Post/Author/DateTime	Post
BoringInfoGuy 04-04-07, 12:15 AM	No, this is not a "My paladin did X, my DM said I fell, and I think he was wrong" type post. No, this is something a little different. Right before the game went on hold, my paladin hit 5th level. Which means it is time to get a mount. No problem. I WANT the mount. My problem is a choice. Summon a Warhorse, or a Chocobo. For those not in the know, a Chocobo is a bird type mount from the Final Fantasy series video games. During the break, I was thinking of running a game. While looking through my magazines, I found a Dragon Magazine with the stats for the Chocobo. Since my DM is a fan of FF, I showed him the article. He read through it, and asked if I wanted one for my mount. Up to that point, I'd forgotten that they could be paladin mounts. Now, this is the first time I've played a paladin. And normally, I like to play the standard version of new races or classes. So, my typical response would be to take the warhorse. Add to that I normally hate putting video game elements into D&D. As in despise with a passion that borders on the fanatical. But the chocobo is an exception. All the hate I have for video games in D&D does not apply. Me like chocobo. So, my dilemma is to either go with my desire to play the standard paladin, or my desire to have a chocobo. For comparison, the Chocobo is faster than the warhorse, with a stronger standard attack. The warhorse has a better full attack, and can carry more. There's more, but those are the biggest difference.
darkneolink 04-04-07, 12:48 AM	are there any other chocobos in the world? or any other FF influence (including the FF formula) Being a FF fan myself i'd say take the chocobo... I mean its a great choice for a mount... so the chocobo will do I don't like having too many videogames in my campaign either
pres_man 04-04-07, 12:54 AM	Well since your mount will only be called for what 10 hours, you might want to have a back up mount anyway. This can be a warhorse that you use when your mount is not available, it can also carry the extra gear that you might need when you can't call your mount (sleeping and camping gear, etc). This way you can have the best of both worlds.
darkhunter2007 04-04-07, 12:37 PM	LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! i use opera browser, and theres an option of speech here so i lay down and listen to your post and as it hits FF (Final Fentasy) i hear FF (french fries). now i think the horse is better...
_Jayne_Cobb_ 04-04-07, 12:54 PM	One thing to consider: anyone who isn't an FF fan is going to think you are a complete dork for riding around on a giant yellow bird.
BoringInfoGuy 04-04-07, 02:27 PM	Nope, no other Final Fantasy elements. This has been primarily a Core game. It's a first time DM, and he's still new to the game in general. There are a couple of optional rules he created on an important NPC, but we don't know what they are. (The King's bodyguard. A helpful, but rather. . . intimidating figure.) So having a Chocobo Mount would be the first non core thing for the players in this game. It shouldn't disrupt the game, but I worry about opening pandora's box. Also, we've been doing a lot of traveling, so we have a two horse cart to carry gear / treasure / us. I don't need to worry about my mount doubling as a pack mule. On the whole, it's been a great game. We decided not to run another game during the break so that we could jump right back in. Almost 4 months now. Normally, that would mean a dead game. So you can imagine our level of engagement. I've just been conflicted. Both mounts would fit Ren, my Paladin. Hence my seeking the perspective of others.
Daydreamer 04-04-07, 02:30 PM	I dont know if you can answer this question in game maybe? Picture your character and who he is-what choice would he make if offered an alternative?
Prator_the_Legendary 04-04-07, 03:14 PM	Hmmm... Well, if you plan to ride your mount into battle a lot, a Chocobo's superior speed and attack power makes it ideal. Otherwise, I'd suggest going with a warhorse, just because Choccies are a bit silly.
Khoran 04-04-07, 03:22 PM	I'd take the Warhorse, myself. Chocobos are alright, but there is something more itimdating and inspiring about a warhorse. What seems more heroic, a heavily armored divine knight on a Warhorse summoned from the heavens, or the same knight on a Chicken summoned from the Heavens. And since you arn't in a Final Fantasy based world from it sounds, you'd possibly be the only person riding a chocobo, and while that's cool for the uniqueness, it seems a little silly that there is only one of these creatures. On a related note, which Dragon Magazine is it that has the stats for a Chocobo. Might be useful if I ever run a FF based campaign.
HermitIX 04-04-07, 03:30 PM	Ok FF rules, but I would stick with the horse, unless there are other coco-riders out there. It would seem odd to me if you were the ONLY one.
Pyritefoolsgold 04-04-07, 05:33 PM	Only do it if your DM wants to generally insert them into the world. Also, make sure to get one that is kind of fierce looking. Of course, if your intention is to play a silly campaign, neither of these apply.
The Game 04-04-07, 08:44 PM	Or play WoW. Then you can be a paladin (An OP class). Be on the better faction (Horde) AND Ride all the chocobo your legs can handle! http://worldofwarcraft.com/info/basics/mounts/hawkstriders.html
BoringInfoGuy 04-04-07, 09:53 PM	One thing to consider: anyone who isn't an FF fan is going to think you are a complete dork for riding around on a giant yellow bird. I was hoping for at least geek status.
LeuktheSavior 04-04-07, 10:18 PM	the question is, are you more of a Basch from FFXII type of guy, where you actually looked cool on a giant yellow bird while hacking your opponents, or are you more of a traditional looking knight in shining armor type?
Toran_A_Sunder 04-04-07, 10:31 PM	I'm going to say this. PLay the chocobo. I have two reasons. I'll give you the better one first. 1: As a die hard fan of kender, they are my all time favorite characters to play. If you are familiar with kender, you would understand why a DM would be hesitant to allow me to play kender in their games (if you're not familiar, look them up on wikipedia). Now most DMs are esitant to let people play kener because they normally play them wrong. My DMs are especially hesitant t let me play a kender because I play them right :D So, my point is, whenevr I find a DM who will actually let me play a kender, I jump at the chance, always, no matter what other character idea I have lined up. Because I never know when I'll get the chance to play one again. I'm playing a kender this summer when my friend starts his game. I havent played one since 2003. Thats four years!! So use the Chocobo, because your DM will let you, and you never know if any other DM will allow you to bring FF flavor into their game. 2: Shorter reason. The whole time I read this thread I was imagining a knight in shining armor, racing to save his damsel in distress on his noble chocobo steed (if you played FF Tactics, the opening scene...kind of) and I thought...this is awesome. I want a chocobo steed in my game. So I demand you play one, because the awesomeness will know no bounds. My 2 cps.
