|
2. If my Ninja-that-isn't is an example of fluff, then why is a Paladin-that-isn't an example of reskinning?
It *is* fluff. It isn't reskinning, not in the "gone too far with a mechanical benefit" way. There isn't a good verbal way of delineating between 'fluff-reskinning' and 'mechanical-actual-reskinning'.
FYI - there's nothing in the Ninja class that requires any sort of particular background - your elf Ninja is completely legitimate, and isn't really a reskinning at all.
Developer
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you play a ninja and say he's a paladin, that's cool, until such time as there's an effect that specifically affects ninjas. At that point, you can't say, "I'm immune to that effect. I'm a paladin." While you can, in character, call your equipment, your class, your race, or your animal companion anything you want, you must always be up-front with the GM and cannot skirt mechanical effects by being an elf one minute to avoid a sleep effect and then reveal yourself to really be a human in disguise the next combat when faces against a ranger with humanoid (elf) as a favored enemy. That's the difference folks are eluding to. Roleplay is encouraged, but not when it means your "pig" animal companion (which uses dog stats) is immune to goblin attacks specifically designed to target dogs due to racial hate.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Frankly, I don't even like the idea that someone, in character, is going to be like "Oh, he just used his Smite ability on that dragon." Because there is no Smite ability in-game.
That seems to be over-stating the case, Erick. There's a lot of game mechanics that the folks of Golarion know perfectly well: specific spells (names, effects, areas of effect, legal targets, etc) channelling positive and negative energy, etc. Characters have a good understanding of spell level. (These are 1st-rank spells. That means that beginning wizards can cast them...) For spell-casters, at least, characters probably have terms for Class level.
Outside of spells, there are other mechanics that folks in the Inner Sea understand. For example, ki (otherwise, wyroot weapons don't make any sense) and probably that it comes in discrete quantitites.
They may have different terms for these things than we players use. (I can't imagine they talk about "Combat Expertise" and mean the same thing we do.) But whether they use "fifth level", or not, they surely have a term for wizards-who-can-cast-fireball. (And as long as we allow that the characters have some name for the thing, we might as well decide that they do have our name for the thing.)
I think there are some classes that are well-enough defined that characters understand that it's a special thing. Clerics, for example. Most prestige classes. Others are generic. Fighters. Rogues. If you had a rogue who claimed to be a finesse fighter, I can't imagine anybody in-world would notice.
I stick Paladin in the first category. And the paladin certainly understand that he can call on a power a couple of times each day, and that it helps him in combat, both offensively and defensively. And as long as he understand that, and give it a name, he might as well call it "Smite Evil."
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
He hasn't been mistaken for a Paladin, but my Fighter gets some confused looks from the GM about halfway through the session, after he attempts all the knowledge checks, identifies the magic items, deciphers the ancient glyphs, and attempts to recognize every spell cast.
Lore Wardens: better than Bards.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
My fussy, prissy and arrogant Chelaxian noble was frequently mistaken for a bard or dabbling oracle, mainly due to his wide array of skills as well as his distaste for melee combat. He would often supply buffs to the party such as Haste or, at best, attempt sleep of debilitating spells on enemies that threatened him.
Upon watching one of his party-mates (who was either his sister, wife, mistress or cousin, depending on who you asked) be turned to stone due to the gaze of a certain two enemy creatures, he tearfully slipped on his rather stylish smoked goggles...
...and vomited a swarm of spiders all over one of the offending beasts, which he then promptly set on fire. While the rest of the party avoided the petrifying gazes of the two creatures, he strode forward, benefiting from magical good Fortune and the protection of his goggles while the beasts themselves dealt with the exact opposite effect, seeming unable to make successful actions or attacks at critical moments.
The second beast fell into a deep Slumber, while the first, still on fire, tried to extricate itself from the swarm of spiders. My Chelaxian noble then pulled a war razor across the throat of the slumbering beast while the rest of the party fell upon the other wounded creature and finished it off.
After the fight, the group's Fighter turned to my noble and warily asked, "What are you?"
To which, still in tearful despair at the fate of his compatriot, he desolately responded, "...I'm complicated."
