|
PC's are field agents.
Is it evil to say "this is field work, you need all your limbs" no.
is it unrealistic to say "this is fieldwork, you need all your limbs?" No. Many real world organizations that are less physically demanding than the pathfinders have similar requirements.
Is there an in game reason to not allow such a character? A few.
There's no mechanic for missing a limb. You can't just make them up.
And pathfinder society requires that all conditions except for a name few be cleared.
Not every dm will say no but enough will for it to be problematic.
Having a blanket rule that says characters with peg legs are too inferior to participate in the patherfinder society is definitely discrimination. It becomes discrimination when the character is being judged not because of their own merit, but because of assumed merits for people like them. The US millitary does this, yes, but they are not legally bound by the anti-discrimination laws that govern most other employment positions - it is still discrimination, just not illegal discrimination.
Now, judging characters on merit based on what each character can individually do, that isn't discrimination on disability. If the specific character is too impaired by the peg legs, then they shouldn't be doing field work. Regarding player character creation, this one should be determinable within 1st level adventuring - if the GM determines that my character is just too impaired as is, that's one thing. They may have useful suggestions on how to fix my character so they aren't as impaired. If they blanket ban disabled characters, that's just discrimination.
Since disability seems to be throwing people off, consider gender. If you deny females because, in your experience, females have proved inadequate PFS agents, that is discrimination. If you encounter a character which is an inadequate PFS agent, who just happens to be female, then denying them isn't discrimination. The issue is when you judge them not on their own merit, but on the merits of others "like" them.
Regarding morality, discrimination is unethical, but it isn't evil. I would argue that it is more common in Lawful organizations, as those favoring order are more likely to demand uniformity in their employees or subjects. PFS, being a neutral organization, would care about results on a character by character basis, so discrimination isn't something that makes sense for them to enforce. If anything, PFS thrives due to the diversity of their agents.
Regarding conditions, it is notable that loss of limbs is not a pathfinder "condition." If, during an adventure, a player loses a limb, I would argue that replacing the lost limb with a peg leg or hook hand would be a PFS legal way to resolve the loss of limb. Just like an eyepatch for losing an eye. I will also note that mechanically, regenerating the limbs is a much better option, as the peg legs and hook hands really bad in comparison to actual limbs.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Actually, it would be discrimination if they didn't allow a player with peg legs to join, a character with peg legs is a straw man. Your continued insistence that it's discrimination only reinforces that.
Surely, you have a better argument then that. :-)
Actually Murdock, there is no "official" steel shod or steel soled boots, though of course any footwear grants a character a +2 AC vs. caltrops.
Alas as this is PFS, GM discretion and RAW apply, but I would think reasonable PFS GM's would be ok with a caltrop PC having some snazy footwear to protect themselves from their favored tactic. Were I in the GM seat, steel soled or shot boots would simply double the AC bonus vs. Caltrops that any footwear gives. Or if they are particularly nice, may just let you ignore your own caltrops all together.
But as it stands, any old boots are the only protection there is, and they do not make you immune to caltrops like peglegs, but, really, if you step on your own caltrops, well.... :)
|
|
Actually Murdock, there is no "official" steel shod or steel soled boots, though of course any footwear grants a character a +2 AC vs. caltrops.
Alas as this is PFS, GM discretion and RAW apply, but I would think reasonable PFS GM's would be ok with a caltrop PC having some snazy footwear to protect themselves from their favored tactic. Were I in the GM seat, steel soled or shot boots would simply double the AC bonus vs. Caltrops that any footwear gives. Or if they are particularly nice, may just let you ignore your own caltrops all together.
But as it stands, any old boots are the only protection there is, and they do not make you immune to caltrops like peglegs, but, really, if you step on your own caltrops, well.... :)
Thanks for that. I really did want to know if there was an easier way to deny caltrops. Like cheap, non-magical solutions.
As written, any old boots or "protective footwear" add +2 ac, but with the denial of normal armor, shield, and deflection bonuses, it's a decent option. Best bit is that it isn't consider difficult terrain, nor a trap, so most things have no special immunity there. So a high dex PC is probably unaffected, but a low Dex heavy armor PC is massively impaired by caltrops. Plus you can always fly or jump over them, but neither of these are good options for heavy armor enemies.
Anyway, if you were using them alot, it might be worth it. The penalties are massive, for the peg legs, but they don't cover all skills that armor check would normally cover. Ride, for example, is unaffected by the peg legs.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
]Having a blanket rule that says characters with peg legs are too inferior
Stop. That.
I am not having a conversation with you where everything "says" something that it doesn't say. Saying you cannot do field work does is not in any way shape or form say that you are inferior or less of a person.
to participate in the patherfinder society
as an advanced field agent
Thats the part you left off, thats the part you're ignoring, that's the part that makes it make sense.
