Another thread about class fluff

[DefKab]

So, I was reading around the forum and came across an interesting thought. Class fluff is only as relevant as the player makes it.

The idea is that a class only a mechanical way to describe what you character can do. Everything weird about it can be refluffed into a way that makes it fit into your backstory, for good character building.

For instance, if my barbarian decided to dip into wizard, I could fluff that his spellbook is just the expensive tribal tattoos he inscribes upon his body, and the magic comes from his devotion to physical fitness. Mechanically, it works the same, but adds background story.

I like this idea. Its cool. I only had a problem with it when reading other posts. Mind you, I cant quote them, but heres the gist of it.

One person decided he had a problem with magic. Didnt like it, wanted to change it because it was too powerful. Another person didnt like it because it was a little far fetched. People argued that you cant change how magic works in DnD.

They explained it simply. Its a mechanic in the game. Its there to be played as such. If you dont like magic, then you simply dont like DnD, and should probably try a different game.

It wasnt just magic, like of Fix This threads come up with an 'Its DnD, suck it up' post.

And heres the thing. I agree with them too. Fighters suck. Dont fix them, play a warblade. Its good advice, and fits in with accepting DnD as DnD.

But what if we put the two together... If DnD describes wizards to spend years learning magic and carrying around a tome of spells, isnt that DnD, and trying to change that is the same as not playing DnD?


I understand that thats extreme, but where is the line where homebrew becomes something very unlike DnD? Where does it start try to fix whats wrong instead accepting its flawed? Is refluffing class homebrewing, or are you trying to fix the fact that the game doesnt fit your idea of the class?

Or are these two different beliefs, never held by the same person? Which side are you on, playgrounders?

[Zale]

Why.

Why must you bring this up? :smallconfused:

This thread will swiftly dissolve into pointless arguments about fiery hair and hypothetical thieves stealing things and magic that's not magic.

[TroubleBrewing]

It's great that you've thought this through and all, but this might be better placed in one of the other pre-existing threads.

Just try your best to avoid necromancy, though.

[Telonius]

Why.

Why must you bring this up? :smallconfused:

This thread will swiftly dissolve into pointless arguments about fiery hair and hypothetical thieves stealing things and magic that's not magic.

Or hypothetical Azers stealing things that both are and are not magic. :smallbiggrin:

[DefKab]

Why.

Why must you bring this up? :smallconfused:

This thread will swiftly dissolve into pointless arguments about fiery hair and hypothetical thieves stealing things and magic that's not magic.

It doesn't have to, if everyone sticks to the question.

Which is, if not stated plainly; If you believe if Refluffing's ok, how about homebrewing?

If not, what's the dfference?

And is there a difference between fixing a flaw and altering a mechanical decision?

[DefKab]

It's great that you've thought this through and all, but this might be better placed in one of the other pre-existing threads.

Just try your best to avoid necromancy, though.

Yes but everyone in the preexisting threads are having pointless arguements about "Fiery hair" and the like. :smalltongue:

[TwylyghT]

I myself support the idea of refluffing stuff to suit your needs. The one thing to remember though is that certain structures need to be preserved in some fashion.

For example, as you mentioned above, the spell book. The Barbarian/Wizard above should not be allowed to use his skin as a spell book, due to the mechanics of the wizard spell book being lost or stolen is a defining separation from a sorcerer. However, he might carry around a roll of hide he paints the spells on, a wooden totem he carves them in, or etched into tiles of bone carried in a sack. This particular Barbarian Wizard sounds like he could take a dip of Blood Magus for Scarification though...

[DefKab]

I myself support the idea of refluffing stuff to suit your needs. The one thing to remember though is that certain structures need to be preserved in some fashion.

For example, as you mentioned above, the spell book. The Barbarian/Wizard above should not be allowed to use his skin as a spell book, due to the mechanics of the wizard spell book being lost or stolen is a defining separation from a sorcerer. However, he might carry around a roll of hide he paints the spells on, a wooden totem he carves them in, or etched into tiles of bone carried in a sack. This particular Barbarian Wizard sounds like he could take a dip of Blood Magus for Scarification though...