...or a witch with all kinds of fun alchemical items, take your pick.
|
|
There isn't a good verbal way of delineating between 'fluff-reskinning' and 'mechanical-actual-reskinning'.
FYI - there's nothing in the Ninja class that requires any sort of particular background - your elf Ninja is completely legitimate, and isn't really a reskinning at all.
Okay, I guess I get what you're saying. I suppose I'm just concerned that some GM is going to read threads like this and then start insisting that all Ninjas at his table be ninja-like and so on, which I think would be disastrous.
I suppose you could also say that the Paladin is actually a unique case, as the only class that has mechanical penalties for behaving or not behaving certain ways, which is interesting. On the other hand, you could always take the Paladin's code upon yourself with a character of whatever class, and, if you broke it, simply not use your class abilities until you received atonement. Food for thought, I guess...
|
|
They may have different terms for these things than we players use. (I can't imagine they talk about "Combat Expertise" and mean the same thing we do.) But whether they use "fifth level", or not, they surely have a term for wizards-who-can-cast-fireball. (And as long as we allow that the characters have some name for the thing, we might as well decide that they do have our name for the thing.)
I think there are some classes that are well-enough defined that characters understand that it's a special thing. Clerics, for example. Most prestige classes. Others are generic. Fighters. Rogues. If you had a rogue who claimed to be a finesse fighter, I can't imagine anybody in-world would notice.
I stick Paladin in the first category. And the paladin certainly understand that he can call on a power a couple of times each day, and that it helps him in combat, both offensively and defensively. And as long as he understand that, and give it a name, he might as well call it "Smite Evil."
I guess in some ways this is an issue of personal taste. Some will find their tackiness meter getting triggered more easily than others. For instance I personally don't even like the idea, in most cases, that a character actually knows how many times a day he can do a certain thing. As far as he's concerned he's just doing his best and rising to the occasion, or not. System awareness like that is for us players.
And I think we're on thorny territory when we try to decide some kind of consensus for what classes are or aren't "well defined" vs those that are "generic." Every class, even many prestige classes, can be pretty generic if you just don't play them the way they were envisioned. Personally, I think it's extremely important that people be able to do this. It can be seen as the very heart of character customization, really.
If you just expand the thinking you mention above regarding the Rogue that calls himself a finesse fighter, you'll see you can take it very far indeed.
|
I play a character who is obviously horrifically tainted by demonic blood - in fact, the entire left half of his body is covered in barbs and scales. He is often accompanied by his animal companion, a giant dire wolf with ash-gray fur and demonic bone spurs piercing out of its flesh. In battle, his wounds seem to vanish from sight and he summons fireballs and beams of searing flame from his mouth.
He's also literally just a Paladin.
|
|
If you play a ninja and say he's a paladin, that's cool, until such time as there's an effect that specifically affects ninjas. At that point, you can't say, "I'm immune to that effect. I'm a paladin." While you can, in character, call your equipment, your class, your race, or your animal companion anything you want, you must always be up-front with the GM and cannot skirt mechanical effects by being an elf one minute to avoid a sleep effect and then reveal yourself to really be a human in disguise the next combat when faces against a ranger with humanoid (elf) as a favored enemy. That's the difference folks are eluding to. Roleplay is encouraged, but not when it means your "pig" animal companion (which uses dog stats) is immune to goblin attacks specifically designed to target dogs due to racial hate.
Sure, obviously I'm in no disagreement with any of this. It's a shame some people try to get away with piddly little benefits through means like this. And thanks for the clarification.
|
|
I play a character who is obviously horrifically tainted by demonic blood - in fact, the entire left half of his body is covered in barbs and scales. He is often accompanied by his animal companion, a giant dire wolf with ash-gray fur and demonic bone spurs piercing out of its flesh. In battle, his wounds seem to vanish from sight and he summons fireballs and beams of searing flame from his mouth.
He's also literally just a Paladin.
** spoiler omitted **
See, that's cool. Anyway, it works for me, mang. ;)
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, I'm pretty sure my paladin knows how many times a day he can Smite Evil, or Lay on Hands.
--
This topic abuts into another, about table etiquette. Let's say that Kyle has a witch that feigns being a paladin. He gets caught telling a lie, or breaking his word, and Kyle decides he won't use any more of his powers until he buys an atonement. Let's say Todd is playing at the same table, and pretends that his character doesn't know how many channel positive energy uses he has per day.