It becomes discrimination when the character is being judged not because of their own merit, but because of assumed merits for people like them. The US millitary does this, yes, but they are not legally bound by the anti-discrimination laws that govern most other employment positions - it is still discrimination, just not illegal discrimination.
I don't know how to tell you this but the fictional in game pathfinder society is not bound by the 2016 laws of united states of earth either.
Even if it was, not everyone can do every job. I cannot work around predators anymore because the 300 pound log i took to the foot a while back left me with a limp that makes me look delicious. When I hurt my back there simply wasn't a job on the maintenance crew anymore. The standard is reasonable accommodation. If it doesn't exist then it doesn't apply. It's not just the army, many police forces, paramedics, firefighting units will put you on a desk job if you get severely injured.
Now, judging characters on merit based on what each character can individually do, that isn't discrimination on disability.
So how do you think this should work? We;d have to have an entire rules supplement for this. It would also be discrimination either way, because the 7 strength wizard doesn't have a climb and swim requirement.
If they blanket ban disabled characters, that's just discrimination.
no. if they blanket ban disabled PLAYERS that's discrimination. Treating a fictional character in a less than fair fashion and treating a real human being in a less than fair fashion are not the same thing. Stop treating one like the other. The moral outrage is not only unfounded it's completely preventing any sort of rational discussion.
Since disability seems to be throwing people off, consider gender. If you deny females because, in your experience, females have proved inadequate PFS agents
Your ability to "accidentally" throw fuel on the fire only goes so far so many times.
That's a very different situation. You can't just have random magic cast on your character. Peg legs, on the other hand, are a rules legal item for purchase.
but single legedness is not.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It should be noted, in case it hasn't yet, there's a campaign trait in Skull and Shackles allowing a single peg leg. :-)
|
|
Actually, it would be discrimination if they didn't allow a player with peg legs to join, a character with peg legs is a straw man. Your continued insistence that it's discrimination only reinforces that.
Surely, you have a better argument then that. :-)
Not sure if teasing or not. I'm refering to the Neutral in-game organization, PFS, not the out of character local gaming league of the same name. As for calling it discrimination, that is being brought up in response to posts by others. I very much think the PFS in-game organization would have no issues, provided the PC was a good pathfinder agent.
But by better arguement, you mean, the use of Peg legs being PFS legal equipment and the loss of limbs not being an official condition via pathfinder? Seems pretty cut and dry.
I just meant you're better off dropping the discrimination angle altogether, that was all. :-)
I don't see the slightest reason why the society wouldn't allow a two pegged person do whatever the stats say a two pegged person could do. Perhaps sending an average commoner without legs into combat is essentially murder... but PCs?? With super stats and min/max stat blocks??
Looking at what the two peg legs actually DOES... 1/2 movement, -10 acrobatic/climb/whatever. Ok, That kind of sucks... HOWEVER...
I played a Paladin in Plate Mail recently who (with all his armor/shield penalties) never made a single climb or acrobatic check... and he got up to level 19/Mythic 5. There were just better ways around such things... and movement of 20.... unless magically enhanced (Love Angelic Aspect) is still the same as a barbarian or monk halved..
So for a character who is built around the concept of no legs... they may REALLY not be any further hindered then other TWO-legged characters in the game. When they have the sack race out back, and Two-pegged Pete is keeping up with Sir Heavy armor and Dwarfy McNeverfast... I'm sure the Venture Captains can find some missions that he can still excel at.
don't see the slightest reason why the society wouldn't allow a two pegged person do whatever the stats say a two pegged person could do
It runs into two in/out of game rules that boil down to
No funky conditions on your characters
No house ruling.
and one piece of very useful PFS advice:
Don't hit a gray area.
missing body parts having a mechanical effect gets precariously close to all three.
don't see the slightest reason why the society wouldn't allow a two pegged person do whatever the stats say a two pegged person could doIt runs into two in/out of game rules that boil down to
No funky conditions on your characters
No house ruling.and one piece of very useful PFS advice:
Don't hit a gray area.
missing body parts having a mechanical effect gets precariously close to all three.
Sure, I can accept that there is the out-of-character rule system that governs all the players. Not having limbs could well be outside of the acceptable rules for organized society play. I don't play society, so I don't comment on those rules.
But there is also the 'in-character' gathering of characters that unfortunately is also referred to as 'the Pathfinder Society', and some people were commenting on whether the in-world society would have a use for someone like that.
My stance is that a character with two-pegs, (by RAW) isn't as nearly hampered and can still be a fully functioning Field Agent. With the Right race/class/level combinations, they are no worse off then many other Race/Class/level combinations.
Always gets confusing when some people are referring to Real World society Organized Play... or in-world Pathfinder Society collection of superhero PCs.
In World, if Two-Pegged Pete could keep up with the party and brought some useful skills to the table that others didn't... he'd be a valuable member of the society and sent on Field missions.
