Fixing the Fantasy of Fantasy Gaming

[Nebuchadnezzar]

I'm not really sold on large creatures anyway as frequently usable characters, so I think I'll just nix equine taurs entirely, make big cat ones based on leopards and smaller instead, and bauriars a generic caprid that's more Sierra Nevada Bighorn than Rocky Mountain.

And now I will never think about this subject again.

[tussock]

Of course, my game the kobolds live in 3' high tunnels full of deadfalls, and the PCs do have to shrink up to get around in comfort. So the centaur's fucked, he can stay out and look after the Druid's bear, the Paladin's mount, the wagons, bullocks, two score archers, and dozen heavy infantry, and protect them when the Kobolds make a break for it.

I'm pretty sure if the Medium members of the party can't fit, they're saying "Fuck this" and just skipping it, flooding the kobold-nest with acid/fire/insecticide/boiling water, or finding a way to tear the roof off then tap-dance over the bloody thing.

Good idea and all, but if the place can be sealed up and burnt out to solve the problem at hand they do it regardless of the size restrictions. My underground complexes get quite serious with their fire, flood, and creeping horror defences. Though I'm assuming you're low enough level for walls and such to matter, thus the centaur having actual problems here and there. And yes, the PCs do set up sieges now and then and take their time over dismantling a place.

[Koumei]

So if they still have to leave their class features outside and shrink down/suffer "lol u can't move" penalties all the time and CAN'T just boil the thing?

They can just say "Well fuck you too" and go somewhere else that does cater to their size properly. And then the loser is not them, having to cripple themselves, it's you, for wasting your time making that tiny dungeon that never saw any use.

And yes, I endorse that, because you're being a cockbag.

[Prak]

Honestly, it's the most logical approach to dealing with anything with an extensive burrow, especially a sentient race known for prowess in mining and trap making. The dumb adventurers are the ones who squeeze in. The intelligent ones search out as many bolt holes as possible and burn the fuckers out.

[violence in the media]

At this point, I feel that I should mention that I have experienced games with both Centaur and Mermaid PCs. In neither case were "easy" solutions to problems employed, for the exact reason A Man in Black pointed out. Though in fairness to the players involved, they got permission from everyone else at the table before bringing these characters in.

I think the centaur was actually less of a hindrance issue than the mermaid was, partially because it was a higher level game, but could also be a result of our group's tendency to make many underground structures fantastically spacious. Town issues involved things like the party having to sit at a table by the window of the tavern so she could be involved in conversation, having to sleep in the stables, or waiting around outside the building if the party couldn't conduct business outdoors. Dungeons, on the other hand, with their 20' wide corridors, cavernous rooms with 40' ceilings, and stairway/elevator access designed for giants were no problem.

The mermaid, on the other hand, was lugged around in a bathtub/cart contraption and was treated kind of like the bucket from Crystal Chronicles. Overland travel was kind of a pain in the ass. Dungeon clearing involved trying to lure creatures out of the dungeon and into her range (she was a sorcerer) whenever possible. This particular game didn't last very long though, so we didn't get as much experience with this situation as we did with the centaur.

[ScottS]

More indirect support of the "let-them-play-awakened-oozes-it's-fuckin-D&D-they-should-be-able-to-deal-with-mobility-issues" school:

Our 4e group was planning on switching from Eberron to Dark Sun. Having read the campaign book, I think they did an OK job with the conversion (they didn't destroy the world, rolling it back to FY1 got rid of the sillier developments from the novels, some of the mechanics are flavorful although have the expected boners like a martial-sourced dominate power etc. etc.).

However, the party is having issues coming up with character ideas, and part of that seems to be because DS is now kinda boring... Maybe it's because the setting minus the wacko fluff tends towards "sand hobos turned caravan guards travelling between places they don't give a shit about". But I'd also argue that not being able to properly play the weird races like aarakocra/half-giants/thri-kreen kills some of the interest. Who cares about preserving the logistics of dungeon crawls, or ensuring that the oh-so-precious flank/AOO subgame stays intact, if in the process you're nerfing the fantasy?

