I have a character in my game playing a kitsune who loves to enter fox form with Fox Shape.
Fox Shape (Kitsune)You can change into a fox in addition to your other forms.
Prerequisites: Cha 13, base attack bonus +3, kitsune.
Special: A kitsune may select this feat any time she would gain a feat.
Benefit: You can take the form of a fox whose appearance is static and cannot be changed each time you assume this form. Your bite attack’s damage is reduced to 1d3 points of damage on a hit, but you gain a +10 racial bonus on Disguise checks made to appear as a fox. Changing from kitsune to fox shape is a standard action. This ability otherwise functions as beast shape II, and your ability scores change accordingly.
Said character wants to have a child. What happens if the character tries to enter its tiny fox form while pregnant?
I'm aware of the scattered splats in 3.5 that had the rule that it killed the child and caused Constitution damage to the mother, but how does it apply in Pathfinder?The player's input: "My shape shifting is a natural part of my race. It would be really weird for them to be unable to use one of their best natural defense options during one of the most vulnerable times"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Uh, dunno where you found that rule in 3.5, but here I would assume it goes to the same place all your equipment goes when you polymorph.
Would not the kitsune fetus also change shape when the mother changes?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Your player told you how she wants it to work-- can you honestly think of a single halfway decent reason that it should not work that way? Can you think of a single, solitary way that making it work any other way is going to make the game more fun for anyone sitting at the table?
Whoever wrote the rule you think you remember is obviously a tremendous a$@!~+*, and the biggest tragedy here is that you don't remember his name so you won't know not to take anything he says seriously in the future.
This is supposed to be a game for fun.
Ask yourself this, does doing anything besides pretending the that the character isn't pregnant for the purpose of game mechanics going to be more fun for the game and the player?
Being pregnant and having a baby should really just be an RP thing, leave the game mechanics away from it.
Because sure, it should probably screw up a whole bunch of stuff. Being pregnant causes a lot of changes to the body and especially in the later months makes it far more challenging to even do normal tasks, let alone adventure.
Honestly, it should probably make being an adventurer untenable, but it sounds like that you're player doesn't want that story. Personally, I say give the player what they want in so far as you ignore the pregnancy from having any mechanical impact on the game.
First, real quick: I don't mean to be the grammar police or anything, but I assume that you have a player with a kitsune character, not a character playing a kitsune, right? Unless your PC's rolled up some characters to play a ttrpg around the campfire after a long day of adventuring.
Okay, with that out of the way, I'm gonna go ahead and play devil's advocate just a bit, here:
What sort of story are you telling? If it's a more lighthearted romp through a wondrous world of fantasy, then I see no reason to give the player one whit less than they desire; it's not "broken", it's not "op". System balance does not come into it.
Now, if you're trying to tell a story of tragedy and sacrifice, things get a little more complicated. I still don't think it's something you should do "just 'cause". It's got to serve the story at large in some way.
Look at White Wolf Game's Changeling: the Lost and Werewolf: the Forsaken. In the first, the vast majority of characters are explicitly stated as being unable to conceive. In the second, a union between two of these people is absolutely forbidden, as their child is some kind of hyper-distilled monstrosity of unfathomable power and savagery. The games are telling us "you don't get what you want. Your life is hard and kinda sucks, sorry." It adds to the tone of the story.
Now with that all said, I think there's one fact that is more important than all the others:
Miscarriage is an incredibly painful, real and common issue for a lot of people. I'd tread extremely lightly on subjects like this. I know my players really well, but I still wouldn't take a chance.
Wasn't there a rule that pregancy prevented female characters/creatures to shapeshift? I swear that I read that somewhere...
Restrictions like "you can't use this power due to your condition" can be fun, if they make you explore new, interesting playstyles. But since your player is already determined to keep shapeshifting, nothing good will come from relying on some old rule.
I doubt such a rule would be published nowadays - writers etc. now pay more attention to potential irritations. The risk of child death can totally be an emotional topic for parents and those who try to become parents...
I agree with claxon, do whatever will be the most fun for the player and the group.
