits Web Enhancement at paizo.com/traits.
Doesn't sound optional to me. I don't believe most of the things Bob Jounquet mentioned work like speed limits.
It's not: your character gains up to 7HP each level, it's your character gains 7HP each level.
It's not: you begin with up to 2 traits, it's you begin with 2 traits.
Something to remember about traits though is that you're allowed to reflavor them. So even if you don't like what any of them say about your background, it doesn't matter.
|
|
I believe you would need to designate the two traits assigned to your character at creation (or via the retraining rules), but you would not have to use any benefits from them (just the penalties if any).
When you level your character, you are not allowed to hold off on taking any feature (Traits, Feats, Assigning Skill points, etc.) and then apply them later. So as long as you designated what you filled each "slot" with, you could ignore the benefit it provided to the character (unless your character was dominated, confused, etc.)
|
|
IMO, taking traits that have no impact on the character just to fulfill some technicality in the rules that say you "must" have two traits, is no different, functionally, as to not taking them in the first place. Is it a bad idea to ignore an option/benefit/bonus afforded your character? Probably, but as we have all said in the past, "its *your* character, build/play it however *you* want." Having an intentionally nerf'ed character is not likely to garner a lot of friends at the gaming table since you are impacting the entire group's ability to succeed at their missions/goals and to survive. YMMV
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would say that you need to take them. Otherwise you have open trait slots that could be filled later in the name of "correcting a mistake." Allowing people to do that opens the door for abuse.
Also, I can't imagine why you wouldn't want them. They're available in a free web document, so you don't need the APG. And even if you can't find anything particularly appealing, just take Reactionary and something from your faction, you know?
|
|
I also respectfully disagree with the last sentence from Bob. I don't care what others do at my table, if they want to play an entirely useless character then that's their choice. I think it's rude to judge people like that.
Whoa, no judging. I was merely pointing out that table variation and player-style might create hard feelings at the gaming table. I'm not saying I am one of them and hopefully, a player's choices for their build will not impact the GoodRightFun at the table. However, we have all seen the passionate "discussions" regarding non-optimized vs. optimized, useful vs. useless, etc. that occur in the messageboards. I am quite certain that at some point in the OP's career, they will encounter someone who will be upset at their choosing to unnecessarily nerf their character. The ability/skill/power of your fellow player-characters does have an impact on your character's survival, so it is not unreasonable to empathize with those who would be taken aback by someone intentionally limiting their PC beyond the norm.
It might make this topic more understandable in we knew the OP's reasons for not wanting to take his/her allotted traits.
|
"Oh shoot, this adventure is in the desert and we will be using environmental rules? Guess I was a Desert Child...."
Just pick two traits. If you don't want anything helpful that pick traits that won't come into effect. The only real reason not to would be to fill them in later, especially when you can re-flavor traits anyway.
|
|
I would say that you need to take them. Otherwise you have open trait slots that could be filled later in the name of "correcting a mistake." Allowing people to do that opens the door for abuse.
This could be easily mitigated by the GM noting the chronicle sheet to indicate the player was aware that the traits where not selected and it was intentional. No future traits can be selected without the use of some bonus material such as the Extra Trait chronicle boon.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Something to remember about traits though is that you're allowed to reflavor them. So even if you don't like what any of them say about your background, it doesn't matter.
Is this true for PFS? I thought I remembered reading it somewhere, but I couldn't find a reference a while back when I was working on a new character. And if it's true, how far does it go?
Could, for example, a Varisian take Two-World Magic without having to explain why they have a Sargavan trait? Maybe by reflavoring it as mixing Shaonti tribal magic with more typical Varisian magic?
And what does that mean for Faith traits that require a specific deity or race?
What if you don't want to be adopted by Halflings, or worship a Halfling god, but want to be Helpful
Not trying to derail the thread. I'm just wondering if there's a reference or post from Mike or someone that I can point to. Or is it that you can reflavor a trait as long as you qualify for it in the first place?
In the meantime, I've been steering clear of anything that might be a questionable pick.
<edited to fix typo>
|
|
Is this true for PFS?
Yes, the mechanical aspect of the trait remains the same, but you can "reflavor" the fluff to apply to your PC. A trait that say's you grew up in the north and that explains your natural resistance to cold temperatures, could be rewritten that your close ties to the desert keep your inner fire burning and affords you the same resistance, or whatever flavor you want to use. Either way, you gain resist cold 1 or a bonus to fortitude saves vs. cold environment effects, or whatever the trait's mechanical bonus is.
I'm just wondering if there's a reference or post from Mike or someone that I can point to
It was LINKED in the body of the text
|
|
Perhaps "reflavoring" would work for traits other than Religion Traits, which (sometimes) require you to have a specific diety.
That worship is a mechanical requirement, not a bit of flavor.
