| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There types of conversation happen here a lot. Ninjas have this problem also. Some GM's dont even allow you to reflavor anything.
Some GM's dont even allow you to reflavor anything.
How horrid! I can't even imagine playing under such a limiting GM.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
it is almost as if arbitrary titles given to collections of rules mechanics have no functional bearing on what you actually make
:O
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
You know what?
We need a set of "CLASS X of the Inner Sea" threads, where people just propose heavily reflavored versions of certain classes to tie them into any of the countries and cultures in that region.
Already got some ideas for Shoanti, Chelaxian, and Osirioni ninjas. :D
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like a lot of these issues could be resolved if the Samurai could pick their weapon for Weapon Expertise... I want a Shoanti Samurai with an Earth Breaker.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One of the most frustrating things about some dungeon masters is that they get hung up on terminology. The samurai is a prime example, especially for DMs who say that unless you're in Tian Xia or playing a campaign like Jade Regent then samurai are totally and completely off limits.
Why? Well, because you're not in the part of the world where they come from, obviously.
The only thing you need to do to the samurai to make it more palatable to this mindset is to stop calling it a samurai. Instead, try calling it a knight. The full details of this flavor re-skin can be found right here!
PFS explicitly disallows it, due to an allergy to reflavouring. But there is an alternative: just play a Cavalier. Of course, you'll need to invest in the archery feats on your own if you want horse archery like a Samurai, but yeah. Samurai is an alternate class of Cavalier.
I suppose it must happen, but I have never heard of a GM who was that inflexible.
I will put out a counter thought though. If Samurai are just 'knights' then there isn't anything special about Samurai.
While this may seem unimportant, if I wanted a world where different regions had different martial traditions, and for those traditions to actually feel distinctive (i.e. have different mechanical abilities) then I must restrict certain mechanical combinations to certain regions.
It is also possible that a GM would reflexively be against allowing many eastern things because of the history in many RPGs (including Pathfinder to an extent) of making eastern things simply like western things, except mechanically better. This stems from an American cultural preoccupation with Japan during the 80s, which was also when RPGs were really starting to become somewhat popular.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I reflavor things all the time in PFS. I haven't had any problems, and I expect not to as long as I'm absolutely clear what it actually is.
What cavalier WON'T give you are standard combat bonus feats and the Resolve ability. While cavalier is an option if you have a concept that focuses on those changes then a cavalier simply won't work the way you want it to.
It's like saying just play a rogue if the ninja is banned. One is a parent class, but that doesn't make them completely interchangeable.
Actually, with the rogue, you can take ninja tricks as part of the rogue class feature, and vice versa. So it doesn't have the same problem.
As for the Resolve ability - if that's the concept you want, then find ways to attain it. A fighter taking combat feats to simulate it, a barbarian getting some of those things through rage powers, a paladin (whose mercies can do some of the things resolve can,) etc.
If it's specifically the samurai, less the Japan... then I'd be inclined to oppose the change myself --- though I would consider building Resolve into a prestige class with requisites favouring cavaliers and paladins (BAB, certain feats, medium armour proficiency, special / must own a warhorse.)
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Only the Samurai gets Resolve in its entirety (and the great Order of the Warrior abilities that supplement it) though. Saying "you can have it but you have to take a s~&*ty version of it" isn't really going to satisfy anyone.
Only the Samurai gets Resolve in its entirety (and the great Order of the Warrior abilities that supplement it) though. Saying "you can have it but you have to take a s$@~ty version of it" isn't really going to satisfy anyone.
Then only the samurai can take it. I don't see a problem with this. (My actual problem with simply reflavouring samurai as knights is that bushido is not any sort of knight martial code, and bushido is implicitly what drives a samurai's ability to have resolve. That's why I'd look for a solution other than changing samurai into something else.)
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
the bushido mechanic explained in the Resolve class ability is pretty complicated no doubt
I mean
if it actually existed
then yeah, totally
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Mechanic X reminds me of real-world concept Y, therefore mechanic X can ONLY be used as an implementation of real-world concept Y."
That's pretty much the line of thinking you're embodying, Sandslice. You don't need to explain it; the people in this thread are quite familiar with it already because the rejection of that line of thinking is the whole premise of the thread.
Can someone explain how Resolve = Bushido
"Mechanic X reminds me of real-world concept Y, therefore mechanic X can ONLY be used as an implementation of real-world concept Y."
That's pretty much the line of thinking you're embodying, Sandslice. You don't need to explain it; the people in this thread are quite familiar with it already because the rejection of that line of thinking is the whole premise of the thread.
Well, among other lines of thinking that oppose the concept, yeah. Maybe it's not intended from the thread title, but it comes off as having this line of thinking: "The GM said I can't be X. I don't like his reasons, so I'm going to be X anyway, but call it Y."
