I'm playing a Beast Master Ranger with a wolf companion. How freaked out do you think random townspeople would be if I just had my wolf quietly walk alongside me?
My DM seems to think everybody will freak out, whereas I lean more towards the idea that man and canine have been together for quite a while, and while it is definitely unorthodox, I believe if my wolf does nothing to show himself as a threat, he'll be little more than an oddity.
Thoughts?
The cautious types would be uneasy. Even "tamed" wolves are little better than wild predators.
The uninformed, particularly the aristocratic types, might not even know that it's a wolf. It's simply a dog.
The average villager would probably give a wide berth, but I wouldn't say "freak out". There are many breeds of dog that I consider inherently dangerous and I think they should be exterminated (pit bulls and rotweilers in particular), but I don't freak out when I seem them with their owners. I just don't want them near me.
How freaked out do you think random townspeople would be if I just had my wolf quietly walk alongside me?
No more freaked out than seeing you walk next to a dragonborn. Maybe less. A wolf is just a wild dog. A dragonborn is an erect iguana. :D
At first I thought this should go in the Striker forums, but it's more of a general gameplay/roleplay question.
I'm playing a Beast Master Ranger with a wolf companion. How freaked out do you think random townspeople would be if I just had my wolf quietly walk alongside me?
My DM seems to think everybody will freak out, whereas I lean more towards the idea that man and canine have been together for quite a while, and while it is definitely unorthodox, I believe if my wolf does nothing to show himself as a threat, he'll be little more than an oddity.
Thoughts?
Better than a croc. A player in my game wants a croc for his ranger. Oi!
Then again I've seen people that have pet gators.
Either one though Wolf or Croc is less unnerving than a Tiefling being in the party.
I'm playing a Beast Master Ranger with a wolf companion. How freaked out do you think random townspeople would be if I just had my wolf quietly walk alongside me?
I don't know...I've known a few people that had wolves as pets (raised them from pups), and would walk them down the sidewalks on leashes. The -very- few people that DID know they were wolves thought they were beautiful, and asked to pet them. Most had no idea they were actually wolves. Since D&D is fantasy-land, chances are your wolf companion will NOT be persuaded to chase a stray cat that runs by, or light out after a rabbit it sees, nor would it mind terribly if someone should pet it...if you want them to, that is. I really feel an animal companion responds to its master's emotions to a degree. I feel if you're uneasy when you enter the town, the wolf will also be nervous. However, it you're totally at-ease there, i see no reason that the wolf wouldn't also be calm and really no different than a pet dog.
Not necessarily, a Tiefling/Dragonborn/ect Party Memeber is at the very least an intelligent being and not a wild beast, although "freaking out" may be a bit much, I can definately see having a known wild animal (And it would take a very stupid person to confuse a wolf for a dog, especially in a quasi medevil setting.) following him around as putting a serious damper on his ability to interact with other people.
Yes but Tieflings are infamous for being sadistic, and wicked creatures. Being sentient makes them far more dangerous than wild animals.
Where as Wolves are simply animals.
Yes but Tieflings are infamous for being sadistic, and wicked creatures. Being sentient makes them far more dangerous than wild animals.
Where as Wolves are simply animals.
I'm trying to think of a non-discriminatory way to say this...
In my D&D worlds, Dragonborn, Tieflings, Genasi, etc. are really seen by the regular Human population no differently than, say, an Oriental man walking through a predominantly African-American neighborhood, or a Latino man walking through a predominantly Caucasian neighborhood. Stereotypes are there, but many have the good sense to try and see beyond them, and let the actions of the individual dictate their reactions more than their race.
If that came off as offensive to anyone, I really do apologize...I had absolutely NO intent to offend.
Yes but Tieflings are infamous for being sadistic, and wicked creatures. Being sentient makes them far more dangerous than wild animals.
Where as Wolves are simply animals.
I agree. However you probably would not mind them walking down the street, but once they are in the court house you crap your pants. I don't think that dragonborn would be scary. They have a rep for being noble people, though they would be pretty intimidating.
Spider companions would be the scariest thing imaginable to have in a party, by far.
Spider companions would be the scariest thing imaginable to have in a party, by far.
I would rather see a Dragonborn with a wolf companion approaching me than a Drow with a spider companion. ---shudder---
I would rather see a Dragonborn with a wolf companion approaching me than a Drow with a spider companion. ---shudder---
Oh dear god Steely Dan's Diplomacy line just crossed my head. Thanks guys. Thanks. It just got wrong on so many levels.
I think it might boil down to whether or not characters are in a renaissance type society or not. If not, there probably wouldn't be chihuahuas, and dachsunds and all the little ankle biter/yipyip dogs we currently have. IMO, much less breeding would have been done and most dogs would be a lot closer to wolves than we see nowadays. Plus, wolves would be common and widespread. So, I think that people would only really be bugged by seeing multiple wolves. I think people would realize that a pack is dangerous but a single wolf is more likely to run. Also, adventurers are far superior to the townsfolk. If people are terrified of a wolf, what are they going to think of the man or woman to whom it answers?
Excellent points.
I'm playing a Beast Master Ranger with a wolf companion. How freaked out do you think random townspeople would be if I just had my wolf quietly walk alongside me?
Random Townie #1: "Yer dawg looks funneh, mister."
Random Townie #2: "Children, take my hand, we're crossing to the other side of the street."
Random Townie #3: "Pfft, the guards will let any scruffy flea bag in these days... and this one has some sort of pet."
Not-As-Random Townie: "Hey, maybe a wolf-tamer is just what I need for that dire rat problem I'm having..."
Really, the good townsfolk might not connect the beast they see walking beside the ranger with the ravenous, fairy tale wolf they picture in their minds.
Now sheep ranchers, they may have a different reaction altogether.
One thing I feel should be taken into account if what are their myths and legends suppose to be like? The beast-master Ranger is a standard build for a ranger, and as such is something that should be recorded in their legends somehow. Giving them a reference to what is actually going on when a wolf is tagging along with that adventurer just stepped into town.
If he has a high one and they're all just normal, average people, it'd range from 'huh, don't see that every day' to 'oooh, it's like a carnival come to town.
If he has a low one and the townsfolks are ignorant, superstitious bumpkins, the may run fleeing in fear of the wolf, or they may try to burn you at the stake for the obvious witchcraft you've worked over the beast.
or they may try to burn you at the stake for the obvious witchcraft you've worked over the beast.
You cannot have points of light without some darkness!
You cannot have points of light without some darkness!
This is actually a rather good point. The major assumption of the points of light concept is that darkness is the norm. Almost everything out there is trying to kill you.