You could however say your "Eyes and Ears of the City" is a blessing from Abadar for spending 50 years in service guarding the first vault before being granted leave to Golarion, rather than having to be a town guard or whatever the default flavor is.
|
|
Oh, I was looking at the wrong trait.
Hunter's Eye requires you be in the Andoran faction and in no way requires the worship of Erastil, the blessing of Erastil in the flavor is reflavorable.
Patient Optimist requires you worship Erastil, this is a mechanical requirement.
Are we on the same page now?
|
|
It was LINKED in the body of the text
So it was. My apologies. My eyes did not catch that.
With regards to mechanical vs flavor, I also noticed that Hunter's Eye was the example in the other thread. I'm going to have to read through that whole thread and look up where the trait is listed. I can certainly understand and am fine with having the worship restriction on religion traits. It's a harder line to draw on something like Two-World Magic.
Magic Traits
This trait is available to all Sargavan characters.
Two-World Magic: You have bridged the gap between the natural magic of the Mwangi peoples and the refined magic of the Chelish colonists. Select one 0-level spell from a class ...
And it goes on to describe what the trait actually does. So, looking at the text of the trait, the Mwangi/Chelish lines could be read as flavor. But it's the sentence before the actual trait that made me decide it wasn't clear enough to take on a character that didn't grow up in Sargava.
Anyway, sorry for derailing the thread. On topic, choosing/not choosing traits seems like it's something that should be left to the player. A GM forcing them to choose something, even if it will have no benefit/effect on the character just seems like something that shouldn't have time spent on it at a game.
|
I also respectfully disagree with the last sentence from Bob. I don't care what others do at my table, if they want to play an entirely useless character then that's their choice. I think it's rude to judge people like that.Whoa, no judging. I was merely pointing out that table variation and player-style might create hard feelings at the gaming table. I'm not saying I am one of them and hopefully, a player's choices for their build will not impact the GoodRightFun at the table. However, we have all seen the passionate "discussions" regarding non-optimized vs. optimized, useful vs. useless, etc. that occur in the messageboards. I am quite certain that at some point in the OP's career, they will encounter someone who will be upset at their choosing to unnecessarily nerf their character. The ability/skill/power of your fellow player-characters does have an impact on your character's survival, so it is not unreasonable to empathize with those who would be taken aback by someone intentionally limiting their PC beyond the norm.
It might make this topic more understandable in we knew the OP's reasons for not wanting to take his/her allotted traits.
Sorry Bob, that came out more harsh than I intended. What I was trying to say (badly as it turns out) was that we should live and let live and try not to be annoyed about other's choices.
Wasn't trying to say you were judgemental or anything. Just a bit of clumsy writing is all.
Wonders of the internet eh?
|
|
Oh, I was looking at the wrong trait.
Hunter's Eye requires you be in the Andoran faction and in no way requires the worship of Erastil, the blessing of Erastil in the flavor is reflavorable.
Patient Optimist requires you worship Erastil, this is a mechanical requirement.
Are we on the same page now?
That sums it up.
|
|
Wonders of the internet eh?
No worries, I probably read too much into the "tone" anyway :-)
Sounds like most of us are on the same page at least in theory. There is likely some level of table variation on this one, but it would still be really helpful to know the intentions behind the OP's question...
|
Hi folks, sorry I don't check the boards frequently. Thanks for the flurry of responses! Honestly I was just toying with the idea of making a CRB-only PFS char. Seeing as there are no traits in the CRB, I'd elect to not take them. I just think I can build a perfectly capable character with CRB only material. Clearly, I would not "nerf" my character so much as to impede the capability of any party I would join. I've seen this done intentionally and while it can provide a challenge, it does put the entire party at risk. I also am avoiding the optimize debate so thank you all for doing so. Since this is PFS, I think I may end up taking just society traits, if I have to take any.
There is no other reason for my original question than "I'd like to stick to CRB".
Thanks!
C
EDIT: Grammar.
Greetings, as above, can I choose to not have any traits for my character?
Cheers,
C
I would suppose this may set a rules precedent for not taking any traits. It may not apply to what you are doing but it would seem that you are allowed to "leave your trait slots open."
From the PFS FAQ.
My character is playing in the First Steps intro series. How can I pick a faction trait before I've chosen a faction?
If you are playing the First Steps adventure arc as a newly created first-level character, you can choose to leave one of your two trait slots open at character creation. After you have chosen a faction at the conclusion of the three-part series, you may select a faction trait to fill this slot. You may also choose any other legal trait if you decide that none of the faction traits for your chosen faction fit your character.
It does specify the First Steps program but it would seem to apply to all characters in PFS play. Bold and italics mine.
|
|
It does specify the First Steps program but it would seem to apply to all characters in PFS play. Bold and italics mine.