But there is also the 'in-character' gathering of characters that unfortunately is also referred to as 'the Pathfinder Society', and some people were commenting on whether the in-world society would have a use for someone like that.
Most comparable real world organizations would not let you go into the field like that. You seem to be making the complaint that reality is unrealistic, even before you consider the fact that our prosthesis are way better than a stick.
My stance is that a character with two-pegs, (by RAW) isn't as nearly hampered and can still be a fully functioning Field Agent. With the Right race/class/level combinations, they are no worse off then many other Race/Class/level combinations.
And what are the right combinations? What is good enough? Do i need a fly spell for 15 minutes or 4 hours a day or 8 hours a day?
This is the problem an organized play system: you either need to make some god awfully complex chart or point system or leave it to the individual DMs. We can't just have you judge all of the characters taking this the way you could in a home a game. Anything that requires that much work and judgement on the DM's part isn't allowed and for good reason.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is no way in which a double peglegged brawler isn't awesome.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But there is also the 'in-character' gathering of characters that unfortunately is also referred to as 'the Pathfinder Society', and some people were commenting on whether the in-world society would have a use for someone like that.Most comparable real world organizations would not let you go into the field like that. You seem to be making the complaint that reality is unrealistic, even before you consider the fact that our prosthesis are way better than a stick.
My complaint is more that Reality has no place in a fantasy world. In Fantasy worlds/books/movies, people with crippling disabilities... are still fantastically awesome who can beat down a dozen mooks while balancing on 1 peg.
Someone above mentioned that you would need two crutches to even move like this... The rules don't state that. They only move at half speed. I just got done painting a Dwarf pirate with admittedly only ONE peg... but he was dual wielding a cleaver and Flintlock.
My stance is that a character with two-pegs, (by RAW) isn't as nearly hampered and can still be a fully functioning Field Agent. With the Right race/class/level combinations, they are no worse off then many other Race/Class/level combinations.And what are the right combinations? What is good enough? Do i need a fly spell for 15 minutes or 4 hours a day or 8 hours a day?
This is the problem an organized play system: you either need to make some god awfully complex chart or point system or leave it to the individual DMs. We can't just have you judge all of the characters taking this the way you could in a home a game. Anything that requires that much work and judgement on the DM's part isn't allowed and for good reason.
Again... not talking about organized play. I can totally understand there are rules that keep the tables fun for everyone.
IN-world though, There are plenty of races/magic/feats that will let you boost your speed. If you're high enough level or have the right gear/stats/skills you can counter the penalties to acrobatics/climb.
There's a world of difference between a level 1 gnome paladin in heavy armor and 2 pegs... and a 10th level human monk with 2 pegs who's maxed out dex and strength and skill focused climb and acrobatics..
One character is a severe encumberence to the party... the other will probably outpace a lot of other characters still.
My point is, that the stats and mechanics are the main issue. You can't look at a character picture and say "oh, he's missing a leg, He's not worthy of field work..." when there are a lot of unoptomized characters with BOTH feet who are also incredibly slow and can't climb a rope.
It's perfectly reasonable for the Venture-Captains to be shaking their heads and saying "I don't know how Pete does it... but he always comes back with the artifact..."
|
|
My stance is that a character with two-pegs, (by RAW) isn't as nearly hampered and can still be a fully functioning Field Agent. With the Right race/class/level combinations, they are no worse off then many other Race/Class/level combinations.And what are the right combinations? What is good enough? Do i need a fly spell for 15 minutes or 4 hours a day or 8 hours a day?
This is the problem an organized play system: you either need to make some god awfully complex chart or point system or leave it to the individual DMs. We can't just have you judge all of the characters taking this the way you could in a home a game. Anything that requires that much work and judgement on the DM's part isn't allowed and for good reason.
I agree with phantom1592.
As for the right combinations, it should be pretty apparent to the player if their character is too impaired after a session or two. DM doesn't need to do anything different - either the player will get it, or they'll die due to the circumstances. There's a reason 1st level characters are allowed free re-builds.
And, as phantom1592 points out, having grossly impaired 1st level characters is pretty normal. Heavy armor paladins or just low strength wizards failing climb, swim and acrobatics checks.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have a sudden urge to find some way to get a centaur character with four peg legs (hooves?).
Too bad I don't think centaur boons are a thing.
Someone above mentioned that you would need two crutches to even move like this... The rules don't state that.
And they don't NOT state that. You've hit a problem with running this in organized play. You're stuck with the dm's judgement of how someone moving around on two 15th century peglegs is because there are not comprehensive rules for that sort of thing.
Again... not talking about organized play. I can totally understand there are rules that keep the tables fun for everyone.
What you're saying is that, in world, there MUST be some sort of system where someone with these injuries can prove themselves ready for fieldwork. that doesn't always exist in the real world, why MUST it exist in fantasy?