Sounds great, I really like that take.
But what if he gained Wizard IN an adventure?

By the books, wizards are assumed to spend YEARS studying, and a barbarian is a least likely of those to study magic. What do you do if your player comes up and says "My barbarian is taking a level of Wizard" and you know you can't fit the study time in the middle of the adventure. Do you refluff the wizard to let his mechanics fit his backstory, or does he have to find new mechanics that are already matching his plot line?

[Diarmuid]

If I were running the game, and the barb char had just gained a level and out of nowhere said "I'm going to level up as a wizard this level", I'd certainly ask some questions about motivations, character direction, etc.

I'd probably ask what he had/hadnt been doing to work on this kind of study.

I wouldnt go so far as some GM's I've gamed under and make the character reiterate daily (in game) what steps he's taking to move towards new classes.

For the most part, if a character's multiclassing/prestige classing isnt somewhat defined beforehand, then I would probably require some amount of "fluff" to have been involved to adding a new class.

[Telonius]

Nothing that can't be solved with a bit of creative description.

"My mind has finally reached a clarity, gained through many years of battle, that has always been inaccessible. I am the calm center of the whirling storm of violence around me. The runes of my ancestors, at last, are comprehensible to me. Let all existence tremble before me, for I am its master."

[Xiander]

It all depends on the campaign in question.

If you are dealing with a well defined world that has a clear explanation for everything in the rulebooks, refluffing is questionable at best.

If you are playing in a campaign where only the necessary stuff is defined, defining, that your barbarian has gained insight into the workings of magic through his experience in battle, is fair game... if you can make your group see why that is cool of course.

[TwylyghT]

Sounds great, I really like that take.
But what if he gained Wizard IN an adventure?

By the books, wizards are assumed to spend YEARS studying, and a barbarian is a least likely of those to study magic. What do you do if your player comes up and says "My barbarian is taking a level of Wizard" and you know you can't fit the study time in the middle of the adventure. Do you refluff the wizard to let his mechanics fit his backstory, or does he have to find new mechanics that are already matching his plot line?

If he gained the wizard class in play, he would likely take after what/who ever taught or inspired him to change carer path. At least initially. He might start with a spellbook given or taken from another, and begin transferring them to a more comfortable medium over the next level. Before letting a Barbarian go into wizard, I might consider enforcing it to buy off the illiteracy first.

[The Dark Fiddler]

Give me two minutes to find the thread I made on the subject of class fluff like a month ago. It got be like forty pages or pointless arguing. Hopefully this will prevent this thread from devolving into the same thing.

Edit: Here you go. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=206955) 42 pages to read through on a very similar, if not the same, subject.

[JaronK]

Quite simply, when people say "if you don't like magic, don't play D&D" they mean that the game of D&D is inexorably linked with magic... magic items control how well even the most mundane of characters perform. Pulling it out completely changes the game, and means that you should probably be playing something designed for that.

Meanwhile, adapting the fluff on a class here or there doesn't really effect overall gameplay. So there's no problem.

That's the huge difference.

[BenInHB]

Sounds great, I really like that take.
But what if he gained Wizard IN an adventure?

By the books, wizards are assumed to spend YEARS studying, and a barbarian is a least likely of those to study magic. What do you do if your player comes up and says "My barbarian is taking a level of Wizard" and you know you can't fit the study time in the middle of the adventure. Do you refluff the wizard to let his mechanics fit his backstory, or does he have to find new mechanics that are already matching his plot line?

To me Wizard1 doesn't represent a master wizard who has spent years studying magic. It is the starting point, they are a neophyte, a fledgeling, a beginner.

A Fighter is also suppose to have spent years training his skill but not every Fighter1 is a Blademaster or Captain of the Guard. Fighter1 just represents a focus on building martial skill, you are not yet a master but you are better than Joe Commoner when it comes to a fight, even though only slightly.

Now there are some definite problems for a Barb going Wizard like illiteracy, But those things can be bought off or worked through over time.