[shadzar]

Honestly, it's the most logical approach to dealing with anything with an extensive burrow, especially a sentient race known for prowess in mining and trap making. The dumb adventurers are the ones who squeeze in. The intelligent ones search out as many bolt holes as possible and burn the fuckers out.

Yeah, you don't go into the high gras after a snake, you set fire to the grass to burn it or chase it out...its tactics, and why Tucker's Kobolds are so dangerous.

The whole never fight a land war in Asia kind of thing...cause of the home field advantage.

[CatharzGodfoot]

However, the party is having issues coming up with character ideas, and part of that seems to be because DS is now kinda boring... Maybe it's because the setting minus the wacko fluff tends towards "sand hobos turned caravan guards travelling between places they don't give a shit about". But I'd also argue that not being able to properly play the weird races like aarakocra/half-giants/thri-kreen kills some of the interest. Who cares about preserving the logistics of dungeon crawls, or ensuring that the oh-so-precious flank/AOO subgame stays intact, if in the process you're nerfing the fantasy?

Aarakocra, half-giants, tri-kreen, and half-dwarves can all go on normal human adventures.

[ScottS]

Aarakocra were claustro/agoraphobic (see "fear of dogs" problem above). Large-sized thri-kreen couldn't rope climb and had to mantis leap out of pits etc. (see "centaurs sleep in the barn and carry two ladders at all times" problem above). I don't know to what extent that fluff got full rules support, other than the 2e-kreen-couldn't-be-rogues thing, so maybe they just ignored it, assumed people wouldn't want to deal with it, or whatever.

Half-giants could do obstacle negotiation, but they started getting the "anything-not-Small-or-Med-humanoid-is-bad-for-the-game" treatment anyway as of 3.5 PsiHB.

[shadzar]

Aarakocra were claustro/agoraphobic (see "fear of dogs" problem above). Large-sized thri-kreen couldn't rope climb and had to mantis leap out of pits etc. (see "centaurs sleep in the barn and carry two ladders at all times" problem above). I don't know to what extent that fluff got full rules support, other than the 2e-kreen-couldn't-be-rogues thing, so maybe they just ignored it, assumed people wouldn't want to deal with it, or whatever.

Half-giants could do obstacle negotiation, but they started getting the "anything-not-Small-or-Med-humanoid-is-bad-for-the-game" treatment anyway as of 3.5 PsiHB.

Not all dwarves have to hate elves, just because that is the default fluff. you can have aarakocra that arent claustrophobic without any problems. the fact they don't like ground combat due to avian bodies is about the only reason to have them not want to go dungeoneering, but doesnt prevent it. ecologies of a race are ignored where needed for a player character. it isnt the same as the centaur issue being a quadruped in a biped world.

Sure might not be smart to get stuck on the ground when your advantages are air-based attacks, but it doesnt remove you from being able to.

Fears are things left up to a player to decide for their character. The centaur will still be a 1 ton creature unable to go some places no matter what due to its size and shape.

Hollow bone may remove the aarakocra from going into cramped places where they might be crushed as a good idea, but it doesnt mean they cant fit.

another thing about the size issue, some opening and portals are made to be smaller a a trap to make people have to remove armor to weaken their defenses, so claiming a larger than will fit creature should be able to go through them kind of removes that tactic from structure building.

[virgil]

If I recall, only one city that wasn't ruled by a Dragon King, and it was able to hold half-giants just fine because they're one of the more common slave-races (place is built with them in mind).

Thri-kreen could super leap and do very minor flight to account for their lack of being able to use rope. I've never seen a picture of them being centaur-large; and half the time, their abdomen gave the impression of being closer to a thick tail, rather than a man-sized rigid trunk.

And while I never ran a campaign, I don't remember man-scale dungeons being the kinds of places you saw much of in Dark Sun. If I recall, aarakockra claustrophobia is more akin to the penalty orcs get in sunlight; aka, their characters take a -1 and whine in-character alot, but they don't deny going indoors.