Comus 04-04-07, 10:31 PM	the question is, are you more of a Basch from FFXII type of guy, where you actually looked cool on a giant yellow bird while hacking your opponents, or are you more of a traditional looking knight in shining armor type? Or are you more like Balthier and get the hot bunny ladies?
LeuktheSavior 04-04-07, 10:32 PM	especially dominatrix bunny ladies.
BoringInfoGuy 04-04-07, 11:45 PM	I dont know if you can answer this question in game maybe? Picture your character and who he is-what choice would he make if offered an alternative? Ren wants to be the typical paladin. A heroic figure who inspires hope to the downtrodden and fear in the hearts of darkness. But his stats are STR: 13, DEX: 8, CON: 10, INT: 13, WIS: 13, CHA: 18. His mentor believes that the heart of a paladin is more important than his sword arm. Ren agrees, but with a 10 CON and a tendency to roll 1 for hitpoints, he wouldn't mind a stronger sword arm, shield arm, steadier legs, and a studier chest to protect said heart. That's Ren in a nutshell. Idealism with a trace of cynicism. At the start of the game, Ren fit in well as support melee, support healing, and primary face. But the dwarven barbarian's player, our primary melee combatant, moved out of the country. So Ren is now our main melee warrior. So, if it was presented to him as a choice, here's his view. A Warhorse would fit the paladin ideal better. The greater overall power of the Warhorse would help him act as primary melee. The chocobo is unorthadox, but so is Ren. The greater speed and stronger standard attack of the chocobo fits better with hit and run style tactics. With Ren's low HP, that would be a safer strategy for him.
BoringInfoGuy 04-04-07, 11:49 PM	Hmmm... Well, if you plan to ride your mount into battle a lot, a Chocobo's superior speed and attack power makes it ideal. Otherwise, I'd suggest going with a warhorse, just because Choccies are a bit silly. He'd probably spend most battles mounted. And the chocobo sounds funny, but it doesn't feel silly. But I can image my fellow players humming the chocobo theme at me. . .
BoringInfoGuy 04-04-07, 11:52 PM	I'd take the Warhorse, myself. Chocobos are alright, but there is something more itimdating and inspiring about a warhorse. What seems more heroic, a heavily armored divine knight on a Warhorse summoned from the heavens, or the same knight on a Chicken summoned from the Heavens. And since you arn't in a Final Fantasy based world from it sounds, you'd possibly be the only person riding a chocobo, and while that's cool for the uniqueness, it seems a little silly that there is only one of these creatures. On a related note, which Dragon Magazine is it that has the stats for a Chocobo. Might be useful if I ever run a FF based campaign. Issue 323, September 2004. Look for a white cover with a red dragon clawing through.
BoringInfoGuy 04-05-07, 12:02 AM	Ok FF rules, but I would stick with the horse, unless there are other coco-riders out there. It would seem odd to me if you were the ONLY one. Only do it if your DM wants to generally insert them into the world. Also, make sure to get one that is kind of fierce looking. Of course, if your intention is to play a silly campaign, neither of these apply. Not a silly campaign, so let us get that out of the way. I asked about chocobo's in his world. The basic rundown is if I choose the Chocobo, they will be in his world. Not on the same continent we are on, but in the world. Which would explain why we haven't seem any yet. So Ren would certainly cause a stir.
BoringInfoGuy 04-05-07, 12:17 AM	the question is, are you more of a Basch from FFXII type of guy, where you actually looked cool on a giant yellow bird while hacking your opponents, or are you more of a traditional looking knight in shining armor type? With horrible dex, and low HP, Ren would quickly be caught dead without his armor. He just got his hands on a set of full plate to replace the first set he had. Rust Monster, 'nuff said.
Pyritefoolsgold 04-05-07, 12:26 AM	Just make sure it's understood that it's not just an ordinary racing chocobo. This, my friends, is a fierce warchocobo. He should be a little fluffy and cute when your showing him off to teh maidenz, but in battle he should more represent an eagle than a baby chick.
BoringInfoGuy 04-05-07, 12:52 AM	I'm going to say this. PLay the chocobo. I have two reasons. I'll give you the better one first. 1: As a die hard fan of kender, they are my all time favorite characters to play. If you are familiar with kender, you would understand why a DM would be hesitant to allow me to play kender in their games (if you're not familiar, look them up on wikipedia). Now most DMs are esitant to let people play kener because they normally play them wrong. My DMs are especially hesitant t let me play a kender because I play them right :D So, my point is, whenevr I find a DM who will actually let me play a kender, I jump at the chance, always, no matter what other character idea I have lined up. Because I never know when I'll get the chance to play one again. I'm playing a kender this summer when my friend starts his game. I havent played one since 2003. Thats four years!! So use the Chocobo, because your DM will let you, and you never know if any other DM will allow you to bring FF flavor into their game. 2: Shorter reason. The whole time I read this thread I was imagining a knight in shining armor, racing to save his damsel in distress on his noble chocobo steed (if you played FF Tactics, the opening scene...kind of) and I thought...this is awesome. I want a chocobo steed in my game. So I demand you play one, because the awesomeness will know no bounds. My 2 cps. Dragonlance is my favorite D&D setting. I know kender. And I can see why a DM would be hesitant. Even if he's ok with the RP aspects, the 2nd edition DM had to keep track of what's in the kenders bags. That was a lot of upkeep. Don't know about the 3rd edition kender. You have a very good point. Who knows when I can get another chance? I've already had to wait a long time for a chance to play a paladin in the first place. It's really important to have the DM and player on the same page before having a paladin. The DM I'd been playing under for the past few years hated the class, and my play style in general. The next DM is a long time friend. His games run on the fun side. Good games, just not one I'd want to play a paladin in. Which is why I'm playing paladin in this game, even though my rolls would've made an ideal wizard. When would I next have a chance? So, for the chocobo. If I don't choose it now, I accept that I may not get another chance for some time.