That said, this makes most points of light highly defensible. every city and even village I've seen in published material away from the Astral has limited, heavily guarded entry points. A lot of people in these communities would probably have an attitude of, "They got past the gate, the guards know they're here and have it under control."
A lumberjack in a rustic outpost won't be too concerned, a prissy matron in a large city where there aren't wild or large animals would probably scream.
More rural villages will react about the same way they do to any other adventurers. Remember in the D&D world an angry mob of townspeople is even lesseffective then it is in the real world against trained combatents. So when the 5 heavily armored guys walk in theres a fine chance they might be able to kill everyone. Reactions to PCs probably start from that assumption and move from there.
Most people probably wouldn't notice. Anything that got through the gates has obviously been given a once over by the guards and is safe right?
This depends.
How much faith do you have in your real-world law enforcement?
Also, how much traffic do they have to care about? Further, how much do they care?
Regardless, making a huge fuss out of a class feature is 'meh'.
I would just ignore it. In a game I'm in one of the players keep essentially asking "So do they reach to my tiger? Huh? Huh? They scared?" and we pretty much ignore him. :P
Personally, I would think it's frikkin' awesome, and I'd ask if I could pet it (making VERY certain to ask before approaching), but I'm a dog person. Obviously, a wolf is a dangerous creature, but in the case of the Ranger's Beast Companion, it's under control. Some people won't like it, but I suspect most wouldn't much care.
People are idiots.
Oh dear god Steely Dan's Diplomacy line just crossed my head. Thanks guys. Thanks. It just got wrong on so many levels.
You have attained my Interest.
What was the line?
I used to walk my roommate's Malamute in San Francisco, and people would cross the street to get away from us. I had one person accuse me of being a sadist for keeping a wolf in the city, and two of my friends refused to drink in our apartment if the dog was home, convinced that it would sense that they were drunk and attack them.
People are idiots.
This.
I think it might boil down to whether or not characters are in a renaissance type society or not. If not, there probably wouldn't be chihuahuas, and dachsunds and all the little ankle biter/yipyip dogs we currently have.
There were plenty of small dogs at the time. And most of them were working dogs.
Dachsunds -- early 1700s, developed for hunting badgers (in their burrows), but there is evidence of earlier dogs used for the same roles.
Terriers -- there were a lot of varieties (for hunting vermin)
Papillon -- 13th century (pretty much pets)
Beagle -- 14th or 15 century (for hare hunting).
"Turnspit Dogs" -- various small dogs used to provide power for turning spit-roasted meat.
Poodles -- recognizable ancestors date back to the 15th century. The smaller varieties were lap or sleeve dogs, but the larger ones were used as retrievers when hunting waterfowl.
Bulldogs -- 13th century (if not earlier)
Most of the early breeds date back to the 18th century, but mostly because before that dogs were characterized by function, and locality.
"Turnspit Dogs" -- various small dogs used to provide power for turning spit-roasted meat.
That would not have been my first guess for the definition.
Asking what people would do RL is irrelevant, as we don't live in a world where magic exists and weird crap happens on a semiregular basis. Remember, D&D does not take place in the real world.
People are stupid, bigoted, prejudiced, and self-important, no matter what world you're in.
People are stupid, bigoted, prejudiced, and self-important, no matter what world you're in.
I like to shorten it as "People are stupid", but that doesn't negate the truth of your comment. ;)
Asking what people would do RL is irrelevant, as we don't live in a world where magic exists and weird crap happens on a semiregular basis. Remember, D&D does not take place in the real world.
We do live in a world where dogs have been trained companions for thousands and thousands of years, in every society on the planet. Yet people are still scared of them.
We do live in a world where wolves are wild predators, just like they are in DnD.
Anyway, "magic" happens all around us every day, particularly the magic of training a pack animal to be a loyal companion.
In DnD, magic is as predictable as technology. The only difference between a fiery burst and a flame thrower is that the wizard doesn't have to lug all that gasoline around.
As for how typical villagers/townsfolk will react in D&D? In rural areas people will be antsy, and may even demand the local authorities do something. Especially in villages where herding is a major way of life. In larger towns, people who tend to be afraid of dogs will likely be terrified, but otherwise, all you'll do is make folk uncomfortable. Shopkeeps may demand the animal (and its handler) stay outside. Butchers will keep a closer eye on the wolf than they would a stray dog. In large cities, some people may not be able to distinguish between the wolf and certain breeds of dog, others may be uncomfy, but there won't likely be any trouble. In barbarian villages, the wolf is often seen as aggressive and clever, two traits they may (for good or for ill) be ascribed to the handler.
A wolf in the village? String it up before it hamstrings someone for life!
People are stupid, bigoted, prejudiced, and self-important, no matter what world you're in.
Not in my game world. If people in the game world were as stupid as people in the real world, the PCs wouldn't go to such great lengths to protect them. It wouldn't be worth the effort.
Not in my game world. If people in the game world were as stupid as people in the real world, the PCs wouldn't go to such great lengths to protect them. It wouldn't be worth the effort.
And yet we still have soldiers?
And yet we still have soldiers?
My players are a cynical, misanthropic lot, on the whole. I intentionally make people in my game worlds more enlightened, smarter, and fair-minded than I perceive the typical real-world person to be. If I wanted to deal with stupid real people, I'd go outside.
Rangers with Beast Companions could be very rare and feared, or very rare and respected, or common as all get out (and feared, or respected).
Logically, there's no more requirement for people to fear (or not to fear) a ranger with a wolf than there is to fear a tiefling, or a warlock, or a wizard. All of those things could be completely reasonable to fear in your campaign setting, or all of them could be something that is seen as relatively mundane.
There's no way you could argue that every setting MUST have villagers who are afraid of every wolf, even if that is the case in every single real world medieval village (not claiming that it is). Warlocks make pacts with supernatural entities. Tieflings made pacts with devils. Who knows, maybe the great hero of the age was a noble tiefling with his brave wolf companion who saved the king, defeated the evil necromancer, and restored hope to the common folk.
As long as it makes sense in your campaign, it makes sense. Don't take anything else as anything but a suggestion.
Also, while in the "real world", many villagers may be worried about wolves due to predation by sheep, in D&D, you have rituals to bar creatures from passing through an area, rituals to detect creatures passing through an area, and FREAKING DRAGONS who might prey on sheep. Given that the gigantic flying firebreathing lizard might eat your sheep, maybe no one's particularly bothered about losing a few to wolves.
I really can't emphasize enough that this depends on your game world.
Thank you.
At first I thought this should go in the Striker forums, but it's more of a general gameplay/roleplay question.