[MGuy]

I'm not really understanding why this issue has been dragged on this long. People who do care about being a centaur, people who don't, blah blah blah are going to find groups that cater to their wants. So what? Who cares? I don't like player's being non humanoid and over Medium or under small. But I've dealt with it before as best as I could. In the same pile of shit I don't like I don't really like DnD past level 10 where shit really really starts getting out of hand. But that hasn't kept me from dealing with it. There are going to be rules drafted for large creatures and centaurs and whatever anyway.

The job here should be just to make rules for them and move on, not contemplate on whether someone should play them or not. The argument about what should or shouldn't be allowed as a credible character should rest in the hands of the group that plays together. As long as the rules (as in 3.5) between monsters and player characters aren't far apart then people will be able to make their own decision based on what the consensus is.

I'm much more interested in the discussion about firearms vs other ranged weapons because from a design point of view there should be pros and cons giving people actually reasons to distinguish between bows, thrown darts, pistols,crossbows, etc when they are selecting a weapon to use otherwise the weapon list will just boil down to taking the one that does the most damage and moving on.

[Aryxbez]

I'm still not seeing how they're non-viable. Why can't they do those adventures?

you would have to design a centaur friendly adventure. there is not rope crossing the ravine because a centaur doesnt have the ability to go foot over foot...er...hoof over hoof over hoof over hoof.

HANDS! So the centaur needs to make a ref, and possibly a str check, while everyone else walks across (or more likely, shimies, a damned sight easier than tightrope walking) making balance checks, the centaur makes like Kratos+horse ass

Hell yeah, Kratos Pony! I was thinking that as I was reading through this thread, just climb the rope with pure arm strength. Perhaps I don't see this "realism" as others do, but doesn't really seem these should be issues, since Centaurs will likely see play in a decent power level category, and are PC's anyway, should be able to circumvent these problems. Need to climb a wall? Arm strength, combined with creating footholds with their front hooves, pits? use momentum to wall jump out Mario/Samus/Ryu Hayubusa style. Stairs and uneven terrain, last I checked, was covered as an obstacle via balance/acrobatic checks, leap up the stairs, kick off the wall by it, or whatever. If you must, give them a circumstance penalty to the action I guess, but still allow them to do the action. Stuff like that reminds me of how FantasyCraft Dwarves apparently couldn't use Jump checks, forcefully banned from the action.

I can see the issue with them hauling that 1000+ pound rump of theirs when climbing though, which I suppose just means should have high strength/carrying capacity bonus as appropriate, or suffer some kind of Medium/Heavy Load when performing such physical strenuous actions. Later on, if they're fighter type centaurs, likely get stuff like super strength where it's a non-issue, just making it a concern for the first few of the low levels or so. If not like fighters, without said super strength, I'd imagine it means they'll have special form of movement via magic, where such minor obstacles won't likely matter too much anyway. They'll do what their fellow medium spellcasters would do to bypass these obstacles.

I also see it odd people talk of dungeons only being 10ft ceilings, as well as wide far as corridors or in encounters will go. Believe that was used as a complaint for 4th edition, how dungeons would be very small, 10ft ceilings (although recall saying 4th edition dungeon were supposed to be big), and yet is now being used as the norm here? Well anyway, having rooms as cramped as that, especially when fight large creatures often enough, sounds like bad dungeon design to begin with. Don't think they should be limited to such confinements, I know I don't keep it to that, although I also like wilderness adventures.

I don't think it's generally good idea to limit the concept of playing a race, especially when talking "fixing the fantasy" here. So long as the idea is appropriate to the group, power level (no commoners/1-3 level concepts, in a game set to about 6th-10th of powerful adventurers, or what have you). Hell, even crazy enough to think a Beholder should be viable, I'm sure they have some innate telekinesis for manipulating objects, and basically just float around everywhere. Like I said, if the idea is actually workable, then why the hell not eh?

Although there is the whole bit of large races invalidating medium strong races, which I'd hope in this "fantasy fix" of sorts, medium/large strong races would be categorized by more than just simple ability score bonuses, rather offering unique racial abilities of some sort.

Also, in a recent posting by MGuy, centaurs, and other races indeed, should be made viable PC races. As for stuff like Wemics, or Dracotaurs, sounds like those could be easy sub-race variants, much like the Drow, or Duergar, to Elf/Dwarf races respectively.

