Dwarves can't Swim

[TheAuldGrump]

Already happened.  I was running a shadowrun game a week after the Classic Fantasy came out and one of my PCs [who hadn't played much spycraft before], took Dwarf Student, and an interest in Swimming, thinking that he could "break the Dwarven mould and set himself apart from the other Dwarves".

I would most likely let a stunt like that fly.

I did.  In my mind half of GM'ing is knowing when to ignore the rules in favour of cool.

I dunno, the image of a dwarf with a Mark Spitz poster has its own type of cool.... (An interest in swimming, not the ability.) And given that there are Cliff-Born dwarfs the option was open in a more legitimate fashion....

The Auld Grump

[Sletchman]

Already happened.  I was running a shadowrun game a week after the Classic Fantasy came out and one of my PCs [who hadn't played much spycraft before], took Dwarf Student, and an interest in Swimming, thinking that he could "break the Dwarven mould and set himself apart from the other Dwarves".

I would most likely let a stunt like that fly.

I did.  In my mind half of GM'ing is knowing when to ignore the rules in favour of cool.

I dunno, the image of a dwarf with a Mark Spitz poster has its own type of cool.... (An interest in swimming, not the ability.) And given that there are Cliff-Born dwarfs the option was open in a more legitimate fashion....

The Auld Grump

One of the big reasons I let it slide was the fact that it was only this players second spycraft game, and we were ready to start play.  He took Cliff-Born as his 6th level feat [started at 5th], which was another rules fudge but it all worked out in the end.

[TheAuldGrump]

Heh - I would have let that slide too. Knowing that he would eventually be taking the feat would be enough.

I might have worked it into an amnesia subplot - no memory of his upbringing, and a battle cry of Cowabunga! (Cue Wipeout!)

Great, now I have that image stuck in my head....

The Auld Grump

[LordKruelos]

Interestingly enough, the biggest resistance I've gotten from others reading so far is that they really don't like the idea of Banned checks -- they tend to subscribe to the belief that you should be able to try anything, but have no problem with major penalties.

I'm suggesting a Campaign Quality, something like:

"It's Not That You CAN'T Do That..."

Characters may attempt checks that they are normally Banned from attempting (e.g. Dwarves may try to swim, etc). When attempting a check that would normally be Banned to your character, the check suffers a -6 Species penalty and the Error range is increased by 1.

[Morgenstern]

I always find it odd that people are so adamant that there is nothing humans can do that other races can't.

[LordKruelos]

I always find it odd that people are so adamant that there is nothing humans can do that other races can't.

I have no problem with the Banned checks. Some people do, though, and given how small of an impact they have on the overall game, I'd rather the guys see how flexible the system is to deliver the game THEY want to play.  Campaign Qualities have always been one of those highlights for the toolbox-approach.

[Desertpuma]

I think the idea of the Banned Checks is awesome. It helps reinforce the stereotypes of the race.

[Morgenstern]

Being able to say "no, you can't" is also part of the range and flexibility of the game . Races that have banned checks are different and should provide a different play experience. They certainly are given perks in other areas as compensation for their difficulties. In my mind, a banned check is effectively short hand for "take -50 to that". The net result is the same and it cuts down on the squirming.

Sadly the predominant reaction does seem to be "nah, that doesn't apply to my character" instead of "Hmm. I might want to get a water walking ring at my earliest convienience and until then play this character as reluctant to book passage on boats."

I guess the sorts of challenges banned checks introduce aren't interesting to some people *shrug*.

[LordKruelos]

Being able to say "no, you can't" is also part of the range and flexibility of the game . Races that have banned checks are different and should provide a different play experience. They certainly are given perks in other areas as compensation for their difficulties. In my mind, a banned check is effectively short hand for "take -50 to that". The net result is the same and it cuts down on the squirming.

Sadly the predominant reaction does seem to be "nah, that doesn't apply to my character" instead of "Hmm. I might want to get a water walking ring at my earliest convienience and until then play this character as reluctant to book passage on boats."

I guess the sorts of challenges banned checks introduce aren't interesting to some people *shrug*.

Again, you're preaching to the choir as far as what I find useful/valuable/interesting. If I were running the game, I'd stand by the Banned checks and have no problem defending them. But someone else is looking to run this, and that was one of the few things that stuck out at him (Rapiers doing Stress damage was another). I'd rather meet him halfway and get to play FantasyCraft slightly modified than argue it should be run as written and not get to play.

[Krensky]

I think part of it stems from 'race' being an overloaded word.