The problems with that existing are pretty much the same as their real life counterparts. The society is large, bureaucratic, and far easier to go with the general rule that missing body parts disqualifies you for field work without trying to set up a system to allow in the exceptions.
It's perfectly reasonable for the Venture-Captains to be shaking their heads and saying "I don't know how Pete does it... but he always comes back with the artifact..."
It is.
It's also perfectly reasonable for them to stick pete on a desk Job. you keep trying to tell me it's not.
With one DM which reasonable choice they go with would be decided by 1 dm in a regular campaign. What you want to try to tell me is that the arguments for doing so are so good that NO dm should be able to rule the other way because it's unerealistic or insensible, and you're not remotely doing that.
As for the right combinations, it should be pretty apparent to the player if their character is too impaired after a session or two. DM doesn't need to do anything different - either the player will get it, or they'll die due to the circumstances
and get the rest of the party killed too.
No.
Someone above mentioned that you would need two crutches to even move like this... The rules don't state that.And they don't NOT state that. You've hit a problem with running this in organized play. You're stuck with the dm's judgement of how someone moving around on two 15th century peglegs is because there are not comprehensive rules for that sort of thing.
But there are rules for that. DM's judgement shouldn't even be a factor. The peg leg goes up to the knee (any higher and you use the Prosthetic items), You cut the movement in half, -10 to acrobatics/swim/climb. There are rules, there are mechanics. If they intended you to use a crutch/cane/etc... they would have said so. The rules are always making mention when something may prevent you from using two-handed weapons or holding items. If the rules don't say you need something extra, you don't need anything extra. Peg legs make no mention of your hands at all. Items do what the book says they do, no more-no less.
Even in organized play... are DM's allowed to make up extra rules not listed in the books based on 'realism'? I was under the impression that you needed to find the reference in order to impose things like that. (Again... I don't compete there, just what I'd heard...)
What you're saying is that, in world, there MUST be some sort of system where someone with these injuries can prove themselves ready for fieldwork. that doesn't always exist in the real world, why MUST it exist in fantasy?The problems with that existing are pretty much the same as their real life counterparts. The society is large, bureaucratic, and far easier to go with the general rule that missing body parts disqualifies you for field work without trying to set up a system to allow in the exceptions.
There IS a system in place. There are multiple books that reference the 3 year training period in Absalom where you study with the three Masters of Scrolls, swords, and spells until they decide you're ready to take the confirmation test. If you fail you're out on your ear... I THINK you can try again if you fail... but if you quit you're out for good.
It's been written and established. When you complete your training, you're given the wayfinder and have proved you're capable.
OR... they have the field promotions that can cut out the 3 year training.
Per Golarion, In-world reasoning... If Two-peg Pete has his wayfinder that means that he successfully proved that he was capable of field work. GM #4 may think it's a stupid idea... but Venture-Captain #1 says he passed.
There may be a lot of NPCs that have two-pegs, that were wash outs and stuck in the research library copying scrolls and assigning missions... but Pete proved his worth per Pathfinder Society Expectations and earned his right to go on Field missions. It's the perk of being a PC.
It is.
It's also perfectly reasonable for them to stick pete on a desk Job. you keep trying to tell me it's not.
With one DM which reasonable choice they go with would be decided by 1 dm in a regular campaign. What you want to try to tell me is that the arguments for doing so are so good that NO dm should be able to rule the other way because it's unerealistic or insensible, and you're not remotely doing that.
There is something to be said about Pathfinder Characters being made with Pathfinder rules being acceptable in a pathfinder game.
There will ALWAYS be characters that aren't suitable for every adventure. Either they dumped wisdom, or They have zero social skills, the mission is going to an area that they don't have the linguistic language for.
The game will be a lot less fun if the DM goes over every character and decides on the merits of your character choices before allowing them to play a game.
"Sorry, this adventure involves a boat, I require all characters to be able to have a swim score of at least 13 before they're allowed to play..." or, "This may require something on a tall shelf, no halflings and gnomes allowed."
I haven't played any of the Skull and Shackles game... or looked at the NPC codex. Do they have any highly efficient enemies in this that happen to have peg legs and hooks? For a pirate campaign I'd be very disappointed if they didn't.
But there are rules for that. DM's judgement shouldn't even be a factor.
you left the normal rules of the game, supplements, and setting behind in the dust. Here there be dragons dm calls.
Even in organized play... are DM's allowed to make up extra rules not listed in the books based on 'realism'?
If you hit a rules gray area, yes.
This is a rules gray area.This is why you do not hit rules gray areas in pfs.
I was under the impression that you needed to find the reference in order to impose things like that. (Again... I don't compete there, just what I'd heard...)
Obviously, it's not a competition for starters.