ETA: As for bushido, that's admittedly head-canon to explain why samurai have a unique game mechanic.
You don't have to reflavor a samurai to make it a knight. You just call it a knight, and don't wield a katana. Reflavoring would mean describing something in a different way that does the same thing. You don't actually do that in this case. A "knight" (samurai) rides a horse, carries a banner, fights, has resolve, etc. There is no dress code for the samurai class.
Now, if you want to take things a step further, talk your GM into allowing a samurai archetype that replaces the weapon choices with bastard sword, longbow, halberd (pollaxe), and shortsword (poignard).
|
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
And then you have players who absolutely refuse to make a character that fits into a setting, but insist they want to play, and then go off crying to messageboards about their "Inflexible DM".
Feeling entitled much?
Listen up... No matter what BS you spout about "cooperative" gaming. It's still the DM who's doing the donkey work on setting the stage and supporting cast for you to be star actors on. You don't like the production he or she is creating... You're better off finding another DM to cater to your prima donna demands.
Or you have a player that makes a character that will fit into the setting perfectly if you allow them to refluff the flavor text. You deny them the ability to call a Samurai a Knight and then go off crying to messageboards about their "whiny player".
Feeling entitled much?
If you are so inflexible that you deny a perfectly valid character concept because the mechanics of the class have a flavor text that doesn't work in your setting, maybe you are better off writing fiction than trying to force players to cater to your prima donna demands.
It's been proven that religious belief and powerful faith can help reduce pain reception, and the knights of old were supposed to be holy warriors.
It's believable that Resolve works for both concepts; the Samurai applies their resolve to the protection and honor of their Daimyo, while knights apply it to their belief in God.
Now make that kind of thinking interchangeable between Knight/Cavalier/Samurai, and it all makes sense.
Honestly, I've always thought the samurai was a better cavalier than the cavalier.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's been proven that religious belief and powerful faith can help reduce pain reception
I feel like I'm going to regret this, but, source cite?
I saw a documentary on Joan of Arc, where they wanted to explain how she could have done some of the things they claimed.
On the note of her pain tolerance during a particular battle, they did an experiment where they scanned the brains of Christians upon being shown two images (one of significance to the faith, and one not). They did the same to admitted Atheists. During this whole process, they asked patients to rate the pain of stimulation they were being provided.
The brain scans showed an area of the religious people's brains lighting up, an area signifying pain tolerance, but it only lit up in relation to the religious portraits, while the atheists' region of the brain did not activate, or if so it was markedly weaker.
The documentary was called Mystery Files: Joan of Arc, from Netflix
(Btw BDTB, I'm not particularly religious myself, so there's no fervor fueled backlash brewing here.)
It's been proven that religious belief and powerful faith can help reduce pain receptionI feel like I'm going to regret this, but, source cite?
Distinctions can be made between nociception, the neurological detection or injury or threat; the mental experience of pain; and the emotional experience of suffering. Religious experience can affect nociception only indirectly but can have a significant effect on pain and suffering. You can Google at your leisure.
Here's a popular article to chew on: LINK.
|
|
I saw a documentary on Joan of Arc, where they wanted to explain how she could have done some of the things they claimed.
On the note of her pain tolerance during a particular battle, they did an experiment where they scanned the brains of Christians upon being shown two images (one of significance to the faith, and one not). They did the same to admitted Atheists. During this whole process, they asked patients to rate the pain of stimulation they were being provided.
The brain scans showed an area of the religious people's brains lighting up, an area signifying pain tolerance, but it only lit up in relation to the religious portraits, while the atheists' region of the brain did not activate, or if so it was markedly weaker.
The documentary was called Mystery Files: Joan of Arc, from Netflix
(Btw BDTB, I'm not particularly religious myself, so there's no fervor fueled backlash brewing here.)
So you're saying that Joan would have been a Paladin class wise?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would also imagine that someone with an incredible faith in themselves, such as many pro athletes would be able to get a benefit.
Or those of us with enough Deadly Sin: Pride, to constantly say to ourselves, "I've taken worse, this isn't enough pain to make me even pause.". I know I do... (Yay the power of Sin?)
I saw a documentary on Joan of Arc, where they wanted to explain how she could have done some of the things they claimed.
On the note of her pain tolerance during a particular battle, they did an experiment where they scanned the brains of Christians upon being shown two images (one of significance to the faith, and one not). They did the same to admitted Atheists. During this whole process, they asked patients to rate the pain of stimulation they were being provided.
The brain scans showed an area of the religious people's brains lighting up, an area signifying pain tolerance, but it only lit up in relation to the religious portraits, while the atheists' region of the brain did not activate, or if so it was markedly weaker.