In the real world, suggesting a race (ethic group) inherently couldn't swim would be ludicrous, offensive, and wrong. In a fantasy world, suggesting that a race (species) inherently couldn't swim would is perfectly correct. Dwarves, for instance, might be so dense they don't float, or maybe they lack the necessary breathing control. Maybe elves can't make calm checks on humans because their psychology is just too damn alien. Whatever. The problem is that people conflate the two meanings, so the suggestion that dwarves can't swim seems ridiculous and stupid.

This is one of the reasons I'm glad FC went with species. Not that it stops the above issue but at least it doesn't contribute to it.

[Morgenstern]

As I suggested in my intital statement, the odd thing is that is almost always based on the notion that human capacities are shared by all other playable species.

This is a 1000' cliff. The drake thinks of it as a good place to catch a themal. The human recognizes it as a flat-out fatal limit to his range of motion. There is no 'playing against type' here - you jump, you die... No one even blinks at this.

This is a slow moving but wide river. The human thinks of it as a minor inconvienience (he'll get wet). The dwarf sees a flat-out deadly obstacle... Oh no, that will never do.

The player of the human is expected to find a solution that involves not going in the deadly place or being appropriately prepared when he does so. Overcomming that challenge being part of the fun of the game. Players of Dwarves, if anything, have more opportunities to display their lateral thinking and cunning. Or so I would hope .

[meadicus]

I think you summed it up there perfectly Morg.

"Dwarves can't swim in the same way that Humans can't fly."

~Mead

"The ships hung in the air in much the same way as bricks don't"

[Morgenstern]

Dwarf and human heroes find themselves cut off on the wrong side of the river as the goblin warchief and his elite guard closes in. Only moments ago the (mildly suicidal) goblin scouts used kegs of their deaded 'fire dust' to blast the bridge our heroes expected to withdraw over to various sizes of smithereen. Knowing the shorter of their number can't swim, the two comrades turn to each other and announce "oh crap..." in unison (ding! action die awarded).

Human eyes the murky waters at their back. "Why couldn't you have been born an elf, rockbritches?"
Dwarf spits on the headless corpse of a goblin he's just finished remodeling. "Why can't you hold your liquor, longshanks?"

Obligatory friendly insults exchanged, its time to put off the grim reaper once more. "What are our assets?" Comes the inquiry as chunks of lumber rain from the sky. Quickly hatching a plan, they run pelmel to the nearest shore and select a stout timber. Draging it into the shallows, the dwarf mounts it with all the prickly displeasure of a half-drowned cat... facing not toward the far bank and safety, but back at the closing ranks of maggot-folk while loading his crossbow. He's planning to give yonder chieftan a little parting gift of fine Dwarven steel - preferably in the right eye. Meanwhile, the human quickly doffs his chain shirt and shield, piling them atop his end of the beam to help balance the load and begins swimming for the far shore for all he's worth, pulling the former bridge fragment along with him.

[warwelf]

Hoy hoy

This is LordKruelos' potential GM here.  No worries about runnin' the game, I'm not gonna wuss out on you at this point.

As far as swimming, the dwarves can freakin' sink.  I take bigger issue with dwarves inability to jump, on account of them still possessing muscles and the ability to build up (small amounts of) momentum.

That said, the main reason I have with problems with bans on actions is that it rules out the fun of desperate, last-ditch attempts.  Sure, your dwarf may have short stumpy dwarf-legs and the last four feet of bridge may have crumbled away, but a rampaging pack of Befanged Whateverbeasts is comin' your way and your companions are too busy holding off the Sorcerous Warsnarks on the other side.  In that situation the last thing I'd want to do as a GM is say "Sorry, no, banned actions, too bad."

To that end, I'll probably keep the banned actions in, and allow players to spend Action Points to invoke a Campaign Quality that reduces the ban to a monstrous penalty for a scene.

I understand why the banned actions exist.  I just don't want to let them ruin the fun of the game.  Much like any other RPG rule, ever.

*...of course, this is also assuming that your Dwarves are the same as the standard fantasy dwarves.  In the case of the campaign I am writing this is markedly untrue.

[Gentry]

I take bigger issue with dwarves inability to jump, on account of them still possessing muscles and the ability to build up (small amounts of) momentum.

Hey, even Gimli had to get thrown. Seriously, though, I find your thoughts on the "desperate effort" circumstance intriguing, and I like your "spend an action die to try and roll a hail mary" solution. As an aside, I'd be half inclined to let dwarves make running jumps (more like flinging yourself forward and hoping you can get enough horizontal distance before gravity does you in), just not straight up in the air jumps.