kender no fear?

[Deremir]

so my dm has made a ruling that kender have to have fear because if they didn't they could not survive. in her eyes a character that has no fear would not be able to retreat (even strategically) because a character with no fear would not fear death and thus not CARE about whether or not he died and so wouldn't retreat even if he was sure to die. My argument is that my character wants to experience as much of this world before he leaves it and thus prefers not to die.

she seems to be basing part of this off of how in our first session (which we just had) my character ran away from a monster and to our boat (where the rest of the party was) and then turned to fight the monster. she believes that i would not do that if i did not have a fear of dying

thoughts? opinions? who's right here?

(also please don't turn this into yet another thread about whether it is or is not a good idea to play a kender)

[Kid Jake]

I see it like this.

If the tiger catches the monkey, the monkey's screwed; but that doesn't mean the monkey's scared. It just means he's gotta be faster than the tiger if he wants to keep playing.

[jaydubs]

I think it's bad practice in general for a DM to tell a player how they should be roleplaying a character. There are exceptions to that, such as dropping a reminder when it seems like an oversight or if it's blatantly metagamey (in a bad way). But when the player just has a different interpretation of how a character would behave, the player's judgment needs to take precedence.

But to get into the actual argument, I think she's confusing "no fear" with "incapable of measuring risks" or "totally unconcerned with self-preservation." To me, fear is that specific emotion that triggers when we feel danger, and causes us to want to fight/flee/hide. But just because something can't feel that particular emotion, doesn't mean it can't decide to retreat for other reasons.

Fictional examples that show something without fear can still retreat:

-Data from Star Trek TNG. A huge part of his character is the inability to feel any emotions, including fear. But he still has the capability to choose to retreat on numerous occasions.

-Insert Terminator model here. Let's go with the traditional T-800 from the first movie. If it's tasked with killing someone, I don't see it retreating in order to preserve life and limb. But it might very well calculate that the chance of success in a given scenario is too small, and therefore retreat to make a more likely attempt at a later time.

Real life examples that show something without fear can still retreat:

-Again, computer-based decision making. Take video games, or NASA robots, or what have you. It's quite easy to program something to retreat under X scenario. But that clearly doesn't equate to the robot/video game character/whatever actually feeling afraid.

-Organisms too simple to feel emotions. Things like bacteria are too simple to actually feel fear, but they can still flee from danger.

[Red Fel]

thoughts? opinions? who's right here?

There's a difference between having no fear and having no sense of self-preservation, just like there's a difference between bravery and stupidity. In fact, the analogy is virtually identical.

The Kender are joyful creatures. They don't fear because they find joy in everything; every opportunity is a chance for more excitement, not terror. That said, they don't have to be stupid. They may not be afraid of the dragon, but they know it will eat them; they may not be afraid of death, but that doesn't mean they look forward to it. They may seek to avoid it, but it simply doesn't worry them.

Also, as others have mentioned, it's bad form for a DM to tell you how to play your character, or for a DM to change the rules once gameplay has begun (absent serious shenanigans). Have a sit-down and ask your DM what the problem is; it's possible that this is just the vent for a deeper frustration with something else. Out of all the things to become cross over, a Kender's inability to feel fear seems oddly innocuous.

[Karl Aegis]

An entire race of things that will jump off a cliff if you dared them to. Why aren't they extinct?

[Kid Jake]

An entire race of things that will jump off a cliff if you dared them to. Why aren't they extinct?

Unafraid isn't the same thing as stupid. I wouldn't be afraid of a bonfire if I stumbled across one; but that doesn't mean I'm going to leap in head first and roll around. I'm not afraid of spiders, but I wouldn't see how many I could fit in my mouth on a whim.

[xBlackWolfx]

There are people in the world who don't experience fear: they're called psychopaths.

They don't fear death, but they try to preserve their existence anyway. Why? Because its more fun that way. To them, life is literally a game. Oh, and because they don't feel fear, they also don't fear punishment, or pain. They don't like pain, but there's nothing in their heads telling them to avoid it. They don't care what others think of them, they just make people think they're an angel just because its amusing and comes with practical benefits.

A person who is actually incapable of feeling fear is NOT a good thing. They can't be intimidated, they can't be controlled, they do w/e they want regardless of the possible consequences.

And of course, psychopaths tend to be violent, though not always. The business world is dominated by psychopaths. Their screwed-up minds are ideal for success in a capitalistic economy, where the only rule is 'survival of the fittest'. They have no moral code (since they don't fear punishment), and they feel no empathy. They will do w/e is necessary to get what they want.

A person like this cannot be good. They can only be evil. There's no way it can be good...

[Kid Jake]

A person like this cannot be good. They can only be evil. There's no way it can be good...

Oh definitely. There's no way that anyone without fear could ever become anything more than an absolute monster.