Suzaku455 04-05-07, 10:00 PM	Or play WoW. Then you can be a paladin (An OP class). Be on the better faction (Horde) AND Ride all the chocobo your legs can handle! http://worldofwarcraft.com/info/basics/mounts/hawkstriders.html Yeah but he would have to play WoW to get that feature. What kind of sick monster are you to suggest someone to play that awful game? Only good thing that comes from WOW is leeroy Jerkins fad...
BoringInfoGuy 04-06-07, 01:18 AM	Just make sure it's understood that it's not just an ordinary racing chocobo. This, my friends, is a fierce warchocobo. He should be a little fluffy and cute when your showing him off to teh maidenz, but in battle he should more represent an eagle than a baby chick. Well, the stats are for the riding chocobo. But a riding chocobo is pretty comparable to a warhorse. Consider the look of an armored chocobo on the attack. Here's an issue. If I have one of the few (only?) chocobo on the continent, than his later gained ability to command others of his kind would be rather useless.
danielinthewolvesden 04-06-07, 02:47 AM	Not a silly campaign, so let us get that out of the way. It will be when you add chocobo's.
Cartigan 04-06-07, 07:06 AM	It will be when you add chocobo's. I don't see why there isn't some form of large, semi-magical bird in D&D that can be tamed to be ridden. There's everything else...
Dei 04-06-07, 08:30 PM	Chocobo, go for the chocobo, it is your duty as a human being. If there's people out there thinking it wouldn't make a very suitable war-mount have a look at the Hawkstriders from World of Warcraft or the chocobo cavalry in Final Fantasy X. Honestly though, I don't see the harm. Provided it would fit with your character's flavour then go for it.
Kradlo 04-06-07, 09:14 PM	I checked the issue of The Dragon to make sure. The riding bird (chocobo) is flightless, so you don't have to worry about keeping to a light load for flight. Since it's bipedal, it doesn't have the carrying capacity of an equivalently sized quadruped (up to 230 pounds). Your paladin with armor and gear will certainly move it to a Medium load, reducing its speed to 40 ft. The heavy warhorse has a base move of 50 ft., and only over 345 pounds will be reduced to 35 ft. But, as you rise in level, you mount gains Strength, and hence carrying capacity. I will say that the chocobo looks pretty cool. Plus it has really good Listen and Spot checks. So, if you can pare down your weight, you might go with the bird. If you can find a mini for it, that would be great. Good luck!
Deathmond 04-06-07, 09:17 PM	Make sure the first time you summon him it's big and dramatic at first. "Behold my Divine might! Gaze upon my might War...chicken?! I thought I was getting a horse? Why did I just summon a chicken?!" Though I suppose this might be a tad silly >_>
BoringInfoGuy 04-07-07, 12:47 AM	It will be when you add chocobo's. Why? What makes the chocobo inherantly silly? At least, more silly than grown men playing a game of make believe in the first place? (There was the time I made the mistake of naming a cleric "Yoda." No one could refer to my character by name and take it seriously. I changed it pretty quickly) Which reminds me. . . My character is named Ren. He was trained by Ian Boydson. Ian Boydson adventured with a wizard named Malakym in his youth, before settling down to marry the Lady Jessica. His mount will be named Micah, be it a horse or chocobo. I'll give a virtual cookie to anyone who knows why this is a reason to pick the chocobo over the horse.
darkneolink 04-07-07, 01:23 AM	faster + stronger + badder= Chocobo also I think that the warhorse is a little too standar and you have told us that your pally is anything but standar cookie plz
danielinthewolvesden 04-07-07, 04:24 AM	Why? What makes the chocobo inherantly silly? At least, more silly than grown men playing a game of make believe in the first place? . Because it's from a VIDEO game. And the very name sounds silly. I got no problems with some sort of riding bird, but a "chocobo"?:rolleyes:
Cartigan 04-07-07, 09:38 AM	Because it's from a VIDEO game. And the very name sounds silly. I got no problems with some sort of riding bird, but a "chocobo"?:rolleyes: Hippogriff anyone?
BoringInfoGuy 04-07-07, 01:40 PM	Hippogriff anyone? LOL. Sounds like match point.
Toran_A_Sunder 04-07-07, 01:47 PM	Dragonlance is my favorite D&D setting. I know kender. And I can see why a DM would be hesitant. Even if he's ok with the RP aspects, the 2nd edition DM had to keep track of what's in the kenders bags. That was a lot of upkeep. Don't know about the 3rd edition kender. You have a very good point. Who knows when I can get another chance? I've already had to wait a long time for a chance to play a paladin in the first place. It's really important to have the DM and player on the same page before having a paladin. The DM I'd been playing under for the past few years hated the class, and my play style in general. The next DM is a long time friend. His games run on the fun side. Good games, just not one I'd want to play a paladin in. Which is why I'm playing paladin in this game, even though my rolls would've made an ideal wizard. When would I next have a chance? So, for the chocobo. If I don't choose it now, I accept that I may not get another chance for some time. Dragonlance is my fav setting too. But you see my point. If you don't use the chocobo now, you may not get the chance for a very long time, if ever, whether as a paladins mount or a mount for some other character. Use it cus, well, it's just awesome. Kender in 3.x, I feel, don't really capture what a true kender is. Plus, most people just play kender as insane kleptomaniacs. Thats not how a kender should be played. I've home brewed my own kender and it seems to work out just fine for the DMs who see it. As you can see in my sig, they are my fav race. Again, any chance I get to play one, I take it. I think you should take the same approach to this chocobo. And Daniel, if you're going to look at some of the monsters in all the MMs, the FF, and the other books, and then say that a chocobo will make the game silly...man I want to live in your world :D
Cartigan 04-07-07, 01:55 PM	And Daniel, if you're going to look at some of the monsters in all the MMs, the FF, and the other books, and then say that a chocobo will make the game silly...man I want to live in your world :D Yeah, doesn't D&D have a giant JELLO monster?
