|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Expect table variation. Many people won't care at all, but some will protest. Sometimes, even the most innocent of reskinning can affect the story. From the GM's perspective (and that of enemies and NPCs) you will be a cactus leshy, albeit perhaps with some unusual coloration. The players are free to think whatever they want.
|
Venture-Agent, Netherlands—Utrecht
|
Very officially, technically it's not allowed. Ask your GM (and players) beforehand.
Basically, the reasoning is, roleplaying can give modifiers, or change the way NPCs view you or react. For example, there is a PFS1 scenario where people don't like the colour blue. If you're an Undine and say that for some reason you are orange (which Undines aren't), you'd be given an advantage other Undine players aren't. It's not about "cheating," but about misrepresentation. Or, for a different example: say, an NPC has a phobia of frogs, and your Druid has a frog companion they've reflavoured as a salamander (no other benefits or penalties, you just like salamanders more than frogs), the NPC won't have an adverse reaction. Basically the fiction of the game won't be the same as what's presented.
In your case, the same is true: animals could be attracted to, or repelled away from cacti because of story reasons. If you say "I'm not a cactus," you have a mechanical (dis)advantage.
Again, just ask your GM and your players about it. Most likely they'll be okay with it, but just in case, you know?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't have my copy of the resource, but more applicable to the change, if you have the option of turning into your base plant, a cactus stands out in the majority of environments that we adventure in where a thorn bush doesn't. So at my table, I'd say, sure, you're a thorn bush until/unless it matters then you have to accept that in relation to the scenario challenges, you're a cactus.
More obvious reskinning isn't allowed: my wolf is a dog, my bear is a pig, my morningstar is a frying pan, my half-orc is a half-ogre, etc.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The classic PFS1 example is a player who was riding a “pig.” The PC could have a dog as an animal companion and was using all the stats of a dog, but flavored to be a pig. But one scenario happened to involve goblins. Who really, really hate dogs. Arguments ensued, the end result was an official ruling “you can make minor cosmetic changes but when it comes to mechanics you are what your stat block says.”
So if for some weird reason you’re in a scenario where there’s a difference between how a bramble brush and a cactus are treated, expect to be treated as a cactus.
Venture-Lieutenant, Finland—Turku
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Got my PDF copy early because of the subscription - not going to directly quote the book since it isn't yet released but for this particular question, I don't think saying that your cactus leshy is a thorny bush would even be a refluffing.
The book mentions that scholars group leshys into different broad categories based on their abilities and no part of the book gives any sort of suggestions or descriptions about a cactus leshy's appearance - merely about their outlook and nature. The only description about appearance is that "spines cover your body".
As leshys are grouped for their abilities, not appearance, anything prickly would probably be a "cactus leshy".
Of course, there may be table variation.
|
One of my characters has been calling his wolf a dog (named Inu) since inception without incident, so as suggested above, expect table variation.
If this is for PFS2, Wolf and Dog share the same stats, as well as "any other canine creature", so you could even do jackal, coyote, painted wolf, dingo, etc.
Similarly, a Badger could be a wolverine "or other large mustelid", and cats can be "any big cat".
I think it was PFS1 where they were different creatures with different stats.
|
|
If this is for PFS2, Wolf and Dog share the same stats
According to the Bestiary, dog and wolf are distinctly different animals with different stat blocks. With respect to companion animals, I would tend to agree but only because dog is not an option. Wild dog and wolf are similar enough to be arguably interchangeable, but that could be impacted if/when the dog as a companion is defined in some future release. IMO, there is a difference between interchanging a dog and wolf vs say calling a frying pan a morningstar or calling a dog a pig. Regardless, it still falls to the GM to adjudicate so the best advice is don't do it if you cannot accept the times when the GM says no because there is table variation with this issue.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Finland—Turku
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If this is for PFS2, Wolf and Dog share the same statsAccording to the Bestiary, dog and wolf are distinctly different animals with different stat blocks. With respect to companion animals, I would tend to agree but only because dog is not an option.
With respect to animal companions, that isn't actually true. Wolf and dog ARE the same animal companion.
Source: Core Rulebook pg. 216
"Your companion is a wolf or other canine creature, such as a dog."
Sure, the name of the entry is "wolf" but the description clearly says that it can also be some other canine.
|
Exactly.
Same for the other examples I listed earlier.
If you want a Wolverine, you use the Badger stats.
If you want a Tiger, you use the Cat stats.
Etc.
In fact, horse specifically allows you to pick large or medium for your companion size, depending on whether you want a horse or a pony (or some other medium equine)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In fact, horse specifically allows you to pick large or medium for your companion size, depending on whether you want a horse or a pony (or some other medium equine)Exactly.
Same for the other examples I listed earlier.
If you want a Wolverine, you use the Badger stats.
If you want a Tiger, you use the Cat stats.
Etc.
Just don't ever get a mature animal companion horse or you don't have a pony anymore *grumble in halfling*