IMO the pregnancy should have a mechanical impact on the character. This topic falls into an area that the game is largely silent on (note the lack of pregancy spells, skill checks and equipment) meaning its up to the DM to decide how it's best to handle it.
Since all kitsune are shapeshifters, Maybe they shift into some sort form that only happens while they are pregnant. The form should probably have increased natural armor and either a climbing or burrowing speed.
Also, keep in mind fox shape is a feat. Sure it might be a racial feat but because its a feat that means that it is a skill that the character has learned how to perform. It isn't something all kitsune are capable of doing. I mean, it requires a bab of +3 and a cha of 13. This means you not only need to have the proper physical traits to do it, but it actually requires quite a bit of training/experience. Like performing a complex gymnastics move.
In any case, it seems reckless for a character to continue to adventure while they are pregnant regardless of race. Since not only does it endanger the child but the character would be physically taxed for the entire duration. Like trying to do extreme rock climbing while you have the flu.
Wasn't there a rule that pregancy prevented female characters/creatures to shapeshift? I swear that I read that somewhere...
If Rule Zero exists for any reason, it's because of stuff like this.
This is not the sort of thing we need game developers to take us by the hand for. With a system as massive and sprawling as d20, which usually has no suggestion for or implicit tone or themes, and only the vaguest nod toward genre, there MUST be some kind of creative requirement.I ran a tropical "Isle of Dread"-type game a while back. My cast of characters included a tribal shaman who had befriended a black panther. She spent much of her time in the form of a black panther. They had a cub.
When the other players learned this and made the predictable outcries (one even going so far as to point out that such acts are technically evil), she said "I was a panther at the time." Since no one had a decent counter to that argument, that was the end of the discussion.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Your player told you how she wants it to work-- can you honestly think of a single halfway decent reason that it should not work that way? Can you think of a single, solitary way that making it work any other way is going to make the game more fun for anyone sitting at the table?
Whoever wrote the rule you think you remember is obviously a tremendous a!~*&&!, and the biggest tragedy here is that you don't remember his name so you won't know not to take anything he says seriously in the future.
There's no need to be this way when I'm clearly neutral on the subject and keeping my opinions out of it. If you were fishing for my opinion then fine, it's "The child is a part of the natural process of the creature's body until it tries to separate, AKA birth, and shapeshifting should just be dangerous near birth." This is something the DM also came up with independently, and what we are going with.
Blanket-declaring previous writers of material as jerks because there was some mechanical detriment to carrying a child, you know, like there actually is? That's rather rude.
You have to remember that for the longest time in culture a child was considered a separate entity entirely. It's only during recent times that people as a whole have started thinking differently due heavily to pressure for body rights for women, and whether or not you're comfortable with a child being just a biological process of a woman, it just wasn't viewed that way, AT ALL, not too long ago. To the headspace of a lot of people, shapeshifting with a child inside of you was like a transformer changing form with a human in the car seat. Dangerous.
The question was asked out of curiosity to see if rules or books exist that approach the subject of shapeshifting while already pregnant.
In regards to the cruelty of shapeshifting with child in 3.5, I think 3.5 was more grimdark in general. However there was a sweetness about it.
You see, on the other side of it, the fluff would ramble on for paragraphs about shapeshifting races treating pregnant mothers with greater protection and understanding than most races that existed. They were pampered and treasured until birth as a general rule because a part of what made their motherhood precious was how much of a commitment to it they had to make. They would use words like 'vulnerable' and 'sacred'. This was present in a lot of the race-specific splat books, even if they didn't approach shapeshifting in such a way at all.
Your player told you how she wants it to work-- can you honestly think of a single halfway decent reason that it should not work that way? Can you think of a single, solitary way that making it work any other way is going to make the game more fun for anyone sitting at the table?
Whoever wrote the rule you think you remember is obviously a tremendous a!~*&&!, and the biggest tragedy here is that you don't remember his name so you won't know not to take anything he says seriously in the future.