[Ralanr]

A person who is actually incapable of feeling fear is NOT a good thing. They can't be intimidated, they can't be controlled, they do w/e they want regardless of the possible consequences.

I doubt such a person could ever be considered brave or courageous either. In my opinion anyway. To me, being courageous is having fear but not letting it control your actions. You fight the fear back and push forward. How can something that feels no fear be courageous?

Hell do they even have a fight or flight response?

[Keltest]

Back to the actual topic, I agree with the people who said your DM was out of line. Besides it being your character, not theirs, fear is not the only reason for someone to retreat from a fight.

[Battlebooze]

Your DM was out of line, but then again, playing a Kender means you deserved it.

(also please don't turn this into yet another thread about whether it is or is not a good idea to play a kender)

Kender fearlessness is as innate to Kender as the above is to discussing them.

[Coidzor]

There are people in the world who don't experience fear: they're called psychopaths.

They don't fear death, but they try to preserve their existence anyway. Why? Because its more fun that way. To them, life is literally a game. Oh, and because they don't feel fear, they also don't fear punishment, or pain. They don't like pain, but there's nothing in their heads telling them to avoid it. They don't care what others think of them, they just make people think they're an angel just because its amusing and comes with practical benefits.

A person who is actually incapable of feeling fear is NOT a good thing. They can't be intimidated, they can't be controlled, they do w/e they want regardless of the possible consequences.

And of course, psychopaths tend to be violent, though not always. The business world is dominated by psychopaths. Their screwed-up minds are ideal for success in a capitalistic economy, where the only rule is 'survival of the fittest'. They have no moral code (since they don't fear punishment), and they feel no empathy. They will do w/e is necessary to get what they want.

A person like this cannot be good. They can only be evil. There's no way it can be good...

Now you've done and gone it. You've unleashed a new idea into the ether. Business-Kender.

[Keltest]

Now you've done and gone it. You've unleashed a new idea into the ether. Business-Kender.

Even the Dragonlance authors didn't do that! The horror!

[LibraryOgre]

As others have said, kender don't experience fear, but that doesn't mean that they are suicidal or incapable of evaluating risk... their valuations might be a bit different, but they're not incapable of saying "That's gonna get me killed."

On a bit more meta level, Fear is an actual game effect, with actual game consequences. In AD&D, there was a 1st level spell for clerics and wizards that caused fear... it was a common thing to encounter. Most PCs could be adequately considered to be immune to fear... under normal circumstances, they never check morale, and they behave in a way that is completely determined outside themselves. If I say my 1st level dwarven fighter is going to hold the corridor against 1000 screaming trolls, then he does it, even though it's a stupid thing for a 1st level fighter to try. It's suicidal, and he's going to fail barring divine intervention. But he's experiencing fear only as a role-playing aspect... it has no game effects. My kender handler, on the other hand, is free to say "I don't want to see what it's like to be pooped out by troll that much!" and run away. He's not afraid... he's just got other priorities than being eaten.

On the other hand, if that same 1st level dwarven fighter is facing a 1st level priest who casts "Cause Fear" on him, the fighter, despite my role-playing HAS to make a saving throw. If he fails, he HAS to run away. The kender handler, though? He's immune to fear... it has no game effects on him. The priest casts the spell, the kender says "My, that was an odd time for a prayer", and cuts the priest's belt so his pants fall down. Because Fear, as a game effect, has no effect on the character.

[Sith_Happens]

so my dm has made a ruling that kender have to have fear because if they didn't they could not survive. in her eyes a character that has no fear would not be able to retreat (even strategically) because a character with no fear would not fear death and thus not CARE about whether or not he died and so wouldn't retreat even if he was sure to die. My argument is that my character wants to experience as much of this world before he leaves it and thus prefers not to die.

she seems to be basing part of this off of how in our first session (which we just had) my character ran away from a monster and to our boat (where the rest of the party was) and then turned to fight the monster. she believes that i would not do that if i did not have a fear of dying

thoughts? opinions? who's right here?

How does she handle Paladins, I wonder.

[NomGarret]

The best example I've seen, outside of some particularly good kender players, is in the Jim Henson Storyteller series. One of them is entitled, appropriately, "Fearnot." Anyone wondering what kender fearlessness looks like should watch that.

[Keltest]

The best example I've seen, outside of some particularly good kender players, is in the Jim Henson Storyteller series. One of them is entitled, appropriately, "Fearnot." Anyone wondering what kender fearlessness looks like should watch that.

Or heck, just read the actual dragonlance books.

[LibraryOgre]

Or heck, just read the actual dragonlance books.

I would suggest starting with "Kaz, The Minotaur". Kaz teaches his kender companion, Delbin Knotwillow, that sometimes he needs to stop talking or he will anger the minotaur, and that is not nearly as fun as it might sound.

