The only time I have made the flavor text binding is on cleave. Most of the time flavor has very loose wording that could reasonably vary with situations. Cleave states that you are making one swing hitting multiple foes. I had a player once wanting to attack with a reach weapon and then cleave with a kick. I couldn't square this in my head. It does fit the letter of the law on the rules of cleave, but completely violates the idea of what is happening in the feat.
Effectively, yes. The nature of RPGs is such that everything that happens occurs in an imaginary world, and if the logic of the world demands something, that trumps a specific mechanic intended for the general case. That said, in this case, there is no actual text stating that a barbarian can only rage in combat. The GM an introductory paragraph, then made something up, because they felt like it. Since the result is unreasonable and possibly unplayable, you should protest, strongly, and if they don't relent, get a new group.
Effectively, yes. The nature of RPGs is such that everything that happens occurs in an imaginary world, and if the logic of the world demands something, that trumps a specific mechanic intended for the general case. That said, in this case, there is no actual text stating that a barbarian can only rage in combat. The GM an introductory paragraph, then made something up, because they felt like it. Since the result is unreasonable and possibly unplayable, you should protest, strongly, and if they don't relent, get a new group.
No they are not. Even the devs say flavor text is mutable. They can show you the designers intent in some cases, but flavor text are never not rules.
Is the Flavour text a part of the rules?
Not really, no, but the flavour is very much part of the game, and it's just as an important part of the game as the rules.
To address some of your examples, first, concerning raging outside of combat, the passage you quoted is not flavour text at all and is part of the rules. However, the rules do not say a Barbarian cannot rage outside of combat; your GM has misinterpreted the rules.
Second, the flavour of the archetypal Barbarian is the flavour as written in the CRB. Again, however, the flavour doesn't say that a Barbarian cannot use tactics in combat. Your GM has misinterpreted the flavour as well.
Also, creating your own flavor, is a key part of having fun, and keeping things fun.
I could not agree with this statement more, OP.
Adapting the flavour of the game to suit the needs of your gaming group is just as important as adapting the rules.
No they are not. Even the devs say flavor text is mutable. They can show you the designers intent in some cases, but flavor text are never not rules.
Sure they are. Imagine for a moment the characters enter a tavern. One character orders a round of beers. Another character accepts one of the drinks, takes a sip, and says, "This cranberry juice is terrible." At this point, it has to be accepted that the drink is somehow not a beer, the character has said something strange and confusing, or that the character didn't actually say that. Those are rules. Without them, the games lacks continuity. Not all rules are mathematical, not all are formulaic, not all are mandates. Rules can be mutable. Rules do pertain to flavor.
But fluff text accompanying a class description is not the sort of rule that generally forbids you from playing a character a certain way. Apparently, in this GM's game, there is a rule against raging outside of combat. That's a rule. It's just not a rule arising from the Pathfinder rulebook.
"No psionics" could be a rule. "This game is set in Golarion" is a rule.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Next time, just tell one of the other players to slap you. Roll Initiative and make them make a touch attack or something. Then ask your GM when it is your action.
When he says it's your turn, say "I rage and smash the door".
If the GM tries to stop you, say "We were in combat, right?"
Then he'll probably say that if you rage you have to attack the object of your Rage or something stupid like that. That's when you ask him if you can tell the difference between friend or foe when you are Raging. (The answer damn well better be yes). When he says yes, you say "Well, Mr. Slappy is still my friend, and even though I'm angry i'm not going to hurt him. So I took out my anger on the door."
Hopefully right around then is when the GM will realize he's a moron.
Edit: Come to think of it, this game is set in golarion isn't even a house rule. Its a statement, nothing more. There's no way to "break" This game is set in Golarion. It's not telling you what you can or cannot do. Its just a statement.
You can't play a Solamnic Knight. You can't say that your elf and the dwarf in the party are identical, biological twins.
My DM / group mean that the flavourtext is a (big) part of the rules.