It's been written and established. When you complete your training, you're given the wayfinder and have proved you're capable.
1) they've moved away from this, a lot
2) This is completely circular. You're assuming that they managed to pass the training and you're using that to justify them passing the training.Per Golarion, In-world reasoning... If Two-peg Pete has his wayfinder that means that he successfully proved that he was capable of field work. GM #4 may think it's a stupid idea... but Venture-Captain #1 says he passed.
you're dipping in and out of game as it suits you here. if you stay in game or our of game this argument doesn't have a leg to stand on. itc;s circular
you, the player, are out of game declaring that the in game venture captain said you passed and so the out of game DM has to allow your character. You don't have any authority to do that unless you're the one running the game. This is why there are standardized rules for character creation and why you can't just have one dm sign off on it and have every one else stuck by it.
There is something to be said about Pathfinder Characters being made with Pathfinder rules being acceptable in a pathfinder game.
There are no rules about missing body parts.
The non existing rules for missing body parts have not been made legal for PFS play- the pegleg being a legal purchase does NOT change that.
Even aging, which there are rules for, isn't allowed except for flavor.
The society will permanently side line you with most conditions if you don't get them taken care of.
The game will be a lot less fun if the DM goes over every character and decides on the merits of your character choices before allowing them to play a game.
It's a good thing that all the characters are required to be legal then. this one isn't. It's using a mechanism that sits somewhere between doesn't exist and isn't pfs legal.
But there are rules for that. DM's judgement shouldn't even be a factor.you left the normal rules of the game, supplements, and setting behind in the dust. Here there be
dragonsdm calls.Even in organized play... are DM's allowed to make up extra rules not listed in the books based on 'realism'?If you hit a rules gray area, yes.
This is a rules gray area.
This is why you do not hit rules gray areas in pfs.I was under the impression that you needed to find the reference in order to impose things like that. (Again... I don't compete there, just what I'd heard...)Obviously, it's not a competition for starters.
It's been written and established. When you complete your training, you're given the wayfinder and have proved you're capable.1) they've moved away from this, a lot
2) This is completely circular. You're assuming that they managed to pass the training and you're using that to justify them passing the training.Per Golarion, In-world reasoning... If Two-peg Pete has his wayfinder that means that he successfully proved that he was capable of field work. GM #4 may think it's a stupid idea... but Venture-Captain #1 says he passed.you're dipping in and out of game as it suits you here. if you stay in game or our of game this argument doesn't have a leg to stand on. itc;s circular
you, the player, are out of game declaring that the in game venture captain said you passed and so the out of game DM has to allow your character. You don't have any authority to do that unless you're the one running the game. This is why there are standardized rules for character creation and why you can't just have one dm sign off on it and have every one else stuck by it.
There is something to be said about Pathfinder Characters being made with Pathfinder rules being acceptable in a pathfinder game.There are no rules about missing body parts.
The non...
I don't know if it's just 2am, but I'm having a harder and harder time understanding your points. I think we're at an impasse because you are focused so heavily on Pathfinder Society Organized play rules, where as I only care about the in-setting concept of the Pathfinder Society adventurers club.
I perfectly concede and don't dispute that two-pegged Pete may not fit in the narrow box that Organized play created with their own specific rule system. I know they've changed the rules as they see fit, and they don't apply to me, so I don't read them much.
However, I still believe that in the fantasy setting of Golarion Two-pegged Pete is a perfectly viable, rules legal and quite capable Pathfinder field agent. He could easily show up as an NPC in an adventure or AP, he could show up in the novels, he could show up in the comics. There's nothing inherently 'wrong' that would cause the Venture captain Ambros or Shiela to slam the gates in their face or confine them to the desk duty. It's not how the narrative, rules, sourcebooks have ever presented themselves. There are no 'You must have 3 or more limbs to play' rules set. There are however item rules for pegs... and even traits that let you start with a peg leg. Regardless if they are recognized within the organized play ruleset.
There could be some DMs out there who don't like the idea but that doesn't make it a broken idea. He would be drastically unoptimized... but there are LOTS of characters that are unoptimized.
Peg Leg
Type: Adventuring Gear
Price: 10 gp
Weight: 5 lbs
Source: Pathfinder Player Companion: Pirates of the Inner Sea
Description:
A peg leg is a wooden stump with a socket built on one end to fit over an individual’s knee. Pirates who lose legs at sea often wear peg legs. A peg leg reduces your base speed by 5 feet and imposes a –4 penalty on Acrobatics, Climb, and Swim checks. You take half damage from caltrops. Pirates often carve hidden compartments into their peg legs—these compartments can hold small items weighing up to 1 or 2 pounds (or a few swigs of grog). If you have two peg legs, your base speed is reduced to half and you take a –10 penalty on Acrobatics, Climb, and Swim checks. You are immune to damage from caltrops.