And let's say you're at the table, too, and your sorcerer gets seriously wounded. Kyle's witch won't cast cure light wounds on you, until he gets an atonement. Todd's cleric decides that, rather than casting cure light wounds on you, he'll try to channel positive energy, but he's used up all his daily uses, so the attempt fizzles. Your character dies.
I'm sure you would be cool with them role-playing their ignorance of game mechanics. But a lot of players would see this as rude behavior.
|
|
Oh, I'm pretty sure my paladin knows how many times a day he can Smite Evil, or Lay on Hands.
<snip>
I don't think anyone is advocating intentionally making bad decisions based on in-game vs. out-of-game knowledge. It's just fun for people who want it to roleplay their characters as being more "dynamic." In the situation you describe, I'd have my cleric realize his channel energy was exhausted, and understand that the cure spell is his only option, even if he doesn't think "I have six of these per day."
Nor is anyone advocating banning roleplaying that you do know you've got six per day.
|
|
Oh, I'm pretty sure my paladin knows how many times a day he can Smite Evil, or Lay on Hands.
<snip>
I don't think anyone is advocating intentionally making bad decisions based on in-game vs. out-of-game knowledge. It's just fun for people who want it to roleplay their characters as being more "dynamic." In the situation you describe, I'd have my cleric realize his channel energy was exhausted, and understand that the cure spell is his only option, even if he doesn't think "I have six of these per day."
Nor is anyone advocating banning roleplaying that you do know you've got six per day.
That's it exactly. You don't have to think so literally about it. I prefer to play in a world where characters aren't asking each other "how many more times today can you heal me?," even if their players are saying that to each other out of game. Instead the character just says "I'm hurt!" and then the healer either heals them or says "I'm too drained; I've not the strength of will left to heal you now (or whatever)."
This obviously does not mean I want people to be a dick and then call that "roleplaying." But yes, if it was a case where somebody was playing an Inquisitor as a paladin and had defied their personal code and was refusing to heal me until they got atonement, I would totally respect that as long as the player was being committed, serious and stylish about it.
EDIT: In other words, I am fine with most things players do as long as I can tell that their motivation is commitment to the illusion of the game, rather than a desire to troll me and watch me die. Obviously, however, even this kind of commitment can be taken too far. I'm not sure I'd actually want to roleplay with Sean Penn or Dennis Hopper or somebody. And then again...maybe I would...
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
For instance I personally don't even like the idea, in most cases, that a character actually knows how many times a day he can do a certain thing. As far as he's concerned he's just doing his best and rising to the occasion, or not. System awareness like that is for us players.
Prepared spellcasters—who literally decide how many times they'll be able to cast a given spell on a given day—are pretty hard on that viewpoint.
Not to mention, most people in real-life know how often and how well they can do the things they're good at or that they do regularly. I know how much spice I can eat before things get nasty. I know how much wine to put in my wife's glass after a meal, and I know the different amount if it's before a meal. I know how long I have between when my phone shows one bar of battery life and when I have to recharge it.
And if I regularly put myself in situations where my life depended on this knowledge, I'd make damn sure I knew it as precisely as possible.
Maybe you enjoy having your fantasy heroes be less competent than a dude in a cubicle farm, and that's fine; but it sure does strain credulity, way more than having them instead know what they're capable of.
"I know what you're thinking, punk. You're thinking 'did he fire six shots or only five?' Now to tell you the truth I forgot myself in all this excitement."
:)
-j
|
|
For instance I personally don't even like the idea, in most cases, that a character actually knows how many times a day he can do a certain thing. As far as he's concerned he's just doing his best and rising to the occasion, or not. System awareness like that is for us players.Prepared spellcasters—who literally decide how many times they'll be able to cast a given spell on a given day—are pretty hard on that viewpoint.
Prepared spellcasters do indeed make this kind of play challenging. Just another reason I love them so much...
Not to mention, most people in real-life know how often and how well they can do the things they're good at or that they do regularly. I know how much spice I can eat before things get nasty. I know how much wine to put in my wife's glass after a meal, and I know the different amount if it's before a meal. I know how long I have between when my phone shows one bar of battery life and when I have to recharge it...