There's no need to be this way when I'm clearly neutral on the subject and keeping my opinions out of it. If you were fishing for my opinion then fine, it's "The child is a part of the natural process of the creature's body until it tries to separate, AKA birth, and shapeshifting should just be dangerous near birth." This is something the DM also came up with independently, and what we are going with.
Blanket-declaring previous writers of material as jerks because there was some mechanical detriment to carrying a child, you know, like there actually is? That's rather rude.
You have to remember that for the longest time in culture a child was considered a separate entity entirely. It's only during recent times that people as a whole have started thinking differently due heavily to pressure for body rights for women, and whether or not you're comfortable with a child being just a biological process of a woman, it just wasn't viewed that way, AT ALL, not too long ago. To the headspace of a lot of people, shapeshifting with a child inside of you was like a transformer changing form with a human in the car seat. Dangerous.The question was asked out of curiosity to see if rules or books exist that approach the subject of shapeshifting while already pregnant.
In regards to the cruelty of shapeshifting with child in 3.5, I think 3.5 was more grimdark in general. However there was a sweetness about it.
You see, on the other side of it, the fluff would ramble on for...
This is swerving hard into a political discussion that is against the rules of this forum. I suggest a course correction.
Also, while I don't speak for approximately half the world's population, I myself find that kind of stuff patronizing and possessive; far from "sweet".
Fortunately, the rules do not cover this. I say "fortunately" because any possible rule they could make would be inflammatory.
I suggest your table come up with something satisfactory and play it that way.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What I personally think is this:
...shapeshifting with a child inside of you was like a transformer changing form with a human in the car seat...
However, I would let the player play how they wanted... I can make the game difficult for everyone without picking on the pregnant fox-lady.
Pfffft. Imagine if shapeshifting actually ended pregnancy.
Kitsunes would literally never have started to exist as a race since their unintentional day-after remedy would wipe them out in a single generation. Do you think humans would have survived long if breathing through your nose instantly ended pregnancy?
Ridiculous. That rule would imply that all shapeshifting races had dumbass creators who arbitrarily decided to screw them over, and that all those races have inherent knowledge of just how their creator screwed them over. Otherwise they'd not know their natural shapeshifting was incredibly hazardous to their own survival before it was too late.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It is a feat that they are not given for free at creation... therefore, if you are ONE of those who CAN shapeshift, you are the exception, not the rule...
The majority of your race can procreate without ever encountering the issue.
Just like extreme rock climbing and gymnastics... there are certain activities that pregnancy should exclude you from... possibly changing your size and shape while something is trying to form inside you is one such activity.
I would let the person play the character how they want to play it, but in my mind shapeshifting into a smaller form whilst pregnant equals squish.
It is a feat that they are not given for free at creation... therefore, if you are ONE of those who CAN shapeshift, you are the exception, not the rule...
Please read the description of Kitsune more closely. Their Change Shape racial trait allows them to switch between two forms, human and kitsune. The feat grants them another form, but all Kitsune are shapeshifters.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wasn't there a rule that pregancy prevented female characters/creatures to shapeshift? I swear that I read that somewhere...If Rule Zero exists for any reason, it's because of stuff like this.
This is not the sort of thing we need game developers to take us by the hand for. With a system as massive and sprawling as d20, which usually has no suggestion for or implicit tone or themes, and only the vaguest nod toward genre, there MUST be some kind of creative requirement.I ran a tropical "Isle of Dread"-type game a while back. My cast of characters included a tribal shaman who had befriended a black panther. She spent much of her time in the form of a black panther. They had a cub.
When the other players learned this and made the predictable outcries (one even going so far as to point out that such acts are technically evil), she said "I was a panther at the time." Since no one had a decent counter to that argument, that was the end of the discussion.
I just remembered...
Back in D&D 3.5, for Eberron, the changelings, which were descendants of doppelgangers (not hags), couldn't shapeshift if they were pregnant.
I stand corrected.
Maybe the baby DOES go to the same mysterious place armor goes when you Wildshape... we will call it "Nature's Pocket"...
Or just "because magic" and leave it at that.