Peg legs presume that the knee joint is intact. If the knee joint is not intact, use the prosthesis statistics instead.
I just want to point out that at no point does it actually day you have to missing a leg. It says it fits over the knee. I could simply bend my knee 90 degrees and attach the peg leg to my knee that way.
In that way you could perfectly well use two peg legs while not getting into a rules grey area at all.
Describe yourself as having two peg legs. Omit that you also have 2 normal legs unless asked. It also makes your character better as in case of dire emergency just remove the pegs and walk on your normal legs again
where as I only care about the in-setting concept of the Pathfinder Society adventurers club.
You keep saying that and yet you keep using organized play as a rationale for why the in game society has to do certain things, like accept someone with peglegs. You make up a story about Pete being a pathfinder and then use the story you made up as evidence for the story being plausible.
I perfectly concede and don't dispute that two-pegged Pete may not fit in the narrow box that Organized play created with their own specific rule system.
This is bull.
Few if any DM's would allow everything that's legal in organized play to be available to the players. I have a druid that rides around on his velociaptor's head in batform, an adorable bundle of fluffy death fox form fighter, a my little pony themed druid that can cuddle a dungeon into submission, and a kangaroo pouch riding gnome with a lance named Joey. Calling the PFS available options a "narrow box" when it encompasses almost the entirety of the very expansive Pathfinder rule set shows that you know nothing about the organization, which leads to...
However, I still believe that in the fantasy setting of Golarion Two-pegged Pete is a perfectly viable, rules legal and quite capable Pathfinder field agent.
And I should believe you because of your obvious non familiarity with the organization?
We don't have (and i certainly don't want) the knowledge of the organization to be so in depth that we have their scheduled loss of use and mandatory retirement policies, but there is an out of game policy of no funky conditions on your character, which means that there is an in game policy of no funky conditions on your character.
Yes, they might let a peg legged character keep doing fieldwork... or they might not. Both are reasonable interpretations from the material that exists. The society itself being rather eclectic, it's even possible to likely that some lodges would allow it, others would not. and some would mandate some form of testing for pete.
But telling me that the society MUST be more accepting of these conditions than their real world counterparts just because it's a fantasy setting is hogwash. There's no argument to it. "because it's fantasy" could just as easily justify anything, "just because". There's no substance to it.
"Its fantasy---->something happens--------> result I want here" works equally well for any result you want.
There could be some DMs out there who don't like the idea but that doesn't make it a broken idea.
It does when a lot of DMs have grounds to say that the character isn't legal.
He would be drastically unoptimized... but there are LOTS of characters that are unoptimized.
There is a difference between unoptimized and deliberately given penalties for no reason. this falls into the latter.
I don't see what's gray about it, unless you're worried about what happens if the peg legs get broken/lost.
The pegleg being available and the missing limb it alludes to being available aren't the same thing.
If the character is still effective when the effect of having two pegs are applied, what's the problem?
Different DM's having different standards of effective. The dm having to come up with an idea of effective.
Okay, I'm lost. Can someone please explain again, why two peg legs are legal in PFS, and explain why they might not be. And please, explain it as if I haven't played in PFS, yet. :-)
Many thanks, in advance. :-)
|
Okay, I'm lost. Can someone please explain again, why two peg legs are legal in PFS, and explain why they might not be. And please, explain it as if I haven't played in PFS, yet. :-)
Two main issues:
1) RP can't trump mechanics. You need to invest actual resources or find rules to support your choice.
2) No rules exist for beginning with one (or zero) legs.
Similarly, you can't begin play with a character who is blind, one-armed, or mute, unless there are rules that govern that (such as an Oracle curse).
The one instance where I'd be comfortable allowing someone to wear a peg leg (although I'm somewhat biased because I want to do this myself) would be for an Oracle with the Lame curse.
Although some GMs still might not be comfortable doing that.
That's what I thought, so outside of playing Skull and Shackles with the peg leg campaign trait, you're out of luck. :-)
Thanks. :-)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Can I get a four peg leg mount?
Okay, I'm lost. Can someone please explain again, why two peg legs are legal in PFS, and explain why they might not be. And please, explain it as if I haven't played in PFS, yet. :-)
Many thanks, in advance. :-)
Why they're legal: the equipment is legal and tells you everything you need to know about how it works
Why they're not legal: The equipment is legal but nothing enters the conditions that they ameliorate into the PFS rules. There is also a pfs standing rule of "no funky conditions on your characters" you need to get yourself back to factory specs before you adventure, with a few exceptions.
This is, at best, a DM's call. In PFS that answer almost means no, because you have a rotating pool of DM's that you'll play with, and any one of them saying no to your character can be problematic. If you have a lot of characters it's no big deal , you use another one, but if it's your first character it could mean not getting to play some nights.