BoringInfoGuy 04-08-07, 12:19 AM	So, at this point, the major disadvantages with the Chocobo are as follows. Can't use the Command others of it's kind ability if there aren't others of thier kind around to command. Lesser carry weight. The Chocobo's light load is up to 232 lbs. Ren wieghs 175 lbs. Full plate runs 50 lbs. His heavy wooden shield is 10 lbs. Longsword is 4 lbs. Lance would be 10 lbs. So. . . 175 Ren + 50 Full Plate = 225 lbs + 10 Heavy Wood Shield = 235 lbs. 235 lbs. + 4 Longsword or + 10 Lance 239 lbs. 245 lbs. Ren, with just armor and shield, already put the chocobo into a medium load. To get the chocobo's full speed, Ren would need to skip the shield and go with the longsword instead of the lance.
Cartigan 04-08-07, 10:42 AM	How are you getting the load numbers.
Kradlo 04-08-07, 06:09 PM	Both the chocobo and the heavy warhorse have a base Strength 18. The paladin's mount at level 5 has +1 Strength, so they both would have Str 19. Both are Large (x2 load capacity). The heavy warhorse is a quadruped (+50% total capacity, and this doesn't fall into the "stacking multipliers" category). The chocobo would have 0-233 Light, 234-466 Medium, 467-700 Heavy. The heavy warhorse would have 0-350 Light, 351-700 Medium, 701-1050 Heavy. So, while the chocob's base speed is greater (60 feet), taking into account the weight of the rider, the rider's armor and weapons, plus saddle and bridle (not to mention his other gear), the chocobo will be at a Medium load. That reduces its speed to 40 feet. The heavy warhorse can manage this and stay in the Light load category, maintaining its full 50 foot movement speed. But, if you get barding, both will be reduced: 40 ft. for chocobo, 35 ft. for heavy warhorse. So, if you have a barded chocobo, it will be faster than a barded heavy warhorse.
Cartigan 04-08-07, 10:18 PM	Nevermind.
BoringInfoGuy 04-09-07, 02:30 PM	No worries, Cartigan. I just figured out why the sample mount for the paladin has a jump score listed, but the one in the Monster Manual does not. The warhorse, like the chocobo, has no ranks or racial bonuses in jumping. But you get a +4 to jump checks for every 10 ft your speed is above 30. So the PHB listed a +12 jump for the warhorse (8 from speed and 4 from strength) because it's something that is likely to come up for the player. The MM did not, since it is not from racial bonuses or skill points, and less likely to come up for the standard wild horse on the plains. What I still want to work out is how likely I am to put the Chocobo into a heavy load versus the warhorse. Or if I can keep the warhorse in a light load. Going from a light load to a medium load really drops the jump check. First you lose most (or for the warhorse all) of your speed bonus, and then you need to add the check penalty on top of that.
Maekrix_Waere 04-09-07, 02:57 PM	Just my 2 cp- I would take the chocobo, myself; picking one of the colors from FFVII. If you do take the chocobo, and if the stats listed for it are for a standard riding chocobo, then I would recommend giving the chocobo the Warbeast template from the MMII, which is appropriate because, as a paladin, you will be taking it into battle. If you don't have the MMII, PM and I'll give you the template.
_Jayne_Cobb_ 04-09-07, 03:15 PM	What makes the chocobo inherantly silly? At least, more silly than grown men playing a game of make believe in the first place? Sorry, but that argument simply does not hold water. How does "playing a game" equate to "everything in said game thus be completely silly." It makes no sense at all. Hippogriff anyone? What is so funny about a hippogryph? :confused:
Cartigan 04-09-07, 03:18 PM	What is so funny about a hippogryph? :confused: It's as dumb ass chocobo. And it's hippogriff.
_Jayne_Cobb_ 04-09-07, 03:56 PM	It's as dumb ass chocobo. In what way? Please explain.
BoringInfoGuy 04-09-07, 04:41 PM	Sorry, but that argument simply does not hold water. How does "playing a game" equate to "everything in said game thus be completely silly." It makes no sense at all. Read my post again. My argument is not that "everything in said game thus be completely silly." My post is stating that the chocobo - a creature from a video game series - is not any more silly than playing D&D in general. I just picked the most "silly" sounding description of D&D. A game of make believe. What is so funny about a hippogryph? :confused: The way it looks, and the name. Hippogryph? It sounds like a rune left by a race of giant engrish speaking water dwellers. The main difference between the hippogryph and the chocobo in D&D is that the hippogryph is a staple of D&D. The chocobo is a new addition. And the chocobo looks better than the hippogryph.
RellenMarn 04-09-07, 04:43 PM	Rename it, make it white and brown rather than brightly colored. Describe it tearing chunks of flesh away in its massive beak. Call it a Vouron - from the scientific name for the Elephant Bird. Or perhaps Moa after the extinct New Zealand giant bird.