For example they "rule" that the flavour text of the barbarian "rules" that you can not rage without combat and also that you can not fight strategic (use flanking, etc.) in rage ... and I have to play the barbarian like a "archetype barbarian" because it is a barbarian. (So I have to take the Urban Barbarian "controlled rage" to use strategie in combat ... but still cannot use rage without a combat situation)
So here is my question to the community:
Not even a little bit. Flavor text is completely mutable and can be tailored to your desires.
That's a ridiculously narrow interpretation.
Yes, it's plain English, but it's plain English flavor text, and thus has no bearing on the character's mechanics. The player is free to decide the flavor of his abilities.
There is actually more to that paragraph. Simply because rage grants combat prowess does not mean it stops doing all the other things it says it does. It just doesn't say, "in combat." It grants combat prowess. And rage powers, you know.
Flavor text is a suggestion. A good suggestion, most of the time, but still, just a suggestion.
Limiting yourself to a single possible fluff created by someone else is unnecessarily restrictive. Even if that someone else is a very capable game designer.
Fluff is cool, as long as it's optional. It should give you ideas, not restrictions.
Nimon: Do you suggest that a barbarian with the "Raging Climber" or "Raging Swimmer" rage powers can only use them while in combat, and not on any out-of-combat climb checks or swim checks?
Edit: Also, the "Primal Scent" rage power grants a bonus to Survival checks made to track by scent (among other things); that's a use that pretty much only comes up outside combat.
Imagine for a moment the characters enter a tavern. One character orders a round of beers. Another character accepts one of the drinks, takes a sip, and says, "This cranberry juice is terrible." At this point, it has to be accepted that the drink is somehow not a beer, the character has said something strange and confusing, or that the character didn't actually say that. Those are rules.
Perhaps his PC just has some reason to not drink beer openly.
First came some rice and we started eating but then the utako battlemaiden, one of the unicorn, gave the servants some wink and they served a dish containing red meat. One samurai stopped eating, one continued eating rice and one helped himself to some of the meat, tried a mouthful and said: "You chicken tasts interesting."
On this the battlemaiden smiled and the two of them eat the red meat.
houserulesYou can't play a Solamnic Knight. You can't say that your elf and the dwarf in the party are identical, biological twins.
Edit: Come to think of it, this game is set in golarion isn't even a house rule. Its a statement, nothing more. There's no way to "break" This game is set in Golarion. It's not telling you what you can or cannot do. Its just a statement.
Houserules are still rules.
(Don't forget to read all of my post Der Origami Mann - I am championing your cause. ;p)
And you forgot this:
These barbarians invite their enemies to attack them
Those crazy cats!!! Always inviting enemies to attack - what if they don't share a language? ;p
(Don't forget to read all of my post Der Origami Mann - I am championing your cause. ;p)
And you forgot this:
These barbarians invite their enemies to attack themThose crazy cats!!! Always inviting enemies to attack - what if they don't share a language? ;p
Body language.
Like in matrix when neo and the other guy stand face to face watching each other until one begs the other come forward with his fingers... then combat starts.
These barbarians invite their enemies to attack themThose crazy cats!!! Always inviting enemies to attack - what if they don't share a language? ;p
I suddenly get this image of all Barbarians being these big, buff, Jersey Shore rejects who always start a fight with a rousing cry of "Come at me bro! Come at me!!!".
(Don't forget to read all of my post Der Origami Mann - I am championing your cause. ;p)
OK, I will read your posts again an again ;-)
And you forgot this:
These barbarians invite their enemies to attack themThose crazy cats!!! Always inviting enemies to attack - what if they don't share a language? ;p
As a munchkin I like to get the "come and get me" rage power without cost (because it´s in the flavour text!) - thanks ;-)
And yes, there are some Rage Prophets which can only speak/understand in their rage one specific language ...
I suddenly get this image of all Barbarians being these big, buff, Jersey Shore rejects who always start a fight with a rousing cry of "Come at me bro! Come at me!!!".
-> This grandma must be a barbarian, too. Link
|
You can't play a Solamnic Knight.