I'm playing a Beast Master Ranger with a wolf companion. How freaked out do you think random townspeople would be if I just had my wolf quietly walk alongside me?
My DM seems to think everybody will freak out, whereas I lean more towards the idea that man and canine have been together for quite a while, and while it is definitely unorthodox, I believe if my wolf does nothing to show himself as a threat, he'll be little more than an oddity.
Thoughts?
Most people wouldn't care. Dogs ARE wolves, just domesticated ones, and a pet wolf is not something that freaks most people out. Some people would probably give you a wide berth, but most people probably wouldn't care all that much, honestly. I know from IRL experience a lot of people will simply walk up and pet aforementioned wolf, without even asking the owner.
Some people wouldn't be happy with you, but they would do little besides avoiding you.
Wolves and Raptors are both pretty reasonable as far as animals you can bring with you most places and people won't care all that much. IRL people aren't really all that scared of either, and in a game world where there are rangers with such things, they'd be probably no more scared. Bears and the like are far more intimidating.
In a world full of monsters sporting tentacles, multiple heads, & other assorted junk, I'd be a bit miffed at any DM that made my ranger's choice of beast companion an issue whenever he tries to go anywhere within ten miles of a city. But since "wolf" is just a generalization for canine beast companions & the stats don't change, I'd stick it to your DM & just change the species to something less threatening (but with teeth just as sharp). Maybe you could ask your DM to provide you with a list of "cute widdle doggies" that you could choose from & make your beast companion an oversized Shih Tzu or Chihuahua, instead. Hey! Labradoodles (shudder) seem to be pretty popular lately...
If the village does any sheep farming or goat herding or possibly even just geese and they live in wolf territory, they'll probably be well-versed in killing wolves. The likeliest result is that they'll want to kill the ranger's companion. If this is Points of Light, then people wont be very happy with dangerous animals roaming their village because there wont be any hospitals or ambulances or insurance policies around. A wolf can easily break a man's arm with its bite (true fact). What's going to happen if it takes a snap at Peasant John and breaks his arm? He can't plant his crop or do his carpentry or help bring in the supplies for the winter. If it gets infected and gangrenous, or if the beast actually took his hand off, then his wife and children are in serious trouble - maybe end up beggars or forced to marry off his thirteen year old daughter, etc. Basically, in a points of light setting, your typical villager does not like risk. Because the world is a dangerous place and nobody thinks "oh a nice few months off work while I rest up."
A wolf in the village? String it up before it hamstrings someone for life!
Spoken like a DM about to watch his carefully designed village of idiots systematically slaughtered by the power of the Beastmaster Ranger build. Good job.
And yet we still have soldiers?
I have enough faith in our armed forces and their intelligence that I expect that they would tell their CO to go hang if he sent them out to fight a 30 ton, flying tank with a sword.
His solution was to put a leash on it, and act like it was simply a rather bedraggled dog.
My DM seems to think everybody will freak out, whereas I lean more towards the idea that man and canine have been together for quite a while, and while it is definitely unorthodox, I believe if my wolf does nothing to show himself as a threat, he'll be little more than an oddity.
At the end of the day, your DM is the one who gets to decide how NPCs will react, not you, and not the rest of the people commenting in this thread.
I have enough faith in our armed forces and their intelligence that I expect that they would tell their CO to go hang if he sent them out to fight a 30 ton, flying tank with a sword.
And I have enough faith in our armed forces to expect them to blow it the hell up and then light up a cigar.
At the end of the day, your DM is the one who gets to decide how NPCs will react, not you, and not the rest of the people commenting in this thread.
True, but a DM who punishes his players for their class features is being an asshat, and by all rights should swiftly find himself without players. Everyone at the game is there to have fun. The DM should be as willing to work with the players as vice-verse.
More rural villages will react about the same way they do to any other adventurers. Remember in the D&D world an angry mob of townspeople is even lesseffective then it is in the real world against trained combatents. So when the 5 heavily armored guys walk in theres a fine chance they might be able to kill everyone. Reactions to PCs probably start from that assumption and move from there.
Reminds me of the time we discussed taking over Winterhaven :P
"There's only ten guys protecting it! We could TOTALLY take them!" :P
But the Paladin and Wizard shot down the idea -.-
We can find out what a wolf looks like by going on the internet and googling "wolf". The wikipedia article describes how different they are from dogs. Twenty years ago we could have done the same in an encyclopaedia, with lovely full colour photos.
In a medieval setting, anyone who doesn't have regular exposure to wolves is not going to have that luxury. Most townsfolk are not likely to have ever seen a wolf, and of those that have, many wouldn't have a solid enough mental image to differentiate it from a large hunting dog.
That doesn't mean bigots and idiots won't assume a large dog is a wolf, but a ranger could easily pass his wolf off as a dog with just a few words to those rare few.
True, but a DM who punishes his players for their class features is being an asshat, and by all rights should swiftly find himself without players. Everyone at the game is there to have fun. The DM should be as willing to work with the players as vice-verse.
+1. Actually, + about a million.
S'why I don't sweat monster races that much.
+1. Actually, + about a million.
S'why I don't sweat monster races that much.
Hrm. While I do agree, I think that removes a lot of fun roleplaying options if taken to draconian extremes.
Should a tiefling in an anti-tiefling area not be treated as an outsider so that the player can have more fun? Or should the racism against the player be limited enough that the player can still play, but present as a fun piece of flavour?
Likewise, I don't think treating a ranger with a wolf as a complete anomaly in any settlement is fair. However, he should expect fear and distrust from small settlements near the wilderness, where wolves are recognised and known to hunt farm animals and occasionally humans. That is just a factor of playing a beastmaster ranger. At least a wolf can get by: I would warn any player wanting to have a spider companion that they'd have a lot of troubles traveling in any settlement with that kind of stigma, fun for the player or not.
Hrm. While I do agree, I think that removes a lot of fun roleplaying options if taken to draconian extremes.
Should a tiefling in an anti-tiefling area not be treated as an outsider so that the player can have more fun? Or should the racism against the player be limited enough that the player can still play, but present as a fun piece of flavour?
Well, IMG, and this is definitely a case of 'author on board', outright racism is a definite sign of evil. With the vast majority of people being Unaligned, the worst a PC is going to get is a little suspicion and a few wary looks, but at the end of the day, the barkeep knows that the kobold's money is as good as the human's, and that personality isn't genetic; everybody deserves a chance to prove what kind of person they are. What you are doesn't matter; who you are does.