_Jayne_Cobb_ 04-09-07, 05:36 PM	The way it looks, and the name. Hippogryph? It sounds like a rune left by a race of giant engrish speaking water dwellers. So you find the name sillier? Huh, how odd. I fail to see it myself, perhaps as I know from where the creature and the name comes, but to each their own. The main difference between the hippogryph and the chocobo in D&D is that the hippogryph is a staple of D&D. The chocobo is a new addition. And the chocobo looks better than the hippogryph. No, the main difference is that the hippogryph has been a staple of western mythology for a few thousand years and the chocobo is from a video game series of which, frankly, many people are sick to death. Not to mention that certain phonemes - like "cho" and "bo" - are generally just funny to the average English speaker's ear. Why not just take an Axebeak; it is a large riding bird, is part of D&D history, is statted for use as a mount in the Arms & Equipment Guide, doesn't come with FF associations, and has a far less dorky name.
Cartigan 04-09-07, 05:57 PM	No, the main difference is that the hippogryph has been a staple of western mythology for a few thousand years and the chocobo is from a video game series of which, frankly, many people are sick to death. Which is of course why it is a huge gaming franchise and is one of the most popular RPGs, if not non-classified game, in the world. Why not just take an Axebeak; it is a large riding bird, is part of D&D history, is statted for use as a mount in the Arms & Equipment Guide, doesn't come with FF associations, and has a far less dorky name. Oh yeah, Axebeak is alot less dorky. :rolleyes: Just because you couldn't beat Final Fantasy VII doesn't mean you have to make up absurd reasons why he can't use a Chocobo.
mlund 04-09-07, 06:01 PM	I have to admit to a soft spot in my heart reserved for anyone with the nerve to ride an over-grown Ostrich into battle. Something that large and that strong is probably even nastier. As long as it doesn't make "wark" noises you'll probably be OK. Heck, call it an Advanced Celestial Dire Ostrich if anyone gives you guff about it. Just make sure you get the Gold model. ;) - Marty Lund
_Jayne_Cobb_ 04-09-07, 06:04 PM	Oh yeah, Axebeak is alot less dorky. :rolleyes: Yes, yes it is. Just because you couldn't beat Final Fantasy VII doesn't mean you have to make up absurd reasons why he can't use a Chocobo. What an odd thing to assume. Just cos one is not a fan does not mean one finds the game difficult. The only thing that beat me on FFVII was boredom. He can use a chocobo if he wants to, it is still a stupid name.
Cartigan 04-09-07, 06:07 PM	Yes, yes it is. If you dismiss the fact it sounds like something a 3rd grader would name a creature. What an odd thing to assume. He can use a chocobo if he wants to, it is still a stupid name. With all your experience in D&D, Chocobo is a stupid name? Hippogriff is a stupid name. Axebeak is a stupid name. Otyugh is a stupid name. Seriously. This game isn't very serious in the fake creature naming department.
_Jayne_Cobb_ 04-09-07, 06:31 PM	If you dismiss the fact it sounds like something a 3rd grader would name a creature. What, chocobo? I concur, it does sound like something a 3rd grader would name a creature. With all your experience in D&D, Chocobo is a stupid name? Hippogriff is a stupid name. Axebeak is a stupid name. Otyugh is a stupid name. Seriously. This game isn't very serious in the fake creature naming department. Yes, a lot of names are stupid - flumph, I am looking at you - so why compound that by adding another stupid name? How is axebeak stupid? A creature named axebeak (beak lik an axe) is no sillier than sewer rat (rat that lives in sewers), polar bear (bear that lives near the pole), house fly (fly found in houses), or any of a thousand other common everyday real-world names. As to hippogryph, I still don't see it. The creature was purported to be the offspring of a horse and a gryphon. Horse (hippo) + gryphon (gryph) = hippogryph. If you find it "silly" perhaps you should take it up with the Greeks. PS - A criticism of something to do with Final Fantasy games is not a criticism of you personally, even if you are a fan of the games.
Noob124 04-09-07, 07:11 PM	If you find chocobo silly take it up with the japanese. and seriously dont insult an entire franchise just because you dont like the games its better to just be quiet. o and Boringinfoguy go with the chocoboif you havent already
Cartigan 04-09-07, 07:23 PM	As to hippogryph, I still don't see it. The creature was purported to be the offspring of a horse and a gryphon. Horse (hippo) + gryphon (gryph) = hippogryph. It's not a damn hippogryph already. It's a hippogriff.
Holy_Beholder 04-09-07, 09:21 PM	Two words. War Ostritch. Ostriches exist, they are stated on these boards(new monster requests, monsters lair), and it is easy to see a bunch of knights in the desert using them, so you wont be the only one. That is basically what a chocobo is. They would probably be more rare than unique, so you won't look like an idiot for riding one.
BoringInfoGuy 04-10-07, 12:20 AM	So you find the name sillier? Huh, how odd. I fail to see it myself, perhaps as I know from where the creature and the name comes, but to each their own. Actually, I said I found the way it looks and the name sillier. As for the name. . . Greek. Hippo means horse (or more exactly, the combining form of horse), gryph is short for griffon. Put them together, and you get horse combined with griffon. Much like the creature, it's an akward combination of two mismatched things. No, the main difference is that the hippogryph has been a staple of western mythology for a few thousand years and the chocobo is from a video game series of which, frankly, many people are sick to death. So the problem with the chocobo is that it's not thousands of years old. And the chocobo has been around too long, so now people are sick of it? So, is it too new, or too old? Make up your mind. Not to mention that certain phonemes - like "cho" and "bo" - are generally just funny to the average English speaker's ear. Yeah, because you hear "cho," "bo," and while we're at it "co" are in all the funny words. Like chosen, choke, chore. Makes me laugh. And co-worker, coat, cope, are just hilarious. Bow is always good for a giggle. Bolt, just as good. Bone can liven up any situation. Note the sarcasm. Also, you misuse phoneme. That describes sounds that are not the same in a language, but sound the same to native speakers of that language. The way that L and R sound the same to japanese, for example. Why not just take an Axebeak; it is a large riding bird, is part of D&D history, is statted for use as a mount in the Arms & Equipment Guide, doesn't come with FF associations, and has a far less dorky name. Why not take the chocobo? It is a large riding bird. It is part of role playing history. It has the stats to be used as a mount in Dragon magazine. It comes with Final FANTASY connotations. And is a better name than Axebeak. Your real objections seem to be that it is A) New, and B) From a video game.
