Michael Haneline |
So, recently I played my warpriest that had just learned the Fang and Thunder style, and showed my character art to the table at the start of the game: Warpriest Art
This apparently caused some contention and lead to a conversation something like this:
GM: "I thought your character uses a klar"
Me: "A steel klar, yes."
GM: "That's not what a klar looks like. A klar is a big lizard skull with a blade stuck in it."
Me: "Well, it says that 'Recently the armorers of southern Varisia
have started crafting these bladed shields from steel' instead of from skulls, so like, do even the steel ones have to look like skulls, instead of just a small shield with blades on it?"
GM: "Yes"
Me: "Ok, well, it's just fluff man, I'm not changing the mechanical stats. That just how HER klar looks."
GM: "That's against the rules. PFS has a very strict no reskinning rule, and you're breaking it right now."
Me: "Ok, whatever."
GM: "I just want everyone to know that not what your character's shield really looks like."
Is this a typical PFS judge reaction to this? Are all those Varisian armor makers taking the time to make steel klars look like skulls instead of just crafting them close enough to function the same? Should I be expecting this response regularly to my "inaccurate" character art? Have any of the sources that the klar is printed in gone into more detail about what steel klars look like?
Deighton Thrane |
Well, they're not wrong about the no re-skinning existing, but it's more to prevent things like a druid saying that their horse is really a large cat, because that could affect other things, like how a goblin might react to it. As far as I know, there's not descriptions of what a metal klar looks like, spiked shield with a long blade out the front looks pretty much like I'd expect a no frills metal klar would look like. As long as you're not saying it isn't a klar, or that it's unrecognizable as one, I don't see the problem.
pauljathome |
There is a "no reskinning" rule. It is very often ignored but a GM is within their rights to enforce it.
That said, absolutely nobody knows where "illegal reskinning" ends and "legal refluffing" starts. Especially when ALL we're talking about is the character art.
Personally, I think the "no reskinning" rule was one of Paizos bigger mistakes. The "there might be consequences" is pretty trivially dealt with. The goblins hate ALL Horses, even ones that look like Pigs or Deer.
Netopalis RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32 |
Brew Bird |
The traditional form of this tribal weapon is a short metal blade bound to the skull of a large horned lizard, but a skilled smith can craft one entirely out of metal.
Keyword being "traditional". A "traditional" longsword has a long flat double-edged blade, wide cross guard, and a pommel. But I don't think any GM would say that every longsword in the game has to look like that (especially when numerous official sources speak to the contrary). It just has to be a sword that's long.
If there's a specific "traditional" form of a weapon, then there should certainly be nontraditional forms as well, right? So what's the matter with your Klar being nontraditional?
Though if that fails, just say there's a big metal skull on the side of the shield your GM can't see, and hope next campaign you have a GM who's not so uptight.
Ascalaphus Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, they're not wrong about the no re-skinning existing, but it's more to prevent things like a druid saying that their horse is really a large cat, because that could affect other things, like how a goblin might react to it. As far as I know, there's not descriptions of what a metal klar looks like, spiked shield with a long blade out the front looks pretty much like I'd expect a no frills metal klar would look like. As long as you're not saying it isn't a klar, or that it's unrecognizable as one, I don't see the problem.
I think this is the best test to see if you're crossing the no-reskinning line.
If a random panel of 100 people from Northern Avistan would readily agree that "that's clearly a klar" then you're good, even if some of the archconservatives complain that it has no real skull on it.
Bear Burning Ashes |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Having a 14th level Shoanti Thunder-and-Fanger myself, conversations like these always turned into fun in-character discussions:
"We Shoanti are often looked down upon by those that call themselves more 'civilized'. They hold their noses when we drink our kumis, or they tell us our klars would be better made of metal, but the one thing they would not ask us to change are the promises we keep. When a Shoanti gives his word, people across the seas recognize it for its value."
Since a skull Klar is the trophy of a Shoanti's "Quest for Klar", usually marking their transition into adulthood or warrior status, having to explain why you left it behind and opted for a modern recreation can be great character development.
Maybe you don't care about tradition, maybe you didn't want to mar your shiny trophy with combat, maybe it's mounted somewhere at home, or maybe [insert reason here].
But as long as you're describing it at the table as a "Klar", mechanically, and not reskinning it as something else, you're good.
Aristophanes |
4 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Grouchy old Shoanti Warrior": You call that a klar? You younguns have no respect for tradition! Look at that thing! All shiny and clean. *grumblegrumble*. In my day we had a proper klar that'd scare the britches off an Ustlav barbarian! A rusty blade stickin' outta a real skull! And the skull would still have bits o'flesh an' scales stickin' to it! An' it smelled like death! What in tarnation do ya polish that thing with anyhoo? It smells like a Varisian cathouse! no sir, no respect...*grumble grumble grumble*
Michael Haneline |
NOTE: So, I need to admit something here. The conversation in the original post is actually a fictional anecdote that combines two different actual conversations I had on the matter. One of those people saw this thread, recognized part of the conversation, and was upset that I was putting words in their mouth. That was not my intention, but nonetheless, I feel I have crossed a line here, and should fess up.
If any mod sees this, I'd appreciate if you could attach the above to the original post, as I can no longer edit it.