Are so many people on /tg/ against reskinning, or is it just a vocal minority?
Of course, it's not suitable for every game, especially those that are 'fiction first'. Doesn't make sense in Apocalypse World, for example.
But it's the very foundation of most effects-based superhero games like Mutants & Masterminds and Champions, and most games beyond that. Do so many people care whether I'm a magician throwing fireballs or a mad scientist throwing unstable concoctions, as long as I'm still doing 10d6 damage in an AoE?
I even saw some craziness in a thread saying someone would insist on writing up full stats for a 'throwing chakram' instead of just reskinning a throwing axe.
>>45834016
It varies. If you want to see a good reskin, look at Hunter: The Vigil, or actually any of the WoD games considering it takes a core system of being a regular shmuck and lets you be a mage, a monster hunter, a werewolf, or a vampire.
If you want to see a bad reskin, go look at the Starships Trooper books make for the D&D 3.5 open license. Those are ungodly.
>>45834016
I wonder how much she was paid to wear the carrot nose and what she was thinking during the shoot when wearing it.
>>45834016
It depends on the person and the game: in some circumstances fluff is sacrosanct as How Things Should Be. In others, the fluff is mutable because there's very little to begin with. The major thing is wanting characters to feel different, and doing so differs on system and player understanding.
>>45834238
Eh, that's not quite the same. That's less 'reskinning' and more 'applying a template'.
What IS a good example in Hunter is the 'Dread Powers' system which, again, is an effects based system. So you can make an evil curse witch or a secretive vampire using the same powerset, just by how you describe the powers.
I've never seen anyone who is against reskinning. What the hell are you talking about?
Also, it seems that the problem is d&d-drones, as always.
>>45834016
I'm not against reskinning as long as it makes sense
We aren't fluffing your fucking robes as plate armor or vice versa.
>>45834290
I've literally seen people who have said things like "No, your gravedigger-backstory character can't use a shovel as a greatsword with greatsword stats. Only a greatsword can be a greatsword."
Or someone saying "There are no kung fu monasteries in this setting, therefore you can't be a monk" ignoring the range of things you can refluff a monk as.
It can't be just a "brainwashed by DnD thing", because both 4e AND 5e explicit mention refluffing as a cool thing to do that doesn't change the rules.
>>45834355
>both 4e AND 5e explicit mention refluffing as a cool thing to do that doesn't change the rules.
3.5 doesn't though. And THAT is what people have been led to believe.
>>45834355
>shovel as a great sword
That is dumb though.
I would however let you fluff your axe or halbred as a shovel, because they handle the same. Maybe give it -1 slashing dmg but also the bludgeoning dmg type.
>>45834397
I wouldn't. I'd simply request the shovel have some rational for why it would have that statblock over a normal shovel. EG, its big, its sharpened, etc.
I have no problem with reskinning OP. Honestly I'm willing to go pretty damn far with how much reskinning I'll allow before I say "yeah no thats not the same thing"
>>45834397
It's a fantasy game, who gives the fuck how something 'handles'?
Theoretically, all weapons of the same category in a game (be it DnD, WoD, etc.) are balanced against each other as being equal choices. It shouldn't matter what the choice IS, as long as it's consistent to the character.
I mean, sure, for any old shovel go ahead and throw an improvised weapon penalty or whatever on there, but for a specific backstory, might as well let them run free.
>>45834458
>It's a fantasy game, who gives the fuck how something 'handles'?
I do because you just want a fucking great sword because it's 2d6 you fucking cunt. Shovel is an axe or a halbred, not a sword, it's a haft with a blade at the end. Nothing about it is even sword like. If I as the DM don't have verisimilitude how the fuck can I expect the players to?
Halbreds are perfectly great weapons, so are axes. D12 with an x3 crit multiplyer.
>>45834438
Because fun is fun. Why is there.never any middle ground between ruurs are ruurs and panty anarchy with /tg/?
Reskinning is fine with me when I DM. As long as it fits the world, I don't see a reason to say no to things that don't have real effects on the game.