Edit: Come to think of it, this game is set in golarion isn't even a house rule. Its a statement, nothing more. There's no way to "break" This game is set in Golarion. It's not telling you what you can or cannot do. Its just a statement.
Actually, 3.5-compatibility allows me to play a Solamnic Knight. Now, one in Golarion ? Of course yes : travelled from Krynn by one of a billion imaginable ways. We have stranger things in Paizo's APs.
You can't say that your elf and the dwarf in the party are identical, biological twins.
Yes I can : Reincarnate
|
Flavor text is there to give a feel to the world in which you play. As such, it is a guide to how things are generally percieved or how they generally work in the game world. The word generally is important I guess.
The flavour of a game world is actually completely the purview of the GM, since he or she are the ones running the game world. As long as they are consistant within their world, they can pretty much set whatever they want as a flavour to their game.
You don't have to like them of course, at which point your options is to either suck it up, or leave the game.
Some GM's (myself included) are wary of folks who rewrite flavour to get advantage in a game. The example demonstrated in the OP is pretty bad, I can see hundreds of situations where someone could get angry enough to call on their inner anger to achieve something out of combat.
However, I have also seen large numbers of posters on these boards submitting characters for games where their backstory and the flavour of their descriptions is clearly a chance to milk advantage from the game without paying for it.
Classic example, I had a character apply for a kingmaker game where he wrote in his background that he was a scion of one of the major noble houses in the game. He didn't take the trait for it though (which was a campaign trait of course). When the time came, he expected his background to provide him benefit even though he hadn't taken the mechanical trait to get said benefit. He was most displeased when I pointed out that without the trait, he was effectively so far down the line of succession in the family tree that no one was even going to pay attention to his requests for aid. He quit the game not long after.
Ive also seen players or spell casters try to get away with reflavouring their spells as whispered words of power. This was done in order to get around being detected while casting. Clearly not something the rules allow for, but said players were adament that it was the flavour for their character.
And many players try to rewrite teh flavour of traits to gain some benefit or other that didnt match the intial intent of the trait.
In this case, it might be worth pointing your GM at some of the barbarian archetypes to let him know just how variable they are. Some of their flavour text would surprise him I believe.
As a point of interest, does he play his barbarians the same way? If the answer is yes then this clearly a case where the DM has set the flavour of the campaign to match his vision, rather than just pickingon you. If you can't convince him to alter his campaign vision, then best create an alternate class character or leave if its that much of an issue.
Something for GM's to be aware of, i feel. But not something to get so carried away as the OP's GM seems to have gone.
Cheers
You can't play a Solamnic Knight. You can't say that your elf and the dwarf in the party are identical, biological twins.
Edit: Come to think of it, this game is set in golarion isn't even a house rule. Its a statement, nothing more. There's no way to "break" This game is set in Golarion. It's not telling you what you can or cannot do. Its just a statement.
Just to be annoying...what if one of them had been Reincarnated?
;P
Darn it: Ninja'd
No they are not. Even the devs say flavor text is mutable. They can show you the designers intent in some cases, but flavor text are never not rules.Sure they are. Imagine for a moment the characters enter a tavern. One character orders a round of beers. Another character accepts one of the drinks, takes a sip, and says, "This cranberry juice is terrible." At this point, it has to be accepted that the drink is somehow not a beer, the character has said something strange and confusing, or that the character didn't actually say that. Those are rules. Without them, the games lacks continuity. Not all rules are mathematical, not all are formulaic, not all are mandates. Rules can be mutable. Rules do pertain to flavor.
But fluff text accompanying a class description is not the sort of rule that generally forbids you from playing a character a certain way. Apparently, in this GM's game, there is a rule against raging outside of combat. That's a rule. It's just not a rule arising from the Pathfinder rulebook.
"No psionics" could be a rule. "This game is set in Golarion" is a rule.
That is not a rule. It is a player being difficult.