None of these examples are really very similar at all to what I'm talking about. Even if we use your examples, they don't hold up. I don't know exactly how many drinks I can have before I'll be too impaired to do X. I have a pretty good idea, but it's not precise, and has failed me on many unfortunate occasions. Look, I think it's just two different ways of approaching the game. Some people think system talk is tacky in character and should be omitted as much as possible. Other people don't mind it, or even think it's necessary. Just two different styles, mang.
Maybe you enjoy having your fantasy heroes be less competent than a dude in a cubicle farm, and that's fine; but it sure does strain credulity, way more than having them instead know what they're capable of.
Really, Jiggy?
|
I usually create a human universalist mage, but I would like to try a primal mage because I like chaotic aspect of it. I would also like to try being a word caster as well as an illusionist, or an enchanter. In my next campaign I will be playing an aasmir, but I like the idea of playing a tiefling or a gnome, which I think will be fun. I don't always play the same character, I notice that each character I create is dealing with a pyscological facet of mine; currently I am playing a mage who was wrongly accused of being a demonic witch by the Mendevian Crusade and set up for execution until being saved by his(mine) barbarian wife who is a guard in the crusade. What didn't help is that he is carrying the staff of a witch that was executed more than twenty years ago, and now whose spirit resides within the staff, teaching him arcane secrets and guiding his path. She recently left the staff and became an archon, so now my characters are on their own in the darklands dressed in Drow skin. It is a lot of fun. I got the idea of the witch's staff from BG2 "Staff of Rynn". I always loved the tragedy of the story behind the staff, that I incorporated it into my game. I always loved the idea of magic and it frustrates my friend because he tells me "you should play against type", but I love playing a mage, it is a lot of fun because you can cast spells and just have fun with magic. I love playing a mage.
|
|
I ALWAYS tell people when they are making a character the class name is just a fluff title for a class that offers rules mechanics.
If you want to be a naruto ninja doing supernatural ninja abilities usually a caster is better at it than a ninja. Infact I have made someones "ninja" as a pure oracle. You tell the DM you are X class and you character gets to act like Y class.
When I help people make characters I tell them to think of a character or characters from a tv show, movie, cartoon, book, comic, or whatever to help influence them. Then build that character as a begginger.
For my purposes if they renamed all the classes by the number they are in the core I would view them no differently.
|
|
Currently playing a wizard archmage who tells (most) people he's a Paladin. Due to the nature of selling souls, a cover identity needed to be established. Now being a better being, he has a paladin follower and friend, both of whom defer to him as the greater paladin. It's quite fun :)
Sounds like fun :)
|
He hasn't been mistaken for a Paladin, but my Fighter gets some confused looks from the GM about halfway through the session, after he attempts all the knowledge checks, identifies the magic items, deciphers the ancient glyphs, and attempts to recognize every spell cast.
Lore Wardens: better than Bards.
I do this with no-archetypes fighter, because Lore Warden makes it too easy. :)
I got the Gloves of the Cheating Apprentice, and spent the 7 PA for a Discerning Jade Wayfinder...and he's got Eldritch Heritage.
FYI: The Spectacles of Comprehension are probably worth the 3K for your Lore Warden if you haven't bought them yet...they're on the list of things I intend to get for Umberto.
The Paladin in Chains has been making his way through Knot of Thorns. However, the NPC populace is very opposed to his calling himself a paladin. In fact, despite him doing the right thing, they get pretty huffy and particular about it. I'm starting to think they know mechanics and abilities better than they ought.
I played a Rogue/Ranger/Cleric in 3.0 that was kind of a "paladin" of the god of murder and death. He had a very jaded backstory, and the god was there with an olive branch at the right time. As a rogue, he was working the streets in a new city, and was collared by the local theives guild, which worshipped this god (Soth, I think, was a homebrew game). He did a few tasks for them, then started paying dues, but also found out that being a priest of Soth immediately bumped you up in rank in the guild, so he did it. In the course of studying, he swallowed the Soth kool-aid, so to speak and became in credibly devout, taking over the assassins of the guild. He was forming a death cult out of homeless people when the game ended.