Well, IMG, and this is definitely a case of 'author on board', outright racism is a definite sign of evil. With the vast majority of people being Unaligned, the worst a PC is going to get is a little suspicion and a few wary looks, but at the end of the day, the barkeep knows that the kobold's money is as good as the human's, and that personality isn't genetic; everybody deserves a chance to prove what kind of person they are. What you are doesn't matter; who you are does.
Fair enough in your game, can't argue with that, but racism was a bit of a fact of life in most older cultures and many modern ones. In my games, mild racism from peasants is pretty unaligned (extremism is not: mild racism is stuff like serving the outlanders worse beer and steering clear of them in the street. Extreme is lynch mobs and brutality from the guards; that is as evil as it would be anywhere).
Basically, an elf in a human city in my game gets similar treatment to a caucasian in Japan (because that is something I know quite well). It's not evil, just a product of uncertainty and inexperience with funny lookin' folk.
Fair enough in your game, can't argue with that, but racism was a bit of a fact of life in most older cultures and many modern ones.
In the real world, yes.
Since my game does not take place in the real world, that is utterly and totally irrelevant.
Sorry, it's a bit of a Berserk Button for me. I have a player who is constantly saying 'back then' in reference to things, and I have to tell him, over and over and OVER, that this is completely unrelated to real world history. There is no 'back then', other than the game world history. What things were like in Middle Ages/Dark Ages Europe is meaningless, as the game isn't in, and never had, a Middle Ages/Dark Ages Europe.
In the real world, yes.
Since my game does not take place in the real world, that is utterly and totally irrelevant.
Sorry, it's a bit of a Berserk Button for me. I have a player who is constantly saying 'back then' in reference to things, and I have to tell him, over and over and OVER, that this is completely unrelated to real world history. There is no 'back then', other than the game world history. What things were like in Middle Ages/Dark Ages Europe is meaningless, as the game isn't in, and never had, a Middle Ages/Dark Ages Europe.
Sure, like I said, whatever works in your games. I just can't picture a world of normal sentient people that didn't include numerous nonevil members that discriminate against others based solely on them being "different". But then, humanity and its foibles are a common theme of my games. In other genres of fantasy, it might work just fine, so your games are probably none the worse for cutting that stuff out. And your absolutely right: your player can't 'correct' you with "back then" and any knowledge of history from armchair to PhD level. Your world is yours ;)
Leash.
Put a tutu on a bear and teach it to dance, and people suddenly forget that it can pimp-slap their head clean off their shoulders...
Really, though, if the DM is going to have any sort of in-game thing affect one of your character's class features, it should never go beyond just occasional rople-playing fluff and should never actually interfere with the operation of said class feature, particularly on a continuing basis...
True, but a DM who punishes his players for their class features is being an asshat, and by all rights should swiftly find himself without players. Everyone at the game is there to have fun. The DM should be as willing to work with the players as vice-verse.
*Shrug* It's not my job as DM to bend my world to fit the players. If the players complain about a little distrust and hostility from a few peasants, they certainly aren't up to the challenge of dealing with a hobgoblin army.
Different groups, different playstyles. It's all good so long as everybody's having fun and some players like role-playing challenges to overcome. I think the reward of seeing a village go from "that's a wolf - kill it" to (after you've saved the village) children wanting to pet it and the local inn naming itself after the beast, would be great for some players.
*Shrug* It's not my job as DM to bend my world to fit the players. If the players complain about a little distrust and hostility from a few peasants, they certainly aren't up to the challenge of dealing with a hobgoblin army.
Different groups, different playstyles. It's all good so long as everybody's having fun and some players like role-playing challenges to overcome. I think the reward of seeing a village go from "that's a wolf - kill it" to (after you've saved the village) children wanting to pet it and the local inn naming itself after the beast, would be great for some players.
I agree, but it becomes old (and asshattery) when it happens every time at every village/town/city/etc. I've heard of far too many DMs who will have people react badly to the something minor (like an unusual animal companion), but cheerful accept having a Cthulu-esque monster as a PC in the group. Umm, hold on, they're scared of the wolf, but Doctor Tentacles over here is honkey-dorey?
I agree, but it becomes old (and asshattery) when it happens every time at every village/town/city/etc. I've heard of far too many DMs who will have people react badly to the something minor (like an unusual animal companion), but cheerful accept having a Cthulu-esque monster as a PC in the group. Umm, hold on, they're scared of the wolf, but Doctor Tentacles over here is honkey-dorey?
I don't disagree.
I'm all in favour of playing up what I see as believable, but I'd also get bored with the "It's a wolf" routine pretty quickly. I'm sure we'd find some way to paper over it once we'd had our fun.
Tiefling's aren't popular due to campaign reasons and that persists from place to place, but they do get +2 to Charisma so that's never really felt quite natural to me that this is the situation.
*Shrug* It's not my job as DM to bend my world to fit the players. If the players complain about a little distrust and hostility from a few peasants, they certainly aren't up to the challenge of dealing with a hobgoblin army.
Different groups, different playstyles. It's all good so long as everybody's having fun and some players like role-playing challenges to overcome. I think the reward of seeing a village go from "that's a wolf - kill it" to (after you've saved the village) children wanting to pet it and the local inn naming itself after the beast, would be great for some players.
True, as far as it goes, but do you make it clear before someone creates their character that it may "fit" into your game world differently than they expect, or do you spring it on them after they start playing?
After all, the player is choosing to "inhabit" a character which has grown up in the game world, and is well aware of general reactions and the like. If a DM makes it clear that certain classes, races, or features work in a particular way, then the player can make intelligent choices about character creation. I just don't like it when it is dropped on the player as a surprise later (of course, if it is a surprise in a particular region then it's OK).
On the topic of "DMs not bending the world to fit the players", I have to admit I don't understand this. When I run a game, I'm focusing the action and the attention on the players. They are the "stars" of the story. Do other people run games where you run narratives of what is happening thousands of years before the players are born, thousands of miles away, to other people, for decades of gaming time? I mean, of course other stuff happens in my games, but it happens "off stage". Do people really run games where the play sessions themselves don't focus on the actions and intentions of the players, but instead totally focus on whatever narrative the DM has written?
I'm probably reading WAY too much into this comment, and you are really simply saying something like your campaign and genre are fairly specific and consistent, and you encourage players to find ways of "fitting into the world", rather than creating highly specific characters without taking the world into account, and then expecting you to "retcon" the entire campaign to justify them.
On that, I agree, though I have to admit, from my own laziness, I created a lot of my campaign setting in collaboration with players rather than on my own. Our previous game, we had one player who, after we spent weeks creating and hammering out a consistent game world, with thousands of years of backstory, and metaphysics, first wanted to play a "card-captors" style mage, and then, when thwarted on that, kept trying to tell us how magic "really worked" in the game, despite being handed a 3 page handout (he requested) on how magic worked in the world. He really did expect us to "bend" the whole world specifically for his character concepts.