>>45834526
Well in the original D&D all weapons dealt the same damage [1d6], in part because there shouldn't be a choice between character concept and optimization.
That said, I'm lenient to your idea. As long as the DM lets the PC choose a semi-functional mechanic for his idea, and doesn't do something stupid like try and punish him for creativity, I don't mind it.
If that amounts to saying "Your shovel knight would be more halberd than greatsword" I don't really care.
>>45834560
In the original D&d elf was a class
It's because people are afraid that if you give an inch they will take a mile.
Stuff like using stats that already exist for a weapon that lacks them is fine.
Stuff like can my magic missile represent something difrent is not and the ever popular can my spells be thrown potions is right out.
You can refluf potions if you want though like the suggestions in complete arcane.
I will allow some spell refluffing but I can't think of anything off the top of my head.
>>45834526
Clearly, the gravekeeper has a deep insight into the ways of the shovel as explained by his back story, that let's him use this particular one as if it were a great sword.
>>45834585
Ancestor spirits of the graveyard clan have given him great shovel powers.
>>45834368
Where does this belief come from its bullshit I even saw somebody a few days ago say 3e discouraged rule zero.
>>45834016
I am all for reskinning whenever it's convenient. Many things just aren't necessary to differentiate.
If there is a difference, though, reskinning is verboten. I'll happily let you reskin a buckler into an ironfist in WFRP, but reskinning a hand weapon into a rapier is not okay.
>>45834599
Well, it's true that there is the rule of 'implied exclusion'.
Which basically means "If something is a class feature, feat, or power that you need to take, then a normal person can't do it". Which extends into other things. For example "the throwing chakram is already statted out in Obscure Supplement #9 as a special weapon, therefore you can't just call a throwing axe one of those."
>>45834579
>Stuff like can my magic missile represent something difrent is not and the ever popular can my spells be thrown potions is right out.
Why? It happens just fine in multitudes of games and is even part of the rules. It's a part of both DnD4e and 5e as explicit rules. It's a part of Strike, Stars Without Number, the latest Sine Nomine game Godbound...
Let me put it this way:
Does it bother you if my chessboard is Simpsons themed and the Queen is Marge Simpson and the pawns are random schoolchildren?
No? Then why should it matter at all in an RPG? They're both games. As long as we agree that a concept fits in the game world, then it should be fine.
>>45834666
Because magic missile is explicitly a force spell which has several implications on the rules of the game.
>>45834678
Yes, but those don't come up frequently. The vast majority of the time, the '1d4 damage' is the important part, not the 'force damage'.
Something is only important if it comes up or has attention called to it.
A good way to handle it is what Savage Worlds calls 'trappings'. They're things that don't come up often, but are an acknowledged fictional effect.
For example, a basic magic spell might be 'Energy Ball' that explodes. It might have the Fire trapping or the Cold trapping, making it do either cold or fire damage, and freezing things or minor things on fire as appropriate.
Little things that MIGHT have rules effect, but often don't.
So a Magic Missile has the 'force energy' trapping, and a Burst Potion has a 'shattering glass' trapping.
>>45834738
Force damage is the single best damage type in all of 3.PF though.
Using force damage is a fucking HUGE boon. Basically nothing is resistant or immune to it, it goes through all DR and hardness, and it hits incorporeals and ethereals 100%.
>>45834836
OK?
I'm still not seeing what the issue is, even if we get rid of trappings and say "This Magic Missile is now a 'Science'-Aimed-Potion.
Either way it's still an ability that can be used X times per day and does Y damage. The rules haven't changed, the limitations are still the same.
>>45834836
why are you talking about 3.PF instead of games that are good? Do you still bring up McDonald's in your discussions of good restaurants, just because you can get McDonald's everywhere?
>>45834836
This a good argument against making random spells force damage.
It's not a good argument against refluffing them tho.
>>45834943
better would probably be Magic Missile has a 100% chance to hit and has magical items and effects built specifically to do things about that. It's hard for me to justify a potion throw that always hits.