He still adventured with his old pals, they had no idea how far dow nthe rabbit hole he had gone...
This is one of the few characters I've had where I looked just as forward to city "Downtime" as I did actually adventuring with him.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My paladin is actually weird enough on his own.
Pit-born tiefling with a connection to the first world (fey foundling).
Worships Iomedae but prefers to use a scimitar.
Specializes in self healing and cannot channel positive energy.
Overlooks most minor indiscretions by other players due to his oath "never let lesser evils distract you from the pursuit of just vengeance."
|
|
My paladin is actually weird enough on his own.
Pit-born tiefling with a connection to the first world (fey foundling).
Worships Iomedae but prefers to use a scimitar.
Specializes in self healing and cannot channel positive energy.
Overlooks most minor indiscretions by other players due to his oath "never let lesser evils distract you from the pursuit of just vengeance."
I think most people would assume that Grace, my paladin, is some kind of druid or maybe a fey sorceress or something, given her fondness for nature and her general lack of armor. I remember the first time she used Smite Evil in Night March of Kalkamedes, someone else said "What!? You're a paladin!?"
|
He doesn't consider himself a paladin, but I have a fun Cavalier/Cleric of Calistria that seems to operate a bit like one. ^_^
And last week I *was* playing my lawful good Tiefling paladin of Iomedae who proudly hails from her Chelish homeland.
Other players kept trying to distract me: "Don't you have to do stuff for Asmodeus?" My answer: "Well, it IS the law of the land to pay some homage to the Prince of Law, but my worship and focus goes to the Inheritor, of course! I follow the law, but devote myself to the Lady of Valor!" The other players finally decided that I was insane. ^_^
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I know this lady, she had this big ass odd smelling "iguana".
true story!!
|
|
I have a ninja who has traits to fill out his knowledges and a higher int than he has dex or cha. He has perform (sing) and goes about in combat singing and rarely looks like he hits things before hard with his little stick, but he always seems to steal the knockout blow. As far as anyone is concerned, he is a bard and he fills the role very well. He's a sap master and uses items to cast a few spells, but in general...he's a bard.
|
|
I have a character who is modeled on Indiana Jones - he investigates old ruins and retrieves valuable artifacts that he finds there. It seemed like very Pathfindery sort of behavior. I was introducing the character at a recent game, and another player said, "Oh, you're an archeologist bard?"
I hadn't looked at all the archetypes to realize that was a thing! I had put together a multi-class rogue/cleric with thievery and knowledge domains (Calistria has both of those domains AND the whip).
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I have a character who is modeled on Indiana Jones - he investigates old ruins and retrieves valuable artifacts that he finds there. It seemed like very Pathfindery sort of behavior. I was introducing the character at a recent game, and another player said, "Oh, you're an archeologist bard?"
I hadn't looked at all the archetypes to realize that was a thing! I had put together a multi-class rogue/cleric with thievery and knowledge domains (Calistria has both of those domains AND the whip).
Heh, amusingly even though both my archeolgists have whips in (combined) 9 levels, they've not been used.
|
|
I have a character who is modeled on Indiana Jones - he investigates old ruins and retrieves valuable artifacts that he finds there. It seemed like very Pathfindery sort of behavior. I was introducing the character at a recent game, and another player said, "Oh, you're an archeologist bard?"
I hadn't looked at all the archetypes to realize that was a thing! I had put together a multi-class rogue/cleric with thievery and knowledge domains (Calistria has both of those domains AND the whip).
I made a similarly inspired archaeologist, she's a monk/bard/gunslinger. When I go to make a character I don't ever look at a list of classes and pick one I want to play. I make a concept of who the character is. The classes to me are just a mechanical grouping of powers from which I pick and choose to get the mix of abilities I envision for the persona I am making.
|
|
I know this lady, she had this big ass odd smelling "iguana".
** spoiler omitted **
true story!!
"his name doesn't translate well, but in the tongue of his people he is called 'champion'.
My name here is loosely champion in the name of my people because of that book. :)Some of my characters define themselves by their profession, not their class. Does that count?
Kodiak sees himself as a marriage councilor first, inquisitor second.
Galdur XXI is a master jeweler first, a dwarf second, then a summoner.