I'm playing a Beast Master Ranger with a wolf companion. How freaked out do you think random townspeople would be if I just had my wolf quietly walk alongside me?
The wolf was one of the most widely distributed mammals in the world. Today it is almost extinct in Europe and the US. Why?
In Norway were we have wolfs today those who likes the wolf tends to live in cities and those that wants to kill it lives in villages. The main reason is that they believe the wolf kills their livestocks and pets (you know, barking dogs that think they can handle a wolf).
If you walked into such a village with a wolf, people would avoid you, be suspicious, lock their doors, not letting their children near you, getting their rifles just in case and the like.
But you have to account for that this is a western, democractic country in the year 2009 with a 100% literacy rate, the second largest GDP per capita in the world, and that 25% have college/univiversity training.
But maybe your villagers are veritable wolf lovers...
luc
True, as far as it goes, but do you make it clear before someone creates their character that it may "fit" into your game world differently than they expect, or do you spring it on them after they start playing?
I'm not perfect. If it occurred to me, then I would mention it to the player in advance. I probably would do, I'm normally pretty good on covering all the likely pros- and cons- of a character in my games. We haven't had a beast master so not come up, but I'll be keeping it in mind.
On the topic of "DMs not bending the world to fit the players", I have to admit I don't understand this. When I run a game, I'm focusing the action and the attention on the players. They are the "stars" of the story. Do other people run games where you run narratives of what is happening thousands of years before the players are born, thousands of miles away, to other people, for decades of gaming time? I mean, of course other stuff happens in my games, but it happens "off stage". Do people really run games where the play sessions themselves don't focus on the actions and intentions of the players, but instead totally focus on whatever narrative the DM has written?
I'm probably reading WAY too much into this comment, and you are really simply saying something like your campaign and genre are fairly specific and consistent, and you encourage players to find ways of "fitting into the world", rather than creating highly specific characters without taking the world into account, and then expecting you to "retcon" the entire campaign to justify them.
I'm probably over-exaggerating my point as a reaction against the prevailing attitude of "game first, reality second" and the, to me, unhealthy attitude that all players must be carefully coddled like children to ensure that one doesn't feel the other got a better present than they did. The 'M' in DM does not stand for 'Mommy'. (Heh - I've just summarised my attitude, I'm going to sig myself). Basically, what I'm getting at is that if I want a realistic feeling setting which for example, I think means villagers not trusting a great big wolf trotting round their village, then I'm not going to bend my world to fit a player that has a great big wolf. No more than in a setting where humans were plagued with vicious orc raids, an orc character wouldn't be in danger walking round a human village. Basically, I like, and players like, having to deal with problems like this.
There's a huge attitude on these boards, and in the 4e game design, that fairness and balance must come before all. I'm not of that mindset. An interesting and compelling game setting is of greater priority to me. I'll up and tell the tiefling player (and have) before chargen that they'll face all sorts of problems being a tiefling and if the players says ' yeah - I want to be an outcast dark hero' then who am I to deny them the pleasure of being picked on. They like it.
Similarly, I don't bend my setting to fit their power-level. If there's an old lich in the tower by the bay and the PCs are level 3, my approach is to let them know to avoid her, rather than to remove the lich. Of course, I equally don't expect them to try and I set up adventures that are appropriate, but the point is that having things present that aren't appropriate to them adds to the depth of the world. And sometimes the players will use that depth. Maybe they want to run a mission to trick the goblins into attacking the lich's tower. But the main thing is that the players don't feel the setting revolves around them because that makes them think the setting is a game, not a world.
On that, I agree, though I have to admit, from my own laziness, I created a lot of my campaign setting in collaboration with players rather than on my own. Our previous game, we had one player who, after we spent weeks creating and hammering out a consistent game world, with thousands of years of backstory, and metaphysics, first wanted to play a "card-captors" style mage, and then, when thwarted on that, kept trying to tell us how magic "really worked" in the game, despite being handed a 3 page handout (he requested) on how magic worked in the world. He really did expect us to "bend" the whole world specifically for his character concepts.
Gah! Sounds annoying. I had a similar player in my Shadowrun game who kept trying to tell me what an NPC would and would not know and correct me on how the setting should be run. It was exceedingly annoying.
I would rather see a Dragonborn with a wolf companion approaching me than a Drow with a spider companion. ---shudder---
Hey, in one rather enjoyable (GURPS) game I *was* the giant spider in the party. 8 hairy legs, glowing red eyes, and a habit of whistling (badly) that sounded like a kettle about to attack- whats not to like?
Sometimes the list got quite long... :PEven if you come upon a village of complete trogs who haven't left their cousin marryin' valley in decades, they're going to be at least dimly aware that these things exist somewhere in the world and probably won't lose their minds anymore than you would running into a chinese guy with a chameleon for a pet for the first time. You've at least heard of chinese guys and chameleons, right?
It's not like every time the PC step out of the fantasy world cities and monster infested woods, they stumble into medieval Europe where people are wholly unaware of this 'Greyhawk/Kyrin/Eberron' place.
People keep losing sight of the fact that rangers, tieflings and dragonborn and all the other crazy crap they're champing at the bit to punish players for playing in the name of faux realism have existed in the campaign world for thousands of years.
Even if you come upon a village of complete trogs who haven't left their cousin marryin' valley in decades, they're going to be at least dimly aware that these things exist somewhere in the world and probably won't lose their minds anymore than you would running into a chinese guy with a chameleon for a pet for the first time. You've at least heard of chinese guys and chameleons, right?
It's not like every time the PC step out of the fantasy world cities and monster infested woods, they stumble into medieval Europe where people are wholly unaware of this 'Greyhawk/Kyrin/Eberron' place.
Well, I'd freak out if I saw a Chinese guy with a Chameleon, but I'm extremely lizard-phobic. But on the whole, you are utterly correct.
This depends.
How much faith do you have in your real-world law enforcement?
Also, how much traffic do they have to care about? Further, how much do they care?
There's a difference between the modern day local police force having to keep a watch over 125,000 people and town guards having to watch two entrances into a town.
> suspicious, lock their doors, not letting their children near you, getting
> their rifles just in case and the like.
They would also likely react that way if you walked into the village wearing full body armor and carrying an assortment of heavy weaponry - yet this goes without comment in the typical D&D setting.