I believe the intention is for characters who are or can play in the First Steps to decide on a faction first before choosing traits.
I see it as soon as you pick a faction or become level two, whichever comes first, you must have traits set in stone. (of course, you may swap these using first-level retraining rules)
|
|
Just tuning in. If I recall correctly advanced players guide is not part of the core assumption, therefore you technically must bring the book or a printout of the sheet with you in order to use anything from it. You could choose 2 worthless traits and elect not use them since you dont have the material. Does that sound legal?
|
|
While the APG is not listed as a Core Assumption, the Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play and Pathfinder Society
Field Guide both are. Both documents conatin traits. The free online document is also listed under the trait section of the Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play. I do not see where a player would need to have anything to have access to those traits.
|
|
Hi folks, sorry I don't check the boards frequently. Thanks for the flurry of responses! Honestly I was just toying with the idea of making a CRB-only PFS char. Seeing as there are no traits in the CRB, I'd elect to not take them. I just think I can build a perfectly capable character with CRB only material. Clearly, I would not "nerf" my character so much as to impede the capability of any party I would join. I've seen this done intentionally and while it can provide a challenge, it does put the entire party at risk. I also am avoiding the optimize debate so thank you all for doing so. Since this is PFS, I think I may end up taking just society traits, if I have to take any.
There is no other reason for my original question than "I'd like to stick to CRB".
Thanks!
CEDIT: Grammar.
*shrug* There are two free documents that contain traits. I don't see why you wouldn't just take two from there.
It does specify the First Steps program but it would seem to apply to all characters in PFS play. Bold and italics mine.I believe the intention is for characters who are or can play in the First Steps to decide on a faction first before choosing traits.
I see it as soon as you pick a faction or become level two, whichever comes first, you must have traits set in stone. (of course, you may swap these using first-level retraining rules)
My only thought on the matter is that they are optional, i would think. Beneficial? Absolutely. Good for characterization and background/story? You bet. Absolutely essential and mandatory? Not that i've seen or read. Why you wouldn't take them? I have no clue but even if your PC was audited by your GM and he said "Hey man you don't have any traits. You know you get two, right?" and you respond "Yeah i know i just didn't want to use any." About all they could really say is "Well they are there for your benefit but oh-well, whatever man it's your loss."
I mean if you absolutely must have traits then i missed this and will be happy to admit my wrongs. Aside from that i just ask on all fronts "Why?"
As far as choosing, it seems fairly clear, in most cases, that you need to pick 2 traits. Granted they could give you a non-existent benefit (ie: two +1 trait bonuses to the same thing, or DC/CL bonuses for a fighter)
and @Eric:
Do you audit your companions character sheet at every table you sit at?
|
|
I think the only questionable part of not choosing is whether you should then be able to fill those traits in with something that was not a legal option for the character at the time but now is (and how do you really verify that).
For example if I see that there is a "People of the Cinderlands" book slated to come out in six months and I'm making a Shoanti character today, can I opt to not select any traits and add them later once I see what's in that book? How about feats, favored class options, or spells known (for a spontaneous caster)?
If I am GMing and see Amirian, female barbarian 10, using Shoanti-specific traits and feats when People of the Cinderlands was only recently added to the additional resources, then this looks like the player did a character rebuild, not that they simply didn't select these options for 9 levels of play. How do I audit this character? Do I just say "sure, okay, whatever"?
To me the simplest solution is that all such options are not optional. As others have pointed out, you can choose something that provides your character with no mechanical benefit.
You could build a credit baby when it comes out if you have enough saved up I guess. That's about the only legit way I see of getting it. From what I've seen so far, it looks like you have to choose traits when you build your character. I like the idea of being able to leave your traits open though :/
|
|
Hi folks, sorry I don't check the boards frequently. Thanks for the flurry of responses! Honestly I was just toying with the idea of making a CRB-only PFS char. Seeing as there are no traits in the CRB, I'd elect to not take them. I just think I can build a perfectly capable character with CRB only material. Clearly, I would not "nerf" my character so much as to impede the capability of any party I would join. I've seen this done intentionally and while it can provide a challenge, it does put the entire party at risk. I also am avoiding the optimize debate so thank you all for doing so. Since this is PFS, I think I may end up taking just society traits, if I have to take any.
There is no other reason for my original question than "I'd like to stick to CRB".
Thanks!
CEDIT: Grammar.
You build your chararcter anyway you like (within the rules of course), even if you want to neuter him. Just rememeber that's because he was chosen that way by yourself; any scenario you find yourself lacking survival in or even putting in your part, can only be blamed on what was built; therefore the less you do contribute the less you gain. An important fact since you know the system and how hard some scenarios can be, your the last person to mention anything on overwhelming scenarios if you elect to make a not fully developed character.
You are what you make(nothing simplier)