|
Here's the list of typical reasons why certain things are now allowed in PFS:
1: Take too much time/GM input
2: Wealth Imbalance
3: Evil
4: Held back for chronicle access
5: Too powerful
6: Campaign Flavor
I would like to point out that the Feral Child does not match 1-5 and that 6 possibly fits why Feral Child is currently not legal. I would like to point out the following though to show why I believe Feral Child should be reconsidered for being a legal Druid archetype.
1) Concerning the illiteracy issue: True Primitive is allowed in PFS. Within their abilities it states that they are forever illiterate and unable to learn how to read or write.
"Illiteracy: A true primitive cannot read or write, and her superstition about such things leads her to refuse to ever learn to read or write, even if she multiclasses into other classes."
I've included True Primitive's description below which seems as isolated and naturally untrusting of civilization as Feral Child is. Yet True Primitives are legal and people are capable of coming up with decent backstories for RP'ing purposes and such.
"Isolated and xenophobic tribes that dwell in areas untouched by civilization often see anything from cities and organized settlements as strange, dangerous, and decadent.... Even when forced to mingle with civilization, the true primitive stays apart in both traditions and trappings."
While Feral Child is not a legal archetype, they start as illiterate just as True Primitive but can read and write if they put just 1 point into Linguistics.
"Illiteracy: At 1st level, a feral child is unable to read and write, though she may learn by taking 1 rank of Linguistics. She does not gain Druidic as a free language and cannot select Sylvan as a bonus language."
Here's Feral Child's description:
"Some youths, abandoned in the wilderness and then raised by animals, are so connected with their adoptive home and family that they become feral. Suspicious of civilized society, these foundlings often choose allegiance to the wild over their human forebears..."
Comparing the two, there's not much difference in the description here as neither are naturally inclined to help organized settlements, guilds, or step foot into civilization. Feral Child's description does say they often choose allegiance to the wild over their human forebears but it doesn't say "Always".
2) The only other thing I can think of is thinking that this archetype is a bit stronger than other legal druid archetypes. None of the abilities that Feral Child receive appear to be overpowering compared to any other archetype. The archetype loses Wild Shape which is arguably a greater loss than any of the abilities gained.
Currently I (personally) see the Feral Child archetype as being banned due to unnecessary cause. In regards to Campaign Flavor or RP'ing, if someone wished to roleplay a Feral Child, I don't see it being too difficult to come up with a backstory that ties them into owing a debt to the Pathfinder Society or some other cause for creating balance. The Pathfinder Society accepts all sorts of folk from different paths as long as they're willing to help the common good of the Pathfinder Society. Everyone has their reasons, and some individuals have reasons are more unique than others. (True Primitives, Blight Druids, and hopefully someday Feral Child.)
I would like to ask that you please reconsider the Feral Child archetype for PFS, thanks.
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
Yeah, from a gameplay perspective, the archetype doesn't gain anything that seems overpowered or disruptive. So yeah it, apparently has something to do with the flavor part.
But frankly why do you want this so much? The archetype doesn't seem that great to me, and giving up wild shape is a major loss in power.
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
What about child endangerment issues?
Also, you make a pretty good case for why True Primitives should be banned. Every Pathfinder either enlisted and voluntarily went through three years of training; or did something impressive in the field, let the Society find out about it, and was offered (and accepted) a field commission to become a field agent.
|
While I can see no mechanical reason to ban it, it doesn't fit very well into the theme of the Pathfinder Society (the same could be said for True Primitive). I think a well articulated individual could certainly argue reasonable exceptions, but the archetype as a whole is somewhat away from genre.
That said, I personally am indifferent either way if others want it to be unbanned.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have only read it, never seen one played or even built. But I can see 1 and 5 applying by the complexity of classes involved. The brawler is monk and fighter combo. The animal companion uses druid mechanics. Wild child also get hunter tactics and uses mechanics from a ranger archetype. While someone could get a monk/fighter/druid/ranger/hunter with multiclassing, this archetype would not suffer the level penalties multi-classing hopes to balance. Personally I see the dirty tricks making a animal companion much more powerful/complicated, but playtesting one may change my mind on that.
Sebastion, power is not everyone's primary goal for playing. Obviously its not the OPs concern (that would be flavor).
Flavor-wise I think there are plenty of reasons for wild children to be allowed. It is almost the definition of 'field agent.' But then again this flavor could be used for druids, hunters, ranger, summoners, wizards, & witches. That is just limiting this character background to 'I was raised by this pet...'
EDIT: I think the 'report' can be accomplished even if one can't write. Earthlings did it for thousands of years just with oral traditions.