On top of that, in a typical D&D setting, anyone who sets out trying to kill all the wolves in an area is liable to end up with some bigger problems than wolves, as that sort of activity is liable to draw attention from druids and the like - if bad enough, it might even get Melora (or other similar deities) in a snit, and that's not good news for your village.
Then there's the possibility of looking outside of medieval (or modern) Europe for inspiration - not every society viewed wolves as bad guys, even if they did.
Because wolves are bred for thier knob turning skill.
I agree, but it becomes old (and asshattery) when it happens every time at every village/town/city/etc. I've heard of far too many DMs who will have people react badly to the something minor (like an unusual animal companion), but cheerful accept having a Cthulu-esque monster as a PC in the group. Umm, hold on, they're scared of the wolf, but Doctor Tentacles over here is honkey-dorey?
Clearly they're Japanese!
PS. If you don't get it, don't Google "tentacle monster".
More seriously, this is really bad and is invariably inconsistent characterization on the DM's part.
As far as it goes, the DM is pretty much being a jerk here. I'm sorry if you think otherwise, but you are wrong. Unless you don't want the PCs to go into towns and villages and roleplay, you simply cannot have NPCs react too negatively to PCs. Grumbling about the elf, overcharging them, whatever, that's fine. If they go to the point of actually threatening the PCs with physical harm, then you've gone too far and are basically saying "These are the bad guys, kill them." No, sorry, that's what it is. If someone cannot deal with someone having a wolf companion, then you're being a jerk to the PC. Same if they cannot deal with someone being dragonborn. Unless you don't want the PCs to play in towns (and don't say "Well, they'll just have to sit it out"; that's unacceptable) then you need to have the towns be at least moderately accepting of them. Having an evil area where you have to all disguise yourselves (or disguise certain party members) is fine, but all the time is simply being a jerk to the players for no reason.
If you don't want someone to play something, don't let them play it. If you have them get attacked/threatened by townsfolk, then you're telling them either to kill them, or that you don't want them playing that thing.
People! We're talking about D&D, not medieval Europe! Chances are that a few kilometers from rural town, undeads lie in crypts, and groups of marauding trolls fight small teams of adventurers all the time.
It isn't normal to have these things happen around the house in the RL?
For the campaigns we run, it's normally in a more...freeform homebrew world. The world evolves as we go through it, and we know virtually nothing about the world going in. So there would be no established hate for a certain race in a certain town because the town was likely to not have existed until a week or so before the session we visit it.
However there are some things that can be done to limit such reprisals.
-Make it so the wolf can be visibly recognized from a normal wild animal. This can be a coller, but should you not wish to so adorn your wolf with a coller, then braids in the hair, ornaments such as bright feathers, ribbons or jewely, equiped items such as armor and magical items, and colouring it's hair and tatooing show that it is not just a wild wolf.
-Find lodging for your animal. Kennels, corals, stables etc can be used to keep animals. They are safe, and are a good place for your wolf to get rested and feed and taken care of, and likely have better facilities for your wolf then staying with you in your inn. If your group also has horses and pack animals then keeping the wolf at the same stables with them provides some protection to them as well.
-Chained. If the Wolf is on a chain and thus visibly controled, people will be less fearful and more tollerant of it. Especially if left unattended in a public place. Keep the wolf with you at all times. Some places might require such animals to be chained or even muzzled or caged. In which case it might be preferable to keep your wolf at a kennel or stables like above where it can be better treated.
-Well Known, Fame and Reputation. If you frequent a place regularly then the people there will come to know you and the wolf, lovals will learn to trust the wolf if it is safe and well behaved. As your character gains fame and your reputation spreads, more people will recognize you and be less afraid of your wolf. As you level you will gain fame and reputation as your adventures become more well known, and the DM should consider this. Townsfolk should at least recognize that you aren't ordinary travelers when you enter a town, and thus you should gain more tollerance aand respect s you level (assuming you are being heroic of course) The difference between level 1 "aaaahh, some damned fool is letting a wild wolf run loose!!!" and level 12 "Who's that man over there with the wolf? He looks like just the person this town needs to get rid of those bandits..."
-Different places will react differently. A town where hunters, Rangers, Druids etc are commonly seen with such animals might not bat an eye, a peasant village however....
-Your appearance and how you behave, as well as your party. If you look like a questionable person or are hanging with a group that looks like bandits, then people will be fearful of your dog and hostile towards you. However a Knight in Shiney armor, or a Noble with such an animal might be tolerated. Historically such powerful dogs and tamed wolfs would mostly be owned by the noblemen, landowners etc who could both afford to feed such animals and who also had the right to hunt. Do you look and behave in such a manner that someone seeing you with the wolf would instantly conclude that you were a Ranger, a profesional hunter with a tamed wolf companion?
Make sure you look like someone who legitimately can own such an animal and would have the skills to properly train and handle it. As mentioned above about having the dog groomed and visibly identifiable as non-wild in combination with your own appearance would go a long way to preventing and misunderstandings or fear/hostility over the wolf.
How do people react when you enter with a large Spider or a Serpent?
My Beastmaster ranger is a good ole boy farm hand, with a mostly feral 17 year old barncat for a companion. It's about the most evil thing in the universe, and I keep it chained(with a logging chain) to a tree outside towns if I have to go into a town.
Oh I do have a way for a female spider ranger to get the spider companion into and around towns... Pretending to be pregnant goes a long way.
Oh I do have a way for a female spider ranger to get the spider companion into and around towns... Pretending to be pregnant goes a long way.
Or, or... you can make a drow, who actually be pregnant with a spider!
I don't know why
She swallowed the fly...
I guess she'll die.
She swallowed the spider to catch the fly.
I don't know why
She swallowed the fly...
I guess she'll die.
*applause*
The important thing for your DM to realize is that any sort of discrimination thrown on the PC needs to be fun for that PC-a challenge to overcome that's no different than kicking down the door and killing a dragon albeit with different rewards. Once a PC has made it clear that his companion is not a menace- then that's certainly a reputation builder (tavern owners might ask for endorsements from the "wolf tamer", and nobles might ask for wolves of their own in exchange for hefty sums of gold)-and even when people are still wary of your PC's wolf it can be used to your advantage. If you're in a city where people are scared of wolves (having heard about them carrying off children and whatnot) keep the wolf on a chain and use him as an intimidation tool when you meet the henchmen of an urban villain. Can you say bonus to intimidate?
I'm playing a Beast Master Ranger with a wolf companion. How freaked out do you think random townspeople would be if I just had my wolf quietly walk alongside me?
How freaked out would your average person be if you walked through your local mall with a lion strolling beside you?
How freaked out would your average person be if you walked through your local mall with a lion strolling beside you?