And a GM being wrong is also not a rule. It is a GM being wrong. Also for the sake of this forum the rules refer to the official rules, otherwise people can just use houserules all day, and no concensus will ever be reached. I don't know if you what you just tried saw a strawman or one of those other fallacies, but I do know it was wrong.
Flavor text is there to give a feel to the world in which you play. As such, it is a guide to how things are generally percieved or how they generally work in the game world. The word generally is important I guess.
The flavour of a game world is actually completely the purview of the GM, since he or she are the ones running the game world. As long as they are consistant within their world, they can pretty much set whatever they want as a flavour to their game.
You don't have to like them of course, at which point your options is to either suck it up, or leave the game.
OK, we don´t play in golarion (we play in eberron, because the DM like this world more than golarion), but we use the pathfinder (and Lorefinder, ...) rules.
--> Does this mean, I should have to look for the "barbarian flavour text" in the eberron books? Perhaps pointing on eberron-rules is a good Idea :-)"barbarian flavour text, on eberron wikia"
Barbarians are mighty warriors who rely on their strength and incredible toughness to win battles. As handy with a weapon as a fighter, they become tougher and more agile as they become more powerful. The most distinctive aspect of barbarians is their ability to 'rage'. When they rage, barbarians become stronger and are able to shrug off the nastiest of attacks
Rage - Barbarians can tap their inner fury to fly into a berserker-like rage. This rage makes the barbarian even stronger and tougher than before, but only lasts a short time and the barbarian loses some proficiency in avoiding attacks and performing any action that requires concentration. When the rage ends the barbarian becomes fatigued. As the barbarian gets more experienced they are able to enter this rage state more often and get even stronger during their ranges.
submitting characters for games where their backstory and the flavour of their descriptions is clearly a chance to milk advantage from the game without paying for it.
I want to pay the price, but I want to pay the "real" (=rule) not the "black-market" price! ;-)
|
|
Flavor text is there to give a feel to the world in which you play. As such, it is a guide to how things are generally percieved or how they generally work in the game world. The word generally is important I guess.
The flavour of a game world is actually completely the purview of the GM, since he or she are the ones running the game world. As long as they are consistant within their world, they can pretty much set whatever they want as a flavour to their game.
You don't have to like them of course, at which point your options is to either suck it up, or leave the game.
OK, we don´t play in golarion (we play in eberron, because the DM like this world more than golarion), but we use the pathfinder (and Lorefinder, ...) rules.
--> Does this mean, I should have to look for the "barbarian flavour text" in the eberron books? Perhaps pointing on eberron-rules is a good Idea :-)
** spoiler omitted **submitting characters for games where their backstory and the...
If you want to convince your DM that you're right, then I'd definitely be showing him that bit of text. It doesn't mention combat nearly as much, and states he just gets stronger and tougher through rages.
Just make sure the wiki is quoting the actual book.
Once again though, it's the gm's world. If he makes it so every barbarian in his world can only berserker rage during combat, then your stuck with it. As long as he's consistent in this ruling throughout his entire world, then that is fine. This can work for you as much as against you at times, though is much less of a burden for the GM.
All gm's tweak their worlds to suit them. If they're up front about it, you deal with it or don't play.
Cheers
=(
I didn't think the last one was very insulting, I was literally just pulling lines from the Barbarian flavor text and pointing out what would happen if they were used as rules. I think the strongest word I used was "silly" in that post.
|
|
An addendum to my above post- don't use the wiki for quoting. It doesn't use the words from the Eberron book at all. It also goes on to say barbarians in Eberron are mostly halflings from talenta, and that is leaving out at least six to seven other cultures that give rise to barbarians in that setting book.
The actual Eberron setting book from 3.5 edition only mentions barbarians coming from certain cultures. It has nothing to do with the class abilities, which means you have to go back to the core rules book again. Given the way your DM is reading that, you very well may be stuck if you can't convince him to broaden his definition.
Cheers
Class is not concept, concept is not class.
You can be a Barbarian (class) without being a barbarian (concept). Same goes for every class.