BoringInfoGuy 04-10-07, 12:42 AM	Now, let us just talk about names in general. For the most part, we forget how the name is derived. It loses that original meaning, and just becomes the label that identifies something. Good example: marshmallow. Think about them for a moment. I'll wait. Ok, most of you probably thought about roasting marshmallows over an open fire. How they burn black on the outside, but get gooey on the inside if they catch fire. How they taste if you get them just right. Using them to make s'mores. Did you think about how the name marshmallow comes from the fact that they used to be made from the mallow plant, which is only found in marshes? Maybe, with the way I opened this post. But did you think about how s'mores is derived from some more? For every new idea or thing, someone has to come up with a term to describe it. Whatever the original meaning(s) that the description had, it fades, and becomes simply the sounds that label the idea / thing.
BoringInfoGuy 04-10-07, 02:43 AM	Just my 2 cp- I would take the chocobo, myself; picking one of the colors from FFVII. If you do take the chocobo, and if the stats listed for it are for a standard riding chocobo, then I would recommend giving the chocobo the Warbeast template from the MMII, which is appropriate because, as a paladin, you will be taking it into battle. If you don't have the MMII, PM and I'll give you the template. The stats are for the standard riding chocobo. But the riding chocobo is comparable to the warhorse. Adding the warbeast template (I do have the MMII) would over power the chocobo for a level 5 paladin. I listed the stats for the heavy horse, heavy warhorse, chocobo, and warbeast chocobo side by side. The warhorse has more HP, better full attack, fort, CON, and load capacity. The chocobo has better initiative, speed, standard attack, Reflex, Will, Dex, Wis, Cha, Listen, Spot, and Jump. For those keeping track, the chocobo already has more advantages than the warhorse. But maybe as an alternate for the command ability if he remains a unique chocobo in the game. BTW, with the extra 2 HD for being a paladin's mount, he get's another feat. I'm planning on giving him improved natural attack from the MM. That will up his bite damage from 1d8 to 2d6. That should be war like enough.
Cartigan 04-10-07, 08:15 AM	Actually, I said I found the way it looks and the name sillier. As for the name. . . Greek. Hippo means horse (or more exactly, the combining form of horse), gryph is short for griffon. I hate you people. "Griff" is short for "griffon," which is why it's called a hippoGRIFF.
_Jayne_Cobb_ 04-10-07, 09:39 AM	It's not a damn hippogryph already. It's a hippogriff. hip·po·griff /ˈhɪpəˌgrɪf/ Pronunciation[hip-uh-grif] –noun a fabulous creature resembling a griffin but having the body and hind parts of a horse. Also, hip·po·gryph.
_Jayne_Cobb_ 04-10-07, 09:44 AM	Your real objections seem to be that it is A) New, and B) From a video game. No, my real objections are that it A) comes with associations to another franchise distinct form D&D that might put other players off and pull them out of the game - much as naming a PC "Darth Vader" or "Gandalf" or "Harry Potter" would - and B) is a silly name. Also, you misuse phoneme. That describes sounds that are not the same in a language, but sound the same to native speakers of that language. The way that L and R sound the same to japanese, for example. I thought I probably had. I have been finding it increasingly difficult of late to dredge up particular words I am searching for. Combined with a sudden drop in manual dexterity and a couple of odd ticks which show up from time to time it has me very worried, in all seriousness, that there is something actually some neurological problem manifesting itself.
_Jayne_Cobb_ 04-10-07, 09:51 AM	I hate you people. You hate people over something this mind-numbingly inconsequential? Yikes. :eek: "Griff" is short for "griffon," which is why it's called a hippoGRIFF. And "gryph" is short for "gryphon," which is why it's also spelled hippoGRYPH. What is your point?
Cartigan 04-10-07, 11:33 AM	And "gryph" is short for "gryphon," which is why it's also spelled hippoGRYPH. What is your point? The point is you people can't spell. No, my real objections are that it A) comes with associations to another franchise distinct form D&D that might put other players off and pull them out of the game - much as naming a PC "Darth Vader" or "Gandalf" or "Harry Potter" would - and B) is a silly name. A) Your comparison is wrong. Those are proper nouns - they name a specific character integral to the stories of those fantasy worlds. Chocobo is just a creature. Do you object to using Trolls, Orcs, and Goblins in D&D? Those are LotR creatures. And if some one had never played FF, how would they know a Chocobo isn't a D&D creature anyway? Oh yeah, it must be because Final Fantasy is a massively popular fantasy franchise. B) You have some inherent aversion to FF, we get it already. D&D is not only full of stupidly named monsters but plain stupid monsters.
_Jayne_Cobb_ 04-10-07, 11:38 AM	The point is you people can't spell. Then said point is wrong. Griffon, Gryphon, Griffin, Hippogriff, and Hippogryph are all correct spellings.
Cartigan 04-10-07, 11:49 AM	Then said point is wrong. Griffon, Gryphon, Griffin, Hippogriff, and Hippogryph are all correct spellings. Except they arn't. The "gryph" version is popularly bastardized, but that doesn't make it correct. No, my real objections are that it A) comes with associations to another franchise distinct form D&D that might put other players off and pull them out of the game - much as naming a PC "Darth Vader" or "Gandalf" or "Harry Potter" would - and B) is a silly name. A) Your comparison is wrong. Those are proper nouns - they name a specific character integral to the stories of those fantasy worlds. Chocobo is just a creature. Do you object to using Trolls, Orcs, and Goblins in D&D? Those are LotR creatures. And if some one had never played FF, how would they know a Chocobo isn't a D&D creature anyway? Oh yeah, it must be because Final Fantasy is a massively popular fantasy franchise. B) You have some inherent aversion to FF, we get it already. D&D is not only full of stupidly named monsters but plain stupid monsters.