Oh, and it'd be pretty cool for PC's to actually want to use Throwing weapons, to bows, guns, and so forth.

[K]

This entire thread is about opportunity cost. Using some bits of fantasy means you can't use other bits, and not all have the same cost.

Take a centaur. Make Frodo from the Lord of the Rings movie into a centaur, and that story has to play out a lot differently because there are a bunch of scenes a centaur just couldn't do. No riding on hawks or elven boats, no hiding from Riders, no getting captured by orcs aand taken to the top of the tower because who is going to lift a 2000 lb centaur and take it anywhere? Heck, lots of little things have to change that you'd never even notice until you tried to do it.

However, you could do Lord of the Rings as a beholder. Weird, but true.

So every time you add something, you have to figure out if what you have to take out is worth less. Catgirls take nothing from the game and add a fun option for people while mermaids are just damned game-killing.

Sometimes, the downside is not another fantasy option being removed, but just a negative outcome like "causes giant head-aches for other players" or "annoys the shit out of people", and those are valid reasons to keep something out of a game. I mean, if someone wanted to play something creepy like an Atropal in a DnD game, they are adding little and taking a lot of fun out of the game and disallowing that is just good form all around.

The guns debate is not even a debate. You either add guns or you don't, and you either make them better than arrows and thrown weapons or you don't. If they are better, then no one will use bows or daggers any more and you've effectively removed bows and arrow from the game. If they are the same, then people will use both or pick the one they like best flavor-wise.

[PhoneLobster]

Oh a lord of the rings wank job post.

Yeah. You'll win an RPG design debate by appealing to lord of the rings, I mean that works all the time around here am I rite?

edit: and in this thread no less

[K]

Oh a lord of the rings wank job post.

Yeah. You'll win an RPG design debate by appealing to lord of the rings, I mean that works all the time around here am I rite?

edit: and in this thread no less

Way to miss the point, guy who can't come up with ONE reason why centaurs aren't just weird fetish fuel.

Because hey, using a fantasy story everyone knows and likes can't be used to illustrate a point because we are all too cool for school. Let's not even pretend that the same point can't be made with dozens of other fantasy stories.

All you have is distraction. In dozens of posts you've proved that you have nothing to say and no valid points. Your position is absurd, and you are a clown.

Fail harder. I dare you.

[Prak]

Oh my god would you look at the size of that one! I almost lost my eyes with all the cock waving, is the buffet on yet?

Fucking hell.

[Nebuchadnezzar]

ONE reason why centaurs aren't just weird fetish fuel.

Not to pick a nit, or get in the middle of a slap fight, but how is anything save humans not weird fetish fuel?

[K]

ONE reason why centaurs aren't just weird fetish fuel.

Not to pick a nit, or get in the middle of a slap fight, but how is anything save humans not weird fetish fuel?

Sure it is, but no one has proposed that.

The rule is simple: no handicapped characters who are going to be a burden on their fellow players. You must be able to go on the same adventures.

So the range of characters you can play is nearly infinite. Go ahead and play Rakshasa, mind flayers, catgirls, hobgoblins..... whatever. Looking funny is correctable by wearing a cloak, so anything that can do that is alright.

But centaurs, mermaids who need to live in a bathtub you drag around, vampires, etc .... all those are out. It's not that you can't make them work with some effort, it's that making a good game is hard enough without putting obstacles in your own way.

[quanta]

You can't really do Lord of the fucking Rings in any version of D&D. Well, not without it completely sucking ass. Fuck, you can use it as a model of how you usually shouldn't run D&D. Don't split the party 3 fucking ways (or is it more at some points?). Don't have helpless characters who's primary purpose is to get wtfpwned by almost everything they encounter except when the plot requires they shouldn't be; a player characters primary strength shouldn't be "suitable mule for the one ring". Don't have DM PC's who arbitrarily hold back on using their awesome godlike powers.

So yes, centaurs rule out a bad choice of adventure that you shouldn't be doing in D&D anyways.

