For example, we have an artificer/shaman in the area who describes his companion as a golem-like construct he built to assist him.
I was planning on MCing into shaman with my cleric and describing my companion as an acolyte who is apprenticing under me (and who dies very easily but I've gotten very used to raising him back from the dead... it only takes a standard action [and some duct tape] by this point!)
I ask mainly because I've seen negative reactions to people wanting to reskin their warforged as orcs or whatever, so I was curious if people were equally insistent that Spirit Companions had to be lame ghost-animal-things.
I ask mainly because I've seen negative reactions to people wanting to reskin their warforged as orcs or whatever, so I was curious if people were equally insistent that Spirit Companions had to be lame ghost-animal-things.
I'm pretty sure you can't re-skin a Spirit Companion, since it would either be not enough damage to change it at all, or it would be so big a change that it would poof out of existance. Plus, I think you can only reskin creatures, which the spirit companion is not. It would be like having a Warforged walking around the Forgotten Realms... crazy!
Besdies... can it really be "reskinning" if the rules say the Spirit Companion can look like whatever you want? (see "Custom Spirit Cpmanions" on page 119 of the PHB2)
Well, I'm talking about companions that are clearly not spirits, like the golem or the acolyte cleric.
Now, the DM and players always knew the reality of it, which I think is important.
In my mind, every shaman should be reskinning their companions. I would be fairly surprised to see someone say "and this spirit looks like a big bear. I'm a bear shaman."
Now, I know there will be no issues in my area since I see people do it all the time, but I was curious overall what LFRers thoughts were on "reskinning" spirit companions.
As long as it's clearly a magical conjuration, I don't think anyone is going to care about what it looks like.
I'd probably look askance at reflavoring spirit companions so that they were not readily apparent as magical conjurations, because that gets into rules mechanics issues, though I'm not sure how much I would care unless the player was obviously trying to cheese some benefit out of that (i.e., the point at which the player makes any indication that he thinks the world should react to his spirit companion based on how he has reskinned it as opposed to its rules mechanical reality is the point at which the player loses reflavoring privileges).
Now, I know there will be no issues in my area since I see people do it all the time, but I was curious overall what LFRers thoughts were on "reskinning" spirit companions.
As long as it's clearly a magical conjuration, I don't think anyone is going to care about what it looks like.
So, you are against the idea of a spirit companion being re-skinned as an acolyte then?
So, you are against the idea of a spirit companion being re-skinned as an acolyte then?
Like before, as long as everyone who looks at the acolyte knows that it is a Spirit Companion, then it's fine.
"My Spirit Companion looks like an acolyte" = OK
"This actual, really human acolyte acts as my Spirit Companion" = not OK
If the "acolyte" in question was perhaps "ghostly" or "angelic" (i.e. obviously supernatural) then I would allow it.
If the "acolyte" looked "human" (i.e. mundane) then I would not allow it.
I once had a Dwarf Shaman character stated up that had the "ghost of his father" as his spirit companion... but my brother got to the Shaman first with his "ectoplasmic-ghost-bear"... the spirit of our ranger's abandoned animal companion...
I have to agree that reskinning a power/effect so that it efectively masks the intent of the ability would have to be ruled out.
If the "acolyte" in question was perhaps "ghostly" or "angelic" (i.e. obviously supernatural) then I would allow it.
If the "acolyte" looked "human" (i.e. mundane) then I would not allow it.
Figured as much. Well, I guess I'll treat him as my dwarven acolyte in my usual group, and if I play at a table that get concerned about such things I'll just temporarily change it to the ghost of my dwarven acolyte.
My arcane trickster in LG was designed as an artifact wielder. I would describe him as opening his cloak to reveal countless trinkets sown into special compartments - a withered hand, a glass jar with a strange monstrous eye, a golden orb, a shamanic totem... etc. Many were actual items gathered in adventures. Whenever he cast spells, he would use one of these up. Given time, I would describe the artifact as I used it, and explain how the spell came from it. "Alandril pulls forth a necklace made of strange stones that fade in and out of existence. As he dons it, his form wavers - one moment here, one moment there. Out of character, I cast Displacement on myself." (OOC: He casts Displacement while holding a necklace of stones he gathered while in the Gran March when he played the adventure Fading Vision.)
Key to this is that at the start of an adventure I would say something like this: "My PC is a collector and wielder of artifacts. When he casts spells, he is actually using artifacts instead. Whether this is true or not, I leave to each of you to decide. Either he really is an artifact wielder, or he is insane or misguided and is just casting normally while holding worthless trinkets."
This way, every player (and the DM) understood what was going on, could either play along or not as they saw fit, and all the mechanics were transparent. There was no question as to what was RP and what was not. MY RP schtick worked just fine, no one had issues. The vast majority of all players would play along with my concept. Every now and then someone would decide to think he was insane, which was fun to RP as well.