Looking at it as a punishment/reward system, by ruling that you can't perform X actions while pregnant, you are punishing players who want to RP a pregnant character and thus restricting players options in the service of realism. The correct answer for the player, as someone playing a game, is to not get pregnant. And that's just... less fun.
In my experience disallowing "fun" stuff at the table, especially something that doesn't alter intended game balance, is a cardinal DMing sin. We can quibble on whether or not is "should" work in-universe, but out of universe my stance is to let them do it.
I agree with the theory, but not necessarily the execution. "Fun" does not always equal "happy, in-game".
If you're going for a very specific feel for your game, I say restrict away.
But the whole "it just wouldn't work that way!" argument? Yeah, let that burn and bury it deep.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pfffft. Imagine if shapeshifting actually ended pregnancy.
Kitsunes would literally never have started to exist as a race since their unintentional day-after remedy would wipe them out in a single generation. Do you think humans would have survived long if breathing through your nose instantly ended pregnancy?
Because every child ever was an accident. Or are you misinterpreting a standard action as being just as easy as breathing through your nose?
This is swerving hard into a political discussion that is against the rules of this forum. I suggest a course correction.
Also, while I don't speak for approximately half the world's population, I myself find that kind of stuff patronizing and possessive; far from "sweet".
Agreed on the first point. We don't need this to become a political discussion about the merits of either/or perspective. However we can make it a purely anthropological statement and leave it at that.
However I must disagree with your second statement. If this was the real world I would agree, but these are times in a world where feeding yourself can be a full-time job... in a world that in-context is literally full of terrible monsters, and some of which specifically have it out for mothers. It's probably the smartest thing to have a community put a carrying mother at its center for a while.
I just remembered...
Back in D&D 3.5, for Eberron, the changelings, which were descendants of doppelgangers (not hags), couldn't shapeshift if they were pregnant.
Yes, you're correct. Some races couldn't even attempt to shapeshift while with child. I suppose for many races that inhibitor just triggered and prevented shapeshifting.
I don't know. I could understand a wizard turning into a rabbit while pregnant being seen as irresponsible.
How? If my boots, spellbook and pointy hat are considered "part of me", I would damn well considered what's going on in the womb to be the same.
But again, while that's an interesting literary element of the world, I don't see why anyone would ever consider making a ruling based on it. It's not a part of the system; changing it isn't like changing spells per day or fast healing. It's part of the setting, like an elf's love of music and stories or the Purple Dragon Knights.
Also, as far as how mothers-to-be are treated in a society, I'm pretty sure "patronizing" and "sweet" can and do easily go hand in hand. This sort of thing is always a complex issue, with lots of different motivations and intentions muddying the waters.
Ok. Food for thought...
Can she just stay in fox form so that her gestation period is only 2mo instead of 9mo?
If she is in "human" form, the exact moment as the baby is born, shapeshifts into a fox, does she give birth to a "human" or fox form baby?
What if the baby is a half breed and will never get the shapeshifting ability for itself? Can it still change inside the mother to match her form?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ok. Food for thought...
Can she just stay in fox form so that her gestation period is only 2mo instead of 9mo?
If she is in "human" form, the exact moment as the baby is born, shapeshifts into a fox, does she give birth to a "human" or fox form baby?
What if the baby is a half breed and will never get the shapeshifting ability for itself? Can it still change inside the mother to match her form?
Seeking answers to questions like this is how we got owlbears.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm all for roleplaying, and I could see a pregnant person playing a pregnant character...
But otherwise, who does that to the party/table?
Sure, there may be no official drawback to pregnancy built into the game, but everyone knows that it's absolutely irresponsible to do any of the things that an average adventuring day entails.
You can't go in hottubs whilst pregnant, but you are willing to put yourself in a position where you may have to take half or even full breath weapon damage from a dragon?
That is piss-poor parenting, and the child isn't even born yet. Might as well pick up an in-game drug habit to go along with your pregnancy.
What if the person rolls a 1 on the Heal check to deliver the baby? Nobody wants to be at that gaming table. No GM wants to say what happens next.