[themaque]

A person like this cannot be good. They can only be evil. There's no way it can be good...

Just because they lack fear doesn't mean they lack empathy.

and as far as your GM is concerned, I also feel there is a diffrence between being afraid of something and considering it inconsequential.

[Maglubiyet]

Also, they might not fear death, but they could fear other things -- being separated from friends/letting friends down by dying, reputation - i.e. losing to someone they deem inferior (what will people say!), missing out on the loot, or missing Taco Tuesday dinner.

Kender are curious, right? Maybe they don't want to die just because then they don't get to see what happens tomorrow!

(Anyway, your DM's ruling is silly).

[Esprit15]

I wonder what your GM thinks of the Paladin, to echo some mentions of others.

[BWR]

If the DM wants to make game-wide alterations to a race in the game, that's her business and her right. This isn't saying 'you have to play your character this way', this is altering the nature of the game. It's no different than saying "in my games, goblins are effete, sophisticated urban artistes instead of crude tribal monsters who hang out in the swamp".
I do, like many other here, think she is misinterpreting what 'no fear' means, and it definitely doesn't jive with how kender have been portrayed in the books.

Kender aren't stupid, they aren't suicidal, most don't go around trying to find dangerous situations. All adventurers are far more suicidal than the vast majority of kender.

[LibraryOgre]

Just because they lack fear doesn't mean they lack empathy.

In fact, reading the books, Kender tend to be filled with empathy.

[Keltest]

In fact, reading the books, Kender tend to be filled with empathy.

Even for the bad guys!

[Gritmonger]

I'm torn. Fear is a survival trait - so how would you survive if you had no fear? What other selection criteria would have to come into play to keep your species alive?

It would need to be something that would allow them to exploit good luck - namely an explicit trait of good luck, or a high enough birth rate to afford shedding so much of the population. So, kids are expected to die or be extremely lucky.

Fear also makes you wary of strangers - Kender should be the most gullible creatures on the planet.

So, honestly - I'd think that would lead to a distinct lack of parental care or oversight, since while you might impart positive skills, you could not confer any warnings or dangers because you don't have any to confer.

So, in conclusion, I think Kender realistically would be octopi.

[Keltest]

I'm torn. Fear is a survival trait - so how would you survive if you had no fear? What other selection criteria would have to come into play to keep your species alive?

It would need to be something that would allow them to exploit good luck - namely an explicit trait of good luck, or a high enough birth rate to afford shedding so much of the population. So, kids are expected to die or be extremely lucky.

Fear also makes you wary of strangers - Kender should be the most gullible creatures on the planet.

So, honestly - I'd think that would lead to a distinct lack of parental care or oversight, since while you might impart positive skills, you could not confer any warnings or dangers because you don't have any to confer.

So, in conclusion, I think Kender realistically would be octopi.

Kender manage to survive for two reasons. One, is that for all their annoying habits, theyre REALLY good at surviving once people decide to kill them. Probably due to practice. If a kender isnt ready to stop experiencing things yet, they'll avoid death, and good luck catching them. Two is that a lack of fear does not mean stupid. Theyre fully capable of recognizing dangerous situations, and recognize when unpleasant things happen or are about to happen. A kender isnt going to stab themselves to see what it would be like.

Also, Kender are totally gullible, but pulling a fast one on a kender is pointless anyway unless youre trying to get them to go away. Theres a moderate chance they'll end up with more of your money after a scam than you do of theirs, and being malicious to a kender by sending them into, say, a dragons lair is going to result in the kender having fun, and possibly making the dragon mad at you.

[Flickerdart]

I'm not afraid of Brussel sprouts, but it doesn't mean I want to eat them.

[Kid Jake]

Kender manage to survive for two reasons. One, is that for all their annoying habits, theyre REALLY good at surviving once people decide to kill them. Probably due to practice. If a kender isnt ready to stop experiencing things yet, they'll avoid death, and good luck catching them. Two is that a lack of fear does not mean stupid. Theyre fully capable of recognizing dangerous situations, and recognize when unpleasant things happen or are about to happen. A kender isnt going to stab themselves to see what it would be like.

Also, Kender are totally gullible, but pulling a fast one on a kender is pointless anyway unless youre trying to get them to go away. Theres a moderate chance they'll end up with more of your money after a scam than you do of theirs, and being malicious to a kender by sending them into, say, a dragons lair is going to result in the kender having fun, and possibly making the dragon mad at you.

They're basically a race of Mr Magoos.

[Segev]

Paladins are also unable to feel fear.

[themaque]

Paladins are also unable to feel fear.

And this very comic has good examples of them living up to their ideals, and how that lack of fear can be used to bring them down as well.