But shit, if you want to add a centaur to LotR just have them split from the party. The party's all over the map anyways. Have 'em hang out with the riders of Rohan or something. Boom. Problem solved.

[K]

But shit, if you want to add a centaur to LotR just have them split from the party. The party's all over the map anyways. Have 'em hang out with the riders of Rohan or something. Boom. Problem solved.

A Centaur can't get to the Riders of Rohan. They basically miss the first encounter out of the Shire (the inn) and never even meet up with the Ranger.

But hey, a centaur can't do either Conan movie, or Willow, or Scorpion King.... I mean, I'd be hard pressed to find any fantasy adventure where they wouldn't screw it up.

[PhoneLobster]

First of all the Conan, willow and scorpion king movies are somewhere between 90-100% centaur navigable. They mostly happen out doors and in big expansive places, many of those movies actually involve extensive use of horses AND camels. (and we all know "even a starving camel is larger than a horse").

But more to the point you are seriously presenting the case "these stories centered around non-centaurs may well include non centaur heroes doing things centaurs couldn't do! OMFG!"

How fucking puerile is that argument? I can't believe you even expect anyone to seriously bother addressing it. Here is a hint. Lets imagine a movie called "Centaur King" or "Lord of The Centaurs" or whatever, it's about a centaur. He does things that the human heroes of Conan and Scorpion King can't and he sure as fuck does a lot of things that the mildly retarded small sized village idiot from Willow can't. By your latest argument that makes humans non viable. And it sure as fuck makes the village idiot midget from willow non-viable as he can't even navigate his OWN fucking movie without plot devices and a human assistant, let alone survive Conan or Scorpion King where he would have his ass handed to him.

You present utter stupid shit like this laughable movie argument of yours and then prance around declaring victory and waving your cock? How dumb are you?

[K]

How fucking puerile is that argument? I can't believe you even expect anyone to seriously bother addressing it. Here is a hint. Lets imagine a movie called "Centaur King" or "Lord of The Centaurs" or whatever, it's about a centaur.

Yes, if you cater adventures to centaurs, centaurs are fine.

Of course, basic adventure races will work fine in centaur adventures without any catering.

Why is this so hard to understand? THE EXTRA WORK IS NOT WORTH THE EFFORT.

What's next? You want a series of adventures catered to sentient mushrooms that can't move? Mermaids in wheeled buckets? Those brains in jars? Sounds like a thrilling game.

[PhoneLobster]

What's next?

Specifically, Trolls, Ogres, Nagas and other characters as utterly unproblematic as Centaurs (I notice you didn't even fucking bother trying to dispute the 90%+ centaur navigability of say, the Scorpion King), and then we can incrementally move up the incredibly large and diverse list of incrementally less and less convenient characters until we finally draw the line somewhere SENSIBLE, and that's going to be somewhere between the perfectly convenient Mermaid from the movie Splash, and the clearly problematic Mermaid who needs a bathtub wheelchair and a personal nurse.

And since the midget from Willow actually falls into a bracket LESS convenient than a Centaur or even the Mermaid from Splash in his own movie I think we can safely say that drawing the line somewhere between those two mermaids is a much smarter place to be since that annoying midget from Willow gets to be ruled in and you used his movie as a test case so he damn well BETTER be in rather than out...

Also as an aside... isn't the main character of Scorpion King basically a horse archer who spends most of the movie disadvantaged by not being mounted?

And the major characters in willow include humans beside a useless midget, comedy relief tiny tiny fairies and an actual honest to god magic baby. I mean could you have found WORSE examples for your supposed argument if you tried?

[K]

What's next?

Specifically, Trolls, Ogres, Nagas and other characters as utterly unproblematic as Centaurs (I notice you didn't even fucking bother trying to dispute the 90%+ centaur navigability of say, the Scorpion King),

It's because 90% access to the adventure is too low. Being the guy who can't continue with the adventure because your centaur fetish was too strong is unacceptable.

If at any point you can't continue the adventure because of your character choice, you've failed as a player. A PLAYER, not a CHARACTER.

And the mermaid from Splash was a were-mermaid, a perfectly playable race.