That's comparing apples to oranges. Well, more like apples to toaster ovens.
That's comparing apples to oranges. Well, more like apples to toaster ovens.
I do not think that means what you think it means.
Lions and wolves are both wild creatures that people fear. It matters not one iota if the creature is ostensibly tame or under the control of the ranger or trainer, most folks are either running for the hills, a weapon or a cop if they see one in wandering around uncaged and untethered in public.
Present or past, fantasy or future, humans are human and react in human ways.
I do not think that means what you think it means.
Lions and wolves are both wild creatures that people fear. It matters not one iota if the creature is ostensibly tame or under the control of the ranger or trainer, most folks are either running for the hills, a weapon or a cop if they see one in wandering around uncaged and untethered in public.
Present or past, fantasy or future, humans are human and react in human ways.
That is entirely dependent on how you choose to view your game world and choose to have people react. There's plenty of counterpoints in this thread.
I do not think that means what you think it means.
Lions and wolves are both wild creatures that people fear. It matters not one iota if the creature is ostensibly tame or under the control of the ranger or trainer, most folks are either running for the hills, a weapon or a cop if they see one in wandering around uncaged and untethered in public.
Present or past, fantasy or future, humans are human and react in human ways.
Would you balk at a cat , or a dog?
A wolf would be the equivalent in any D&D world especially if it followed someone into the town.
How many people in the real world are actually afraid of wolfs? I most certainly am not, infact there are few animals that I am indeed afraid of.
That is entirely dependent on how you choose to view your game world and choose to have people react. There's plenty of counterpoints in this thread.
Then the point is entirely moot as any given DM can envision any world as they choose. For the question to have any meaning it assumes a common baseline of generic PoL quasi-medieval D&D, and it was from that position that I framed my reply.
How many people in the real world are actually afraid of wolfs?
Most, and that in a modern world with easy access to information in which most folks have little to no first- or even second-hand experience. In a standard-model quasi-medieval D&D world in which wolves are a very real danger, including many related species both mundane and magical which present far greater threats, this fear is likely to be far more pronounced.
Humans are panicky animals at heart and "fear the quadruped carnivore" is hard-wired into out psyche. DMs can spin their worlds any way they like to allow people to accept anything they wish, and there is nothing wrong with that, but assuming real humans in a quasi-medieval fantasy setting then wild animals walking the streets would always be a cause for fear and distress.
A wolf would be the equivalent in any D&D world especially if it followed someone into the town.
This is not true in the slightest. Dogs and cats are domesticated animals, wolves are not. A world in which wolves are domesticated animals and pets differs significantly than the standard D&D model. Such a world is not wrong per se, but it would be an exception to the norm and notable as such.
Then the point is entirely moot as any given DM can envision any world as they choose. For the question to have any meaning it assumes a common baseline of generic PoL quasi-medieval D&D, and it was from that position that I framed my reply.
Most, and that in a modern world with easy access to information in which most folks have little to no first- or even second-hand experience. In a standard-model quasi-medieval D&D world in which wolves are a very real danger, including many related species both mundane and magical which present far greater threats, this fear is likely to be far more pronounced.
Humans are panicky animals at heart and "fear the quadruped carnivore" is hard-wired into out psyche. DMs can spin their worlds any way they like to allow people to accept anything they wish, and there is nothing wrong with that, but assuming real humans in a quasi-medieval fantasy setting then wild animals walking the streets would always be a cause for fear and distress.
Why are you assuming that the typical human is some ignorant hick? A typical D&D commoner knows full well that magic and all kinds of weird things exist. This is the main differential between any kind of comparison to any RL reactions; there's no magic in the real world, but it's well-known to exist in D&D.
These people also live in the same settlements with everything from elves and dwarves to eladrin and tieflings, to say nothing of the occassional genasi or warforged, and the off goblin or kobold or gnoll. This would, logically, make the inhabitants far more tolerant and open-minded regarding the unusual.
While you might have a point about wild animals, the ranger's animal sidekick is very obviously tamed, as evidenced by the fact that it's walking alongside a humanoid instead of prowling about in the woods, and even wild wolves are very rarely a threat to humans; they attack livestock.
This is not true in the slightest. Dogs and cats are domesticated animals, wolves are not. A world in which wolves are domesticated animals and pets differs significantly than the standard D&D model. Such a world is not wrong per se, but it would be an exception to the norm and notable as such.
We have domesticated wolves; we just call them dogs. Dogs and wolves are the same species, and look quite similar; generally, people are pretty comfortable around animals which look similar to harmless ones, and wolves and dogs resemble one another, pretty strongly in some breeds.
Indeed, it wasn't all that uncommon to have dog/wolf crossbreeds.
> your local mall with a lion strolling beside you?
Honestly? They'd probably give it a reasonable berth, but if someone was actually walking through the mall with a lion beside them then most people would probably assume that it was a tamed/trained one and not freak out, because the scene wouldn't make much sense otherwise.
How freaked out would your average person be if you walked through your local mall with a lion strolling beside you?
A lion is a dangerous animal, and not completely tamable. Even a trained and tamed lion is still extremely dangerous to have just strolling around in a public area like this. Add to this that a door, or sitting in a car is enough to keep one safe from a wolf, whereas a lion can open a car like a tin of sardines. Completely different scales.
A wolf is a potentially dangerous animal because they are not fully domesticated as a species. But then people have pitbulls for pets.
But then people have pitbulls for pets.
As I understand it, a properly trained pitbull makes a great pet. Unfortunately, a large number of people who get pitbulls aren't willing to invest the time necessary to teach the animal how to properly use or restrain its aggressive tendencies. Right up there with rottweilers. One of my friends used to have a rott, she was a very gentle, friendly, and intelligent dog. But she was also very protective, if you raised a hand to my friend while she was around he may not have gotten the chance to beat you down, because she'd maul you in a heartbeat.
As for the wolf lion comparison, entirely different. If a wolf attacks you, you might be able to defend yourself with help, and they could be pulled off of you reasonably if you can just get your arm in the way of an attack. If a lion attacks you, you are pretty much screwed. That said, if a heavily armed person in a kevlar vest was walking down the street with a military weapon strapped to their back, which would never be allowed as a civilian weapon, with a wolf by their side that had a couple scars and a bullet wound in it, the reaction would be a little different.
Maybe if it was strolling next to me as I walked down the street, and was wearing full body armor and many, many weapons. I know my D&D character is. Yet nobody seems to care about my weapons or armor.
If we're assuming people are okay with me bringing in extremely lethal weaponry, is it really a stretch to assume a heeling wolf is going to be that much more of an issue?