BoringInfoGuy 04-10-07, 11:59 AM	No, my real objections are that it A) comes with associations to another franchise distinct form D&D that might put other players off and pull them out of the game - much as naming a PC "Darth Vader" or "Gandalf" or "Harry Potter" would - and B) is a silly name. As I stated in a previous post, I once played a cleric named Yoda. It was distracting, so I changed it. At this point, I'm planning on going with the chocobo, but with a standard warhorse written up in case it is a problem (or the bird dies). I thought I probably had. I have been finding it increasingly difficult of late to dredge up particular words I am searching for. Combined with a sudden drop in manual dexterity and a couple of odd ticks which show up from time to time it has me very worried, in all seriousness, that there is something actually some neurological problem manifesting itself. See a doctor. It could be nothing. It could be something minor or it could be something major. If it's nothing, you'll be glad to find out. If it's minor, you need to take care of it before it turns into something major. If it's major, you need to start treatment ASAP.
_Jayne_Cobb_ 04-10-07, 12:22 PM	Except they arn't. The "gryph" version is popularly bastardized, but that doesn't make it correct. Sorry, that is simply not the case. In fact, the griff version is the bastardized one. The name comes from the Latin grȳphus, itself from theGreek grȳp, meaning "hooked nose", pertaining to the gryphon's eagle beak. A) Your comparison is wrong. Those are proper nouns - they name a specific character integral to the stories of those fantasy worlds. Chocobo is just a creature. Do you object to using Trolls, Orcs, and Goblins in D&D? Those are LotR creatures. No, my comparison is apt. It doesn't matter if it is a main character, a creature type, an object, or a place. Sailing on the U.S.S. Enterprise to the Emerald City accompanied by a bunch of Jawas is just as bad, you don't need to have Bilbo Baggins captain the ship to make it problematic. And if some one had never played FF, how would they know a Chocobo isn't a D&D creature anyway? Oh yeah, it must be because Final Fantasy is a massively popular fantasy franchise. For those who haven't played FF it is a non-issue (apart from the silly name). For those who have played FF it is potentially an issue. Why introduce a potentially problematic issue when it is a matter of seconds to remedy it? If a player objects to a name-change then clearly they are more interested in FF than in the D&D game at hand and thus should go do so, or should seek out a group willing to play a FF-based D&D game. B) You have some inherent aversion to FF, we get it already. D&D is not only full of stupidly named monsters but plain stupid monsters. No, I have an aversion to introducing elements to the game that have the potential to take players out of the experience owing to existing associations with that element be it a person, place, thing, creature, object, or event. Use the stats, alter the name and fluff to make it game-specific and D&D-appropriate and you're golden. That's what I did with it. I used the Dragon mag article, renamed them "Aderyn" - "bird" in Welsh, representative of the culture in the game that breeds them - and it works just fine.
_Jayne_Cobb_ 04-10-07, 12:27 PM	As I stated in a previous post, I once played a cleric named Yoda. It was distracting, so I changed it. At this point, I'm planning on going with the chocobo, but with a standard warhorse written up in case it is a problem (or the bird dies). Going with the Chocobo as is or with a name-change? See a doctor. It could be nothing. It could be something minor or it could be something major. If it's nothing, you'll be glad to find out. If it's minor, you need to take care of it before it turns into something major. If it's major, you need to start treatment ASAP. I know, but I am just this side of terrified to find out it might be Parkinson's or something equally debilitating. My wife has a rare neurolgical disability that prevents her from even leaving the house unattended, to have me hit with something along the same lines would just be too much to handle. Still, that is neither here nor there in regards to this topic. Glad you've worked out a solution. Cheers. :)
Cartigan 04-10-07, 01:14 PM	No, my comparison is apt. It doesn't matter if it is a main character, a creature type, an object, or a place. Sailing on the U.S.S. Enterprise to the Emerald City accompanied by a bunch of Jawas is just as bad, you don't need to have Bilbo Baggins captain the ship to make it problematic. Proper Noun to a Proper Noun to a race. Jawa sounds like something that would be in D&D anyway. For those who haven't played FF it is a non-issue (apart from the silly name). For those who have played FF it is potentially an issue. Why introduce a potentially problematic issue when it is a matter of seconds to remedy it? An issue for who? People who are wayyy too invested in the "seriousness" of a table-top fantasy game I imagine.
darkneolink 04-10-07, 01:22 PM	Well I'm a suporter of the chocobo but there Jayne has a Valid point but that is something easy to avoid Boring info: hey guys I'm thinking about taking a Chocobo as my paladin mount... do you guys mind if I do? Problem solved... is not likely that they mind If he were on my group I'll try to get a Chocobo myself just for the fun of riding an overzised bird
wrecan 04-10-07, 01:25 PM	Just call it a Dire Emu and be done with it.
_Jayne_Cobb_ 04-10-07, 01:26 PM	An issue for who? For people who like to enjoy the game without the inclusion of extraneous elements from other fictional or real-world properties that have strong associations and thus disrupt or negatively impact the mood and atmosphere of the game. People who are wayyy too invested in the "seriousness" of a table-top fantasy game I imagine. Then you clearly have a very active imagination.