Sure, you can play a pregnant character, but why would you want to?
Wasn't there a rule that pregancy prevented female characters/creatures to shapeshift? I swear that I read that somewhere...If Rule Zero exists for any reason, it's because of stuff like this.
This is not the sort of thing we need game developers to take us by the hand for. With a system as massive and sprawling as d20, which usually has no suggestion for or implicit tone or themes, and only the vaguest nod toward genre, there MUST be some kind of creative requirement.I ran a tropical "Isle of Dread"-type game a while back. My cast of characters included a tribal shaman who had befriended a black panther. She spent much of her time in the form of a black panther. They had a cub.
When the other players learned this and made the predictable outcries (one even going so far as to point out that such acts are technically evil), she said "I was a panther at the time." Since no one had a decent counter to that argument, that was the end of the discussion.I just remembered...
Back in D&D 3.5, for Eberron, the changelings, which were descendants of doppelgangers (not hags), couldn't shapeshift if they were pregnant.
Not quite right. They couldn't shapeshift to change gender if they were pregnant.
Because every child ever was an accident. Or are you misinterpreting a standard action as being just as easy as breathing through your nose?Pfffft. Imagine if shapeshifting actually ended pregnancy.
Kitsunes would literally never have started to exist as a race since their unintentional day-after remedy would wipe them out in a single generation. Do you think humans would have survived long if breathing through your nose instantly ended pregnancy?
I'm not sure what your first sentence is supposed to mean. It sounds like sarcasm but I don't see how it fits as a response if it is.
The shapeshifting is what defines their race. It's not about being "just as easy", it's that they would regularly use it before they even knew about the pregnancy. There wouldn't have been enough time for a culture to form around pregnancy and its risks since the first Kitsune would wipe themselves out if they didn't know about it.
See what I mean?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's no need to be this way when I'm clearly neutral on the subject and keeping my opinions out of it. If you were fishing for my opinion then fine, it's "The child is a part of the natural process of the creature's body until it tries to separate, AKA birth, and shapeshifting should just be dangerous near birth." This is something the DM also came up with independently, and what we are going with.
You know, I didn't express any personal opinion about you and your game until you said this-- I asked you directly, knowing your player's wishes in advance, what benefit you thought you were going to derive from taking the game in a very personal and potentially very hurtful direction instead. You've now confirmed that you're doing this anyway, using historically less-than-ideal attitudes towards pregnancy and childbirth as justification, and you're complaining that I'm being rude to you?
You are literally trying to explain to me how magical shapeshifting powers would "realistically" impact pregnancy to justify turning your game into an abortion simulator at the expense of your players' expressed wishes and concerns.
I still haven't expressed my personal opinion of you and your game, but at least now I am heavily implying it by comparison. If you think the shoe fits, I'm not going to stop you from lacing it up and wearing it to town.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Until the fetus can breathe on it's own, and isn't connected by an umbilical to the mother, who is doing it's breathing / eating / etc. for it, I'd rule that it just changes with her, like part of her body.
Or even other *things* in her body that aren't body parts, like that giant sandwich she just ate or the contents of her human-sized bladder, both of which are far too large for her smaller fox-tummy or fox-bladder.
If she hasn't had some terrible 'I had to pee, and now my tiny fox-bladder just exploded' incident *long* before now, whatever weird magic goes into her shapeshifting shouldn't magically stop working now that she's got a passenger.
OTOH, making a ruling that shapeshifting killed / expelled stuff inside of them makes it a sneaky way to make shapeshifters immune to some of the weirder things in PF/D&D's history like scarabs of death, rot grubs or blue slaad pellets, since they can just shift to a smaller size and violently eject them. :)
Because every child ever was an accident. Or are you misinterpreting a standard action as being just as easy as breathing through your nose?Pfffft. Imagine if shapeshifting actually ended pregnancy.
Kitsunes would literally never have started to exist as a race since their unintentional day-after remedy would wipe them out in a single generation. Do you think humans would have survived long if breathing through your nose instantly ended pregnancy?