How about someone with no arms or legs that flies around and uses Mage Hand and Unseen Servant to do stuff?
Similarly, you can't begin play with a character who is blind, one-armed, or mute, unless there are rules that govern that (such as an Oracle curse).
Of which there are none. Clouded Vision imposes penalties, various mysteries will impose a wasting condition, or a penalty to your movement speed, and Tongues makes you speak funny in combat in languages that quite a few characters will have a chance of speaking.
None of these are actually Blind, one-armed, or truly mute.
|
|
Similarly, you can't begin play with a character who is blind, one-armed, or mute, unless there are rules that govern that (such as an Oracle curse).None of these are actually Blind, one-armed, or truly mute.
I wasn't actually implying that they were, although I can see how that could be read.
I liked your equating of Wasting to one-armed. I had to think about that for a bit.
Okay, I'm lost. Can someone please explain again, why two peg legs are legal in PFS, and explain why they might not be. And please, explain it as if I haven't played in PFS, yet. :-)
Many thanks, in advance. :-)
Why they're legal: the equipment is legal and tells you everything you need to know about how it works
Why they're not legal: The equipment is legal but nothing enters the conditions that they ameliorate into the PFS rules. There is also a pfs standing rule of "no funky conditions on your characters" you need to get yourself back to factory specs before you adventure, with a few exceptions.
This is, at best, a DM's call. In PFS that answer almost means no, because you have a rotating pool of DM's that you'll play with, and any one of them saying no to your character can be problematic. If you have a lot of characters it's no big deal , you use another one, but if it's your first character it could mean not getting to play some nights.
The legality of peg legs assumes you're only using one of them, which has a much less severe impact on ambulation than actually having to use two. Peg legs are not modern lower limb prosthetics.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The legality of peg legs assumes you're only using one of them, which has a much less severe impact on ambulation than actually having to use two. Peg legs are not modern lower limb prosthetics.
a) the topic is "two peglegs"
b) we have just as many rules for 1 as 2c) the idea that you've given your character too many disadvantages to be legal at 2 peglegs but not 1 is the very dms call you would need to avoid for this to be functionally legal.
where as I only care about the in-setting concept of the Pathfinder Society adventurers club.You keep saying that and yet you keep using organized play as a rationale for why the in game society has to do certain things, like accept someone with peglegs. You make up a story about Pete being a pathfinder and then use the story you made up as evidence for the story being plausible.
I perfectly concede and don't dispute that two-pegged Pete may not fit in the narrow box that Organized play created with their own specific rule system.This is bull.
Few if any DM's would allow everything that's legal in organized play to be available to the players. I have a druid that rides around on his velociaptor's head in batform, an adorable bundle of fluffy death fox form fighter, a my little pony themed druid that can cuddle a dungeon into submission, and a kangaroo pouch riding gnome with a lance named Joey. Calling the PFS available options a "narrow box" when it encompasses almost the entirety of the very expansive Pathfinder rule set shows that you know nothing about the organization, which leads to...
However, I still believe that in the fantasy setting of Golarion Two-pegged Pete is a perfectly viable, rules legal and quite capable Pathfinder field agent.And I should believe you because of your obvious non familiarity with the organization?
We don't have (and i certainly don't want) the knowledge of the organization to be so in depth that we have their scheduled loss of use and mandatory retirement policies, but there is an out of game policy of no funky conditions on your character, which means that there is an in game policy of no funky conditions on your character.
Yes, they might let a peg legged character keep doing fieldwork... or they might not. Both are reasonable interpretations from the material that exists. The society itself being rather eclectic, it's even possible to likely that some lodges would allow...
I'm really not mentioning Organized play at all. I don't understand why you think I am.
My knowledge of the in-universe concept of the Pathfinder Society, Comes from...
Pathfinder Society Primer, Pathfinder Society Field Guide, Faction Guide, Seekers of Secrets.
I have not found anything in there that says in-univers requirements for all limbs to be allowed to have a wayfinder and be a field agent. There is nothing at all limiting about what kind of funky conditions you may want to put on a character.
Whatever organized play does to limit and manage the thousands of players in the same world... is irrelevant to the Golarion setting line.
What I HAVE found are mentions about what training is required to be considered a field agent. I have not seen anything that stops you from being a centaur or Drow or Evil in the Pathfinder Society. PFS organized says no Evil Characters... But the Golarion Setting says that Evil characters are perfectly acceptable, and no fighting in the lodge houses.
My stance is that if a DM doesn't want Two-pegged Pete in his game... He needs to say "I think it would be disruptive, I think it would be a sucky character, I don't see him surviving past book 1... I really don't want you to play it." Be up front, work with the player to find something fun for everyone.
What has no setting grounds is 'The pathfinder society has no use for a 2-pegged field agent.'
I'm really not mentioning Organized play at all. I don't understand why you think I am.