BoringInfoGuy 04-10-07, 06:35 PM	I'm going with the name chocobo.* Not because I am more interested in Final Fantasy than in Dungeon and Dragons. But because it is a chocobo. I could call it something else, but a rose by any other name. . . Honestly everyone in my group will know that it's a chocobo. Trying to force everyone to call it something other than what everyone knows it is would be more distracting than keeping the original name. Player: "Hey Boring, what's the chocobo's name?" Me: "It's a riding bird." Player: "Whatever. So what's the riding bird's name?" Me: "Micah." Player: "Micah the chocobo?" Me: "RIDING BIRD!" DM: "C'mon, keep the name right." Me: "Thank you. I dismiss the chocobo." All: "RIDING BIRD!" I had a DM that kept calling the druid's wolf companion a dog. He just couldn't get it straight. We kept correcting him. After a while, the DM got to where he was calling it a "dogWOLF," trying to correct himself before we could. ------------- The correct pronounciation for chocobo is to have the "o" sound like the o in go. (But you don't hold the sound as long as in english). Cho * co * bo. Many people pronounce it sounding like chocolate, with the first two o's sounding like the a in father, and the last o sounding like the o in boo. Chah *cah * boo.
BoringInfoGuy 04-10-07, 09:52 PM	For people who like to enjoy the game without the inclusion of extraneous elements from other fictional or real-world properties that have strong associations and thus disrupt or negatively impact the mood and atmosphere of the game. There were chainmail players who probably said the same thing when the fantasy optional rules came out. All I can say is that D&D is made up of extraneous elements. Griffons from greek culture. Rakasha's from Indian (India, as opposed to native American), Golems from jewish culture. Fey creatures from Ireland. (I think that's all correct. If you know any mistakes, let me know). My point is that D&D has never been picky about where it gets it's creatures from. They found legends from around the world and used whatever struck their fancy. Not just legends. Literature is fair game. No one can deny the strong influence J.R.R Tolkien's works have had on shaping D&D. How about movies? Vampires and werewolves legends are ancient. But movies really brought them to life for the public like never before. And what is the flesh golem but an homage to Frakenstien's Monster? Sure it was a book first. But it's the movies that made it one of the classic monsters. So what is so wrong with a video game as a source? A Role Playing Video game at that. A well built RPG video game is like a game of D&D where the DM railroads you horribly, but the story is good enough that you don't care. Instead of hearing a story, (legends), reading a story, (literature), or watching a story (movies), you play a story (RPG's). Now, there are many things in video games that I have seen people try to put into D&D which I've despised. Save points - added by a DM desperate to get the players to take more risks - tops the list. Followed closely by Magic Point system spellcasting. Just about any video game mechanic being badly grafted onto the pen and paper mechanics. Adding the chocobo won't add or change any of the game mechanics. The only way it could be a problem is if another player makes it one. And if my having a chocobo really will ruin the game for another player, then I won't have one. D&D is a team game. How they feel matters to me also.
_Jayne_Cobb_ 04-11-07, 10:23 AM	I'm going with the name chocobo.* Not because I am more interested in Final Fantasy than in Dungeon and Dragons. But because it is a chocobo. I could call it something else, but a rose by any other name. . . Honestly everyone in my group will know that it's a chocobo. Trying to force everyone to call it something other than what everyone knows it is would be more distracting than keeping the original name. Then that's all fine and dandy. If everyone at the table is cool with it then chocobo away! :)
darkneolink 04-11-07, 07:29 PM	yay we got to a non-violent solution no hammer gun no chair to the head no flamming And if you could send me the chocobo's stats I would be pleased
BoringInfoGuy 04-12-07, 11:58 AM	Non violent solutions? On a forum? How unheard of. Anyway, tonight is game night, so I'll post how it goes later in case anyone is interested. We'll see how my fellow players like a yellow chocobo named Micah that goes "Wark."
BoringInfoGuy 04-13-07, 03:47 PM	Well, no one objected. No one hummed the chocobo theme. The DM did rule that I didn't know what type of creature it was, so I couldn't call it a chocobo. Thankfully, we know some well traveled NPC's, who filled us in. But I did spend most of the game trying not to call it a chocobo. Micah did pick up a few stares, but not as many as I at first thought. Silvercrest, the major city we are in, is full of strange and unique things. Looks like it will work out fine. Thank you everyone for the input. That includes those who disagreed with the idea. It all helped. Now I just need to learn to draw a chocobo. . .
darkneolink 04-13-07, 03:58 PM	http://www.google.com.mx/search?hl=es&q=%22draw+a+chocobo%22&meta= there you go just choose one of your options
Holy_Beholder 04-14-07, 12:40 PM	Drawing a chocobo....How hard could it possibly be.*tries to draw, fails miserably* Also, my point about the ostritch would be that that way there would be others and it wouldn't be wierd. But hey, what mainland knight knows exactly what the difference between desert ostritches and chocobos. Plus, it looks so cool. Are you going to post the stats? Since these are going to find there way into my game.
BoringInfoGuy 04-16-07, 02:31 AM	You know, I'm really not certain if posting the stats for the chocobo is allowed or not. Otherwise, I'd have started the topic with a side by side comparison between the Heavy War Horse and the Chocobo. So I sent a PM to a Wiz-O. If the moderators are ok with it, then I'll very gladly post it. Until then, those with a good local store with past issues, it's from Dragon Magazine issue 323, September 2004. Sorry, I know that won't help much.
Ack 04-16-07, 08:57 AM	Hm. I've never played any of the Final Fantasy games. I'd never heard of the chocobo before. But I would consider the distinct possibility that someone in the group (probably not having played FF before either) is going to nickname it the "choccy-bird". And that the nickname will stick. That's why I wouldn't be calling it a chocobo. But hey, YMMV. :D
_Jayne_Cobb_ 04-16-07, 09:06 AM	But I would consider the distinct possibility that someone in the group (probably not having played FF before either) is going to nickname it the "choccy-bird". And that the nickname will stick. That's why I wouldn't be calling it a chocobo. I'd be more woried about the inevitable "I'm coo-coo for chocobo!" and "Count Chocobo is a delicious part of this complete breakfast" jokes. ;)