This way, every player (and the DM) understood what was going on, could either play along or not as they saw fit, and all the mechanics were transparent. There was no question as to what was RP and what was not. MY RP schtick worked just fine, no one had issues. The vast majority of all players would play along with my concept. Every now and then someone would decide to think he was insane, which was fun to RP as well.
What I worry about with reskinnings is what happens if something about the game runs afoul of the concept? What if your PC was captured? He wouldn't be allowed to keep his doodads, but as they're not technically required (outside of actual material components). Along the same lines, if a spirit companion is imagined as a living person who just dies a lot, how can that fit in if the party is in some kind of circumstance in which and extra person would be noticed and eliminated or detained or something? Capturing might be a bit of a corner case, but there are probably other circumstances that might clash with a given reskinning.
This way, every player (and the DM) understood what was going on, could either play along or not as they saw fit, and all the mechanics were transparent. There was no question as to what was RP and what was not. MY RP schtick worked just fine, no one had issues. The vast majority of all players would play along with my concept. Every now and then someone would decide to think he was insane, which was fun to RP as well.
What I worry about with reskinnings is what happens if something about the game runs afoul of the concept? What if your PC was captured? He wouldn't be allowed to keep his doodads, but as they're not technically required (outside of actual material components). Along the same lines, if a spirit companion is imagined as a living person who just dies a lot, how can that fit in if the party is in some kind of circumstance in which and extra person would be noticed and eliminated or detained or something? Capturing might be a bit of a corner case, but there are probably other circumstances that might clash with a given reskinning.
For me, I'm cool with suffering for an RP concept. I mean, if the DM says "Alandril lacks his artifacts... can he cast..." that would be a very cool moment where I would have to choose to not cast just to uphold the RP concept. I'm guessing I would go with not casting. As a DM, I try not to punish PCs that way (unless they think it is fun).
The big thing for me is not benefitting. I recall in LG a player that got hung up on a batch of ironwood described in a Geoff mod. "Can I have an ironwood staff?" "Sure, for RP reasons." "What happens if I sell it?" "You can't." "But it's made of ironwood!" "Yes, in your brain."
My PC couldn't say "Oh, you want to take away my spell components, I don't use them, I use [insert something here like spellcasting via inherent ability]". At all times, the real mechanic is there. Everyone can RP otherwise, but the mechanical reality should be there.
Between this and your Human/Dwarf, you are obviously enjoying coming up with "out of the box" concepts. Far be it for me to try to stifle someone's creativity, but at the same time, in a setting such as the RPGA where you are going to be playing with many different people, stepping "way out of bounds" of the established fluff may end up causing more headaches than if you were only playing with one set group of people who all knew what was what.
What it boils down to in my mind is, is the non-fluff concept completely necessary for the character concept? Could the Cleric McShaman have a beloved acolyte who passed away and his/her/its burgeonoing Shamanic powers allowed him/her/it to recall the friend from beyond the grave to assist them once again? Could that work instead of it being a flesh and blood acolyte with a red shirt? What is the purpose or neccessity of the spirit companion not being a spirit? Is the altering/reflavoring for RP reasons that are actually serving a purpose or is it just doing it for the sake of doing it?
What is special about it being flesh and blood instead of a spirit other than it turning the class concept on its head?
Players should be able to handle this... I mean, many races are the same except for an encounter power, skill, stat boost, and a few other bits... but we act as if they are completely different for RP. When a smart enemy sees a dragonborn, they know it can breathe on them. When they see a shaman's spirit, etc. Very few intelligent foes see a shaman's spirit and think it is the same as a PC, and that should be true regardless of the acolyte "reskin".
My cleric MC'd into shaman, and the SC is an 'ancestor spirit' - the ghost of a long dead warrior, in armor, and carrying a large rectangular shield (think Roman Legionaire). This gives plenty of cool RP options (the Centurion usually sits and 'eats' a ghostly meal around the campfire, with the rest of the group when we camp, etc). But it doesn't change the mechanics of the SC in the game.
I have a low-level druid with the shaman multi-class feat. But I roleplay the spirit as the actual character and the druid is just his animal companion (the druid stays in dog form most of the time and the spirit is the ghost of a boy druid).
None of the stats are different from a normal druid with shaman MC, but the roleplaying flavor is unique.
I ask mainly because I've seen negative reactions to people wanting to reskin their warforged as orcs or whatever, so I was curious if people were equally insistent that Spirit Companions had to be lame ghost-animal-things.
My picture of my spirit companion is a bunch of jumping and floating skulls, and my attacks are all Ghosts, Specters, and Zombies... but I'm playing my Shaman as a Vodoo Priestess. I've not recieved any complaints yet.
My picture of my spirit companion is a bunch of jumping and floating skulls, and my attacks are all Ghosts, Specters, and Zombies... but I'm playing my Shaman as a Vodoo Priestess. I've not recieved any complaints yet.
Sorry, voodoo is not an LFR legal religion because Bondyè is not an FR deity.
Then again.. I'm just being silly.