The documentary was called Mystery Files: Joan of Arc, from Netflix
(Btw BDTB, I'm not particularly religious myself, so there's no fervor fueled backlash brewing here.)
I'll look for it, I will be extremely interested to find out if they published a paper in a peer reviewed journal. Also, unless they were able to show a reduction in neurotransmitter (either glutamate or substance P) then it won't be particularly convincing.
For example, just off the top of my head, prayer has been shown to activate reward centers in the brain which would be a goto activity for a person of faith while under duress. Or more simply, you would likely find the same levels of "pain tolerance," if you gave the atheist a bag of oreos.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well...
The documentary noted that she believed she was receiving the word of God through the voices of Saints and Angels. So...probably Cavalier/Samurai (Back to the OP, HA!), from Order of the Star, with some sort of mildly prophetic ability, like a trait for Magical Talent: Guidance 1/day.
Whatever it takes man; I like to imagine the mind and faith in either something great, or faith in oneself can lead to remarkable ability.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
And then you have players who absolutely refuse to make a character that fits into a setting, but insist they want to play, and then go off crying to messageboards about their "Inflexible DM".
Feeling entitled much?
Listen up... No matter what BS you spout about "cooperative" gaming. It's still the DM who's doing the donkey work on setting the stage and supporting cast for you to be star actors on. You don't like the production he or she is creating... You're better off finding another DM to cater to your prima donna demands.
Or you have a player that makes a character that will fit into the setting perfectly if you allow them to refluff the flavor text. You deny them the ability to call a Samurai a Knight and then go off crying to messageboards about their "whiny player".
Feeling entitled much?
If you are so inflexible that you deny a perfectly valid character concept because the mechanics of the class have a flavor text that doesn't work in your setting, maybe you are better off writing fiction than trying to force players to cater to your prima donna demands.
I don't force anyone anything. If I run a campaign, not only do I let everyone know IN ADVANCE what kind of campaign it's going to be, what kind of chaaracters will fit, and I only DM for people I know not to be prima donnas in the first place.
I have neither the interest, nor the time to DM for players that are that inflexible. Within the parameters I set, I can be extremely accomodating. Especially if someone comes up with an option I haven't considered.
None of which has anything to do with reflavoring to fit the setting.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wouldn't reflavoring, actually help the DM, with making sure PCs fit the flavor of the game they are running?
Also, I have never seen, any "no reflavoring" rule, for PFS.
I don't see the logic, the point, or even the definition of "reflavoring" a setting. Not any more than I'd "reflavor" hippos as horses. A setting is defined literally by what it is... and what it's not.
Samurai is a lot more than someone who shoots arrows from a horse. The mechanics for mounted archery were already there in the CRB. They don't need a samurai to execute them.
You don't reflavor settings, you reflavor crunch.
You don't take cheese powder and turn it into ranch powder. You take Nacho Cheesier Doritos and turn them into Cooler Ranch Doritos. The corn chip doesn't care what flavor it is, just change the crap you put on it so it tastes like something that works with the rest of the meal.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wouldn't reflavoring, actually help the DM, with making sure PCs fit the flavor of the game they are running?
Also, I have never seen, any "no reflavoring" rule, for PFS.
I don't see the logic, the point, or even the definition of "reflavoring" a setting. Not any more than I'd "reflavor" hippos as horses. A setting is defined literally by what it is... and what it's not.
Samurai is a lot more than someone who shoots arrows from a horse. The mechanics for mounted archery were already there in the CRB. They don't need a samurai to execute them.
You are completely missing the point.
Reflavoring a class, or other mechanic, so that it fits with the theme, of the DM's game.
That is what I am talking about.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Some GM's dont even allow you to reflavor anything.How horrid! I can't even imagine playing under such a limiting GM.This has happened a LOT to me. You have storytellers who are so focused on what their image of a fantasy game is supposed to be that they pigeonhole their players by arbitrarily declaring X, Y, and Z out of bounds. When you try to make a case, or to explain that you could just look at it a different way, they don't want to hear it.
It's extremely frustrating.
And then you have players who absolutely refuse to make a character that fits into a setting, but insist they want to play, and then go off crying to messageboards about their "Inflexible DM".
Feeling entitled much?
Listen up... No matter what BS you spout about "cooperative" gaming. It's still the DM who's doing the donkey work on setting the stage and supporting cast for you to be star actors on. You don't like the production he or she is creating... You're better off finding another DM to cater to your prima donna demands.
At what point did he say he expects a GM to change the setting, or that he would not make a character that would fit into a setting? People on these boards really need to stop reading too far into things and remember that they are not mindreaders.