In fact Barb/Fighter/Wizard makes somewhat of a logical progression to me. Starting out as a wild warrior who fights with raw emotion, then beginning to develop technique and uses strategy and maneuvers when he fights, he likes the advantage that using his head has given him and begins to notice how powerful these frail little men in robes waving there little stick can be and wants some of that power for himself.

[Zale]

The idea of some tribal wizard using tattoos as a spell book makes far more sense to me than a spellbook.

Unless you want every random wizard in the middle of the wilderness to somehow have a paper spellbook. :smallconfused:

There's even rules in one of the Complete books for a wizard using his/her body as a spellbook with tattoos.

[DiBastet]

Don't confuse changing fluff with ignoring mechanical things. The spellbook has its price and weight and whatever, and there are rules for you to inscribe spells in your body. Just removing this with the excuse of "changing fluff" is very wrong.

However, I believe you're very much into allowing things you agree and not ones you don't, so suit yourself.

[Greenish]

Which is, if not stated plainly; If you believe if Refluffing's ok, how about homebrewing?Sure, I'm okay with homebrewing. I don't do it myself, but if the DM okays it and it fits, I can use homebrewed stuff.

Of course, homebrewing something that works in the existing framework of rules and changing the basic assumptions of that framework are two different things. I don't mind the latter, either, but sometimes using a different system would be the easier solution.


Unless you want every random wizard in the middle of the wilderness to somehow have a paper spellbook. :smallconfused:There was a wilderness wizard variant (it wasn't called that) in one of the Dragon Magazines, I seem to recall. I forgot how it dealt with spellbooks, though.

[Zale]

Don't confuse changing fluff with ignoring mechanical things. The spellbook has its price and weight and whatever, and there are rules for you to inscribe spells in your body. Just removing this with the excuse of "changing fluff" is very wrong.

However, I believe you're very much into allowing things you agree and not ones you don't, so suit yourself.

There are rules for using your body as a spellbook via tattoos. They're in Complete Arcane.

They require more gold than normal to scribe, as well as a Craft (Tattooing) check. You also only get eighty pages worth of spells instead of 100.

:smallconfused:

I'll try not to feel insulted by your last comment.

[Prime32]

The idea of some tribal wizard using tattoos as a spell book makes far more sense to me than a spellbook.

Unless you want every random wizard in the middle of the wilderness to somehow have a paper spellbook. :smallconfused:

There's even rules in one of the Complete books for a wizard using his/her body as a spellbook with tattoos.All wizards record spells in different ways anyway; carve them into knucklebones if you want. There's an example spellbook in Dragon which is written with live snakes. I've been in a game where an NPC wizard recorded their spells as Braille bumps concealed in their clothes.

You could always go with that crystal from Eberron that works like a spellbook.

[Captain Six]

Magic comes down to a matter of taste. I like my magical fluff rigid personally. Magic is magic, it is beyond mortal reasoning and we are grasping at the fringes of its potential. Magic does not care what you think, magic does not work the way you want it to. Magic works the way it works, take it or leave it. It's a harsh edge of realism to a fantastic aspect of the world which I feel anchors it into believably.

That said I hold a special place in my heart for "anything goes" kitchen-sink settings. I've tried to get a DM to allow "Energy Substitution: Knives" and have all my Area of Effect spells deal Magical Piercing damage that is subject to DR instead of Energy Resistance.

[TwylyghT]

There are rules for using your body as a spellbook via tattoos. They're in Complete Arcane.

They require more gold than normal to scribe, as well as a Craft (Tattooing) check. You also only get eighty pages worth of spells instead of 100.

:smallconfused:.

Ha! so there is, good find. Though im sure you have problems to worry about, if your party had to revive you by reincarnation, you'd be in a mighty pickle lol.

What would happen if you gained a "natural" natural armor bonus? would the scales or whatever you have grown ruin your spells?

on a related but not really related note...

If you you tattoo a message on a small creature like a cat, mouse, or very young human infant, you now have something under 10 pounds that is bearing written information... can you cast explosive runes on it? What if its already dead? Hmmmm maybe my nest BBEG will be a necromantic dead baby bomber...