I realize you may not have noticed that (for some reason) this post was removed from the PFS forums, but surely you've noticed the giant [PFS] in the thread title?
I have not found anything in there that says in-univers requirements for all limbs to be allowed to have a wayfinder and be a field agent. There is nothing at all limiting about what kind of funky conditions you may want to put on a character.
You haven't seen a rule so it doesn't exist isn't a very good argument to start with, but you are going further than that. You are saying that it is completely unrealistic for such a requirement to exist.
What has no setting grounds is 'The pathfinder society has no use for a 2-pegged field agent.'
You don't see half of the setting without reading the scenarios and the rules that PFS runs under. The rules requiring you to clear all conditions can easily be read as a very sensible in character policy of the organization, as heading out on a mission with mummy rot isn't good for anyone.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I thought the stated rule was only for conditions gained during an adventure? Preexisting conditions seem like they would be an exception.
I thought the stated rule was only for conditions gained during an adventure? Preexisting conditions seem like they would be an exception.
1) you can try to rules lawyer that way, but part of the problem with going outside the rules in pfs is that multiple DM's have to agree to it. What he's stated is an argument, not a rule. The guide definitely leans more towards RAI than RAW in how it's read or it breaks even easier than the rest of the games rules.
2) There is no mechanism for giving yourself conditions before the start of play.
3) there's (thankfully) no mechanism I know of for having this happen to your character in play.
I'm really not mentioning Organized play at all. I don't understand why you think I am.I realize you may not have noticed that (for some reason) this post was removed from the PFS forums, but surely you've noticed the giant [PFS] in the thread title?
As you say, this thread is not in the PFS forum, and I didn't start commenting until the thread diverged from 'what is legal in organized play' into 'What the in world opinions of field agents would be.' I enjoy participating in Lore conversations, but don't stick my nose in with variant rule systems.
You haven't seen a rule so it doesn't exist isn't a very good argument to start with, but you are going further than that. You are saying that it is completely unrealistic for such a requirement to exist.
Actually, that seems pretty legitimate debate to me. I've presented the books I've read that are relevant to the in-world society... if there is something that I missed or contradicts or retcons the ones I have... I'd love to know it. If those are the sum total of all the lore on the society and the rules you state aren't there... I THINK that it's your turn to show where the rule is that I'm missing. Show somewhere that the Pathfinders and the Decemvirate or the Venture Captains actually DO disqualify people with appropriate skills simply because they don't like them or want them...
"Read through the rules, and that rule doesn't exist" seems a very reasonable stance to me.
You don't see half of the setting without reading the scenarios and the rules that PFS runs under. The rules requiring you to clear all conditions can easily be read as a very sensible in character policy of the organization, as heading out on a mission with mummy rot isn't good for anyone.
Those are irrelevant to the setting. I'm currently running Shattered Star which has all the players as Pathfinders working out of a Lodge. We do not clear all our conditions after each chapter. We have to deal with them as we go. Organized play and 'the setting' are completely autonomous.
But even then, do you have any examples from the scenarios that indicate your points?
As you say, this thread is not in the PFS forum, and I didn't start commenting until the thread diverged from 'what is legal in organized play' into 'What the in world opinions of field agents would be.' I enjoy participating in Lore conversations, but don't stick my nose in with variant rule systems.
The second one is simple, as I keep getting at.
No sourcebook goes into SO much depth about an organization that they would ever spell out everything that would or would not disqualify someone from membership. By your same argument there is no in game information on the number of orphanages you can burn down and still be a pathfinder, so the pathfinders MUST be ok with serial orphanopyromancy, because there's no rule about it.
This means that, as with any spot not covered by the rules at all, the DM needs to make a judgement call because there is insufficient data on the subject.
Actually, that seems pretty legitimate debate to me. I've presented the books I've read that are relevant to the in-world society... if there is something that I missed or contradicts or retcons the ones I have... I'd love to know it.
No.
This is not legitimate debate this is moving the goalposts.
You are treating your position as evidenced and correct unless shown otherwise and an honest examination doesn't work that way.
Show somewhere that the Pathfinders and the Decemvirate or the Venture Captains actually DO disqualify people with appropriate skills simply because they don't like them or want them...
Who is nester rees? / What does he look like? “Master
Rees is an appraiser and relic broker and friend of thePathfinder Society; he is a middle-aged man of Garundi
descent who has worked with us for some time now.
While he tried going on field missions as a Pathfinder
in his youth, his weak constitution limits his ability to
travel. He has a very sharp mind, however, and the ability
to identify genuine Azlanti relics.”
Those are irrelevant to the setting. I'm currently running Shattered Star which has all the players as Pathfinders working out of a Lodge. We do not clear all our conditions after each chapter. We have to deal with them as we go. Organized play and 'the setting' are completely autonomous.
They very much are not.