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
I have only read it, never seen one played or even built. But I can see 1 and 5 applying by the complexity of classes involved. The brawler is monk and fighter combo. The animal companion uses druid mechanics. Wild child also get hunter tactics and uses mechanics from a ranger archetype. While someone could get a monk/fighter/druid/ranger/hunter with multiclassing, this archetype would not suffer the level penalties multi-classing hopes to balance. Personally I see the dirty tricks making a animal companion much more powerful/complicated, but playtesting one may change my mind on that.
Sebastian, power is not everyone's primary goal for playing. Obviously its not the OPs concern (that would be flavor).
Flavor-wise I think there are plenty of reasons for wild children to be allowed. It is almost the definition of 'field agent.' But then again this flavor could be used for druids, hunters, ranger, summoners, wizards, & witches. That is just limiting this character background to 'I was raised by this pet...'
EDIT: I think the 'report' can be accomplished even if one can't write. Earthlings did it for thousands of years just with oral traditions.
Look I very much in favor of giving players the tools to make the character they want, but if an option gives up a very versatile class feature for.. not very much actually, this usually raises the question of some obscure broken combo.
And if the description is the draw here, any druid can use that particular trope, I suspect someone wanted to prevent players from using the fluff text as an excuse to do stupid things. "My character doesn't know any better ...." but frankly I see no reason to keep it banned.
I think if the mighty barbarian or druid wants to join the society, chances are that most venture captains would just give him/her a secretary, or a picture book.
EDIT: And give him plenty of red to document all the blood and all those fires...
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
I believe that each Pathfinder team needs to explore, report, and cooperate. But not necessarily every agent. Blind oracles aren't much on exploring, but they're fine for back-up, and combat prowess.
"Somebody has to get these delicate muttonheads safely to their precious tombs and back again. I'm hired muscle, except that I work for the company instead of freelance."
|
There's a vanity for that, costs 10 prestiege though.10 prestige just to write things down?! Which vanity is that?
My next Pathfinder will be going for this job.
Chronicler (10 PP): A Pathfinder has a lot to remember, especially if she hopes to report every detail back to the Decemvirate for publication. Some memory-challenged Pathfinders employ ambitious underlings to document their accomplishments, their interactions, and sometimes even their frustrated mumblings for posterity. Once per game session, you may ask your GM to repeat a detail about your mission, some esoteric backstory element, or the name of an NPC that you have otherwise forgotten by consulting with your chronicler.
|
|
Look I very much in favor of giving players the tools to make the character they want, but if an option gives up a very versatile class feature for.. not very much actually, this usually raises the question of some obscure broken combo.And if the description is the draw here, any druid can use that particular trope, I suspect someone wanted to prevent players from using the fluff text as an excuse to do stupid things. "My character doesn't know any better ...." but frankly I see no reason to keep it banned.
Good point :)
Maybe a combo the designers/campaign leadership is already aware of :)|
|
And if the description is the draw here, any druid can use that particular trope, I suspect someone wanted to prevent players from using the fluff text as an excuse to do stupid things. "My character doesn't know any better ...." but frankly I see no reason to keep it banned.
I believe this is a player/maturity issue and not an archetype background issue. There's plenty of ways to go about a background that integrates a Feral Child into the PFS and I'm sure with a little bit of creativity you could come up with some examples.
Based on giving up Wild Shaping and why would anyone want it? That is honestly irrelevant. People like options, less options box people in on their choices and concept designs. Some people wouldn't mind playing a Druid that loses Wild Shape as some players have a hard time keeping track of 3-4 wildshapes, don't want to do the stat inventory of different forms, and just want the Druid feel with a more simplistic side. A regular Druid could just not Wild Shape, but if you're not interested in really using it then why not have an option to trade it out for something else.
Before it goes to the Nature Fang archetype, that's besides the point that they also lose Wild Shaping and gain other options. I own the ACG, but not everyone does and PFS requires you to own the book to use the material for play.
I don't see any reason how a Feral Child is unfit for PFS. The Druid concept is already halfway there towards a Feral Child as they often revere nature more than civilization, but not always. As previously mentioned, a Blind Oracle or Deaf Oracle have hinderances towards giving a full report for the PFS. Feral Child is still able to speak and give oral reports which is good enough to fill the requirement. It's also important to understand that the PFS recruits those from many different backgrounds, which all have their strengths and weaknesses, some members are purely there for "muscle/bodyguard" purposes, while others are useful for social gatherings and such.
I still see this archetype as being banned for no particular reason and in the spirit of giving players more choices for character concepts (trading out abilities for acrobatics as class skill, IUS feat, Favored Terrain, and Trap Spotter/Trap Sense in FT.) and versatility I'm requesting that this archetype be reconsidered for PFS eligibility.
Some of these abilities can be gained by a Nature Fang Druid but there's still some interesting options (Druid with Favored Terrain, free IUS, acrobatics as class skill without spending a trait, "Beast Family" ability, and the +2 CL boost to SNA spells.)