I'm not sure what your first sentence is supposed to mean. It sounds like sarcasm but I don't see how it fits as a response if it is.
The shapeshifting is what defines their race. It's not about being "just as easy", it's that they would regularly use it before they even knew about the pregnancy. There wouldn't have been enough time for a culture to form around pregnancy and its risks since the first Kitsune would wipe themselves out if they didn't know about it.
See what I mean?
No because its a standard action, meaning it takes effort to perform, and is not something that is necessary to their survival like breathing. You are implying that they can't recognize that they are pregnant or wanting to become pregnant and put off shape-shifting if they want to have a child; or you're implying that behavior can't also evolve to solve problems like that, like in real life when animals migrate and do things completely unnecessary and potentially harmful to their survival for the sake of reproduction.
Destroying the pregnancy in no way enhances gameplay.
However, there being a pregnant woman in the party makes everyone at the table subconsciously stuck in the real world.
It detracts from immersion.
You are naturally drawn to help the pregnant woman (assuming you aren't a piece of garbage in real life)...
Help her on and off her horse, stuff like that is actually pretty good roleplaying.
However, when it comes to failed Acrobatics checks at the top of a flight of stairs... everyone is stuck in the real world with what happens next.
Sure, there's nothing built into the game that forces the GM to do anything, but the very act of NOT doing anything is actually detrimental to the way players interact with the story.
SHOULD a GM terminate the pregnancy as the result of a failed skill check, or a massive blunt force trauma, or a breath weapon attack...?
Probably, yes, because that's what you expect to happen when some irresponsible pregnant woman puts herself in harm's way. It makes the story real, believable, and contributes to immersion in the game.
However, it makes everything suck, everyone is uncomfortable, it's awkward for literally everyone involved, and it's all completely unnecessary...
Don't make pregnant adventurers.
Why does this have to be spelled out?
Who is inconsiderate enough to plague an adventuring party with a pregnancy?
They suck bad enough in real life... no need to bring it into your fantasy game.
I'd probably rule that they couldn't shape shift while pregnant simply because I don't want to DM either a birth or a baby as a party member. I wouldn't make excuses for it, just tell them my reason and ask them how they want to handle their inability to achieve this character goal.
If pressed for some solution, I'd look at fox pregnancy and see how that worked into things. Foxes being pregnant for only 54 days rather than 280 days for humans would strongly encourage a fox form only pregnancy to simplify development. Foxes also typically have 4-5 young, so it could be beneficial to conceive in humanoid form to ensure only one child, then stay in fox form to develop it quickly.
I guess the simplest "yes" solution would be to have the mother produce a single fox sized child regardless of shape, and include a "fox only" development period for the new born. This leaves you with little difficulty from pregnancy, their smallest form can support the small sized child, and the infant is more portable and easier to care for.
No because its a standard action, meaning it takes effort to perform, and is not something that is necessary to their survival like breathing.
Fine, PedantryDog. Then let's use a chameleon or mimic octopus as the example instead.
You are implying that they can't recognize that they are pregnant or wanting to become pregnant and put off shape-shifting if they want to have a child;
I'm saying that they wouldn't have had the time to figure out either of those things. That's a cultural response, and would depend on generational knowledge passed down.
or you're implying that behavior can't also evolve to solve problems like that, like in real life when animals migrate and do things completely unnecessary and potentially harmful to their survival for the sake of reproduction.
I'm saying that the original Kitsune would have died out before any behavior could have evolved to solve it. Magic isn't a gradual development, like real life traits. One day there simple was the first Kitsune with the ability to shapeshift, and the inherent knowledge of how to do so.
So at the same time the first Kitsune got their shapeshifting, they would also have needed to evolve that specific quality that stops them from shapeshifting while pregnant. Which implies they'd actually pass on progeny, and not just figure they were infertile since the repeated use of shapeshifting magic prevents them from even showing symptoms of pregnancy.
The idea that shapeshifting ends pregnancy would only work if the races were created in very large numbers or with an already existing culture revolving pregnancy. Which is why my vote goes to "dumbass deities".