As I understand it, a properly trained pitbull makes a great pet. Unfortunately, a large number of people who get pitbulls aren't willing to invest the time necessary to teach the animal how to properly use or restrain its aggressive tendencies. Right up there with rottweilers. One of my friends used to have a rott, she was a very gentle, friendly, and intelligent dog. But she was also very protective, if you raised a hand to my friend while she was around he may not have gotten the chance to beat you down, because she'd maul you in a heartbeat.
A pitbull is specifically bred to be a killer, so while they are trainable and can make good pets, they are always at risk of being dangerous. It would take a good 50 or more generations of selective breeding to make them safe.
Rottweilers are a safe dog, and completely domesticated. The only time they are trouble is if they are abused, which would make any dog trouble. Rottweilers are a huge dog though, so if one did attack it could do some serrious harm. I have two very large pure bred rottweilers and they are the most passive of dogs.
A wolf is undomesticatable, They are not just simply dogs and cannot be fully domesticated. In fact a domesticated wolf is more dangerous then a wild one because they will no longer fear humans, and if they escape they will likely hunt and kill humans. You have to understand that it took nealry 20,000 years for humans to domesticate the modern dog to what it is today.
but some leeway should be given in D&D, where powerful people can do all sorts of things with magic. Rangers and Druids have guilds and even religions and temples in the case of druids. Both have animal companions, and most people in the D&D world would know what you meant if you told them you were a ranger. In turn then most people would know that rangers can have wild animals as tame companions, would know tales of rangers with such animals, etc etc. so would have some understanding that the ranger's wolf is a safe creature under his control.
We have domesticated wolves; we just call them dogs. Dogs and wolves are the same species, and look quite similar; generally, people are pretty comfortable around animals which look similar to harmless ones, and wolves and dogs resemble one another, pretty strongly in some breeds.
Indeed, it wasn't all that uncommon to have dog/wolf crossbreeds.
Grey Wolf: Canis lupus
Dog: Canis lupus familiaris
A dog is the sub-species of a grey wolf.
However, the reaction would depend on the locals ideas of what a wolf is and how that wolf looks like the local dogs, if any.
This is more likely to be dependant on what kind of humanoids make up the community as well as basic folklore of the region.
Here's a nice article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolves_in_folklore,_religion_and_mythology
>
They would also likely react that way if you walked into the village wearing full body armor and carrying an assortment of heavy weaponry - yet this goes without comment in the typical D&D setting.
true, and when I DM you do have a problem if you enter into a town or village heavily armored and carrying weapons. the guards will be suspicious, interrogate you and the weapons often have to be peace-bonded and sometimes surrendered.
luc
Maybe if it was strolling next to me as I walked down the street, and was wearing full body armor and many, many weapons. I know my D&D character is. Yet nobody seems to care about my weapons or armor.
then your characters have not ventured into Cormyr (in Forgotten Realms). in this very lawful society only the nobility and the military are allowed to carry ready-to-use weapons. all others have to have them peace bonded. an exception is made to adventure companyes with a charter from the king.
when I DM you will not be allowed into a town fully armored and carrying an arsenal of weapons unless you are well known to the town.
luc
(And given that the guy walking around town in Cormyr carrying weapons is almost assuredly someone with a license, it all but shouts from the rooftops that the wolf walking beside him is part and parcel of that status, so people would be even *less* inclined to worry.)
true, and when I DM you do have a problem if you enter into a town or village heavily armored and carrying weapons. the guards will be suspicious, interrogate you and the weapons often have to be peace-bonded and sometimes surrendered.
luc
Guard: Ma'am, we're going to have to confiscate all of your weapons.
Ember: ... I think you'd need to dismember me to do that, no deal.
Guard: Ma'am, we're going to have to confiscate all of your weapons.
Ember: ... I think you'd need to dismember me to do that, no deal.
And Ember, after attacking local law enforcement was taken into custody earlier this morning. Trial will be this afternoon. You're all invited to the hanging tonight.
On the differences of opinions on this thread. Consider this, I live in the Rocky Mountain West. I've encountered wolves on the streets as pets, mostly in small rural areas. I've chased a bear who got into my camping neighbors tent unarmed (and afterwards thought wtf am I doing). I've sat sat down next to a wild fox near enough to reach out and maybe touch him (he would have bolted). All of this is par for the course IMHO.
I suspect if I lived in and grew up on the east coast or even Denver these experinces would have been very exotic to me.
All the Best,
Nani?
I've chased a bear who got into my camping neighbors tent unarmed (and afterwards thought wtf am I doing).
Yeah, sometimes, you just have to wonder "what the #### is WRONG with me?"
I once started to chase down a deer with my bare hands. I caught myself soon enough to go back and grab the carving knife we had with us (picnic) but they bolted before I found it.
I was still hungry...
And Ember, after attacking local law enforcement was taken into custody earlier this morning. Trial will be this afternoon. You're all invited to the hanging tonight.
Why would she attack them?
Maybe you aren't getting the reference. Ember, the iconic monk from 3e? Hello? She's Lawful, she won't attack city guards for doing their job. And she can't surrender her weapons, she fights unarmed. Hence the "you'd need to dismember me" bit.
Think about the beastmaster ranger's options as far as companions go, & aside from the raptors, a wolf seems to be about the least intrusive/scary of the lot, & yet, the DM is still making it an issue. Last time I checked, I was just another average human, & I'd sooner take my chances with a wolf than any bear, big cat, giant lizard, etc. Don't even get me started when it comes to the Medium-sized spider (seriously, just picture one bigger than a halfling for just a sec - ugh). Pretty limited options, there.
So it seems that the DM is being pretty transparent about keeping beastmaster rangers down by saying that unless one has a regular dog or an eagle for an animal companion, nobody anywhere is gonna have anything to do with them. Meanwhile, the tiefling warlock who farts out a tiny fireball whenever he sneezes too hard is still A-OK with everyone in town. Riiiiight...
In short, to pull off epic-level asshattery like that, you pretty much need a ten-gallon cowboy hat or a sombrero.
Well... It is not recommended to pet any wild animal. They are ferocious and it doesn't matter how much you love them, their built in "anger" and "wildness" is like a volcano. Anytime it can errupt.
Regards,
You know that this thread has been dead for five years, right?
Oops! I'm sorry I couldn't read that this thread is so old. Pardon! 
I usually assume that most people have seen some pretty freaky stuff, so a wolf companion is a meh.
kurenaiyami wrote:
FFS, can we stop the necroing? This thread was dead long ago and an ill-informed necro brought it back; the situation was brought to attention of those involved, and rectified- LET IT DIE.