To the OP (blog?):
I once played a half-orc "Paladin of Chaos". Yes he is a master of arms and yes he calls upon the power of the divine. No he doesn't summon a mount. Why bring the power of the divine to the mortal world and encase it in a horse? He brought the divine into himself for strength and vitality. Lo it is not for the weak, when the divine leaves, this mortal frame becomes tired. Very, very, tired.
I also had a beardless dwarf mage, whose breadth of knowledge, dagger skills, & creature calling* stunned his allies. So great were his skills that the party did not realize when they left the dwarven tunnels for the elven forest that the dwarf wasn't with them anymore, or that the elven ranger wasn't with them from the beginning (they DID notice he was a very short elf). When asked why he fell prey to the fey sleep magic he simply replied, 'it would be easier to stay with the party if I let myself be captured.'
*Knowledge: bluff, disguise, sleight of hand, Knowledge: bluff, bag of tricks, wands of magic missile & silent image, Knowledge: bluff, & use magic device.
I think this is the only rogue I have played and one of the few halflings.
|
|
Professor Fether is a motor-mouthed snake-oil salesman in a Doctor's Outfit and Doctor's Mask, who constantly attempts to peddle his patent medicines to PC and NPC alike (though he has been know to dole out "samples" to prospective buyers free of charge). He's also a crack shot with a bow, packs 3 natural attacks, deals precision damage when flanking, and can cajole, lie, threaten, or sneak his way out of most situations.
The rest of the party thought he was an Alchemist/Rogue. In fact, he's a Tengu Inquisitor (Heretic) of Calistria with a Chirurgeon's Bag and the Conversion Inquisition. Actually having the ability to heal people removes the need to use audience plants during a sales pitch, and what better way to hide a beak than to wear a mask sporting the same?
|
|
In Kingmaker once, someone brought in a self-proclaimed Paladin of Nethys. His sword glowed when he shouted, "Smite Evil!", even though he was only smiting a dire boar.
I really love this idea. Of course the martial champions of The All-Seeing Eye would have a penchant for the arcane. Arcane Pool can stand in for Smite, Bladebound mimics Divine Bond, and Hexcrafter with the Healing and Lifegiver hexes can substitute for Lay on Hands. Hexcrafter also gets access to Brand, which combined with Spellstrike makes for a stylish smite.
It's not much of a stretch, but I have a kitsune ninja planned for an upcoming campaign that will insist up and down that he's a human 'specialist' ie rogue. If caught in his (gray) fox form? "By the gods, I've become a werewolf!"
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have an Oath of Vengence/Mysterious Stranger Paladin I simply call "Stranger." Personality-wise he is a Clint Eastwood Man-With-No-Name knock off, and is just as likely to offer you a flask of whiskey as he is a potion of healing. He is constantly on the border of falling, though more due to non-lawful acts than due to non-good ones. He is far more devoted to Iomedae than he is to the church of Iomedae. He does not boast about his Paladinhood or preach to others about it. In fact, the other players at the table may not even realize he is a paladin until he does a detect evil or lay on hands. To him, his faith and oaths are a private matter.
I've got three characters like this:
Nostrum: A LG bard who acted like a Cleric/Paladin. He was a member of a cult that worshipped Rovagug as a lawful good diety, who just wanted to wipe out the entire world to make it a nicer place. His holy symbol was a bit interesting
Charlaxis Mephistophiles Wright: A lawyer. I hand out those cards at the start of each PFS game, as well as giving the GM a piece of paper saying he is actually an inquisitor. Due to his high Bluff, Intimidate and Diplomacy skills, he basically gets by pretending he is a lawyer until we get to combat. Then he draws his great sword, and starts throwing judgements left right and centre ;)
Captain Bartholomew: Haven't had a chance to play him yet, but a Summoner who pretends to be a Pirate/Swashbuckler. He has a fake parrot on his shoulder, and uses bluff and Profession (Ventriloquist) to make it appear like his stuffed parrot is talking. He calls it Polly. When he gets into combat, he will summon the actual Polly from the aether.
These are legitimately my favourite type of flavourful characters to play. When people finally workout what your character is, they get heaps excited. Equally, they often have the most memorable RP moments.