>>45835026
That's literally what they do already, since the splash always gets the target, if nothing else (ignoring things like flight).
Also, MM->potion throw is kind of a bad refluff to be honest... but it still works.
>>45835050
How are you going to get that fireball potion out to long range?
Why does that lightning potion work in a line?
How does chain lightning work?
Flaming Sphere?
I don't really mind spells as potions, but I'd need justification for lots of things. Like if Long range spellpots are fired from a grenade rifle or something, why can't my scorching ray or aura type spell also be launched to long range?
>>45834585
>>45834596
>the back story I wrote gives me bonuses
No. A sword is a sword
It is a long, balanced, sharpened piece of metal with a short handle
A shovel is a short sharpened piece of metal with a long handle on a curved spade shape.
They are not analogous
You really want the great sword? Fine. When you wiekd your shovel for battle it conjures the ghostly spirit of your families sentient ancestral sword, which inhabits your shovel (because plot reasons), surrounding your shovel in a spectral sword. Because it is weakened (because plot reasons) it only functions as a standard great sword right now but with improvements to the shovel, questing, and magical rituals you can slowly upgrade and awaken its ancient power. The sword is very irritated at being in a shovel though and often gives you shit for it.
There, my autism is sated and better, we've got a plot hook out of your damn shovel sword.
>>45834943
>>45835050
It isn't though. You don't lob a MM and MMs don't splash. They don't act close at all. There are already supported rules for splash potions, so if you're going to reskin something, you should probably try to make things match.
If science-aimed potions are what we're after, then Fireball is actually a much closer option. Magic Missile would fit much better as a laser based attack, supported by the mechanics magic missile actually brings.
>>45835152
You are making a fucking huge logical fallacy here with trying to refluff everything as potions, and then using that as justification for why refluffing other things as potions is bad.
>>45835292
This is why I said it's a shit refluff.
>>45835318
There isn't any logical fallacy. The conversation has literally been about turning spells into potions as a reskin.
>>45835344
>There isn't any logical fallacy. The conversation has literally been about turning spells into potions as a reskin.
Some spells. Not all spells. Or all spells, but not all of them into potions.
>>45834368
We have a winner.
People against reskinning are 3.5 players who got their underwear in a knot after 4e advocated it.
Now that 5e is going in that direction too,you see a bunch of converts praising it as the greatest innovation in D&D ever.
>needing rules for fluff
>>45834256
It's not a porn thing, unfortunately, it's just sexy halloween costumes
Goddamn my elsaboner
>>45835152
Here's the answer to any refluff:
They use the same rules.
No "but what if I do x" or "but what if I modify my equipment to do".
If you want to make your eldritch blast a laser cannon, that's 100% fine. And it will have the exact same rules as an eldritch blast, and you can't mod your laser cannon to be longer distance, or hand it over to someone else to use, or whatever. It's your special laser cannon that works for you because it's your eldritch blast.
Easy.
>>45834579
I concur with this anon.
You want to play a Wizard, but refluffed as entirely non-magical? Yeah... nah. Fuck the potions idea, I don't know what that's so common that we've both seen it.
You want to play a Barbarian, but fluff the rages as instead deep internal zen? Sure, why not.
Shovel as greatsword? Uh, fuck you. Shovel as a hammer, or halberd? I guess I'm okay with that.
It's a continuum.
>>45834016
Unless it's a generic system where refluffing things is a basic design assumption, then stats are generally intended to represent specific things, which are the way they are for a particular reason. In those cases refluffing tends to cause issues, such as why (insert new thing here) works exactly like something that's already in the setting despite ostensibly being something very different.
>>45834016
I think a big part of resistance to reskinning is either it doesn't fit with the DM's ideas for the world/tone/whatever, or the worry over progressive inconsistencies.
Reskinning of whole system is bad because, yes, you can run sim sci-fi or narrativist horror on D&D, but no, it won't be nearly as good as ran on actual horror of sci-fi focused system with sim/narrativist mechanics.
But people are lazy and/or too attached to system they already know, so they still do it.
And this way d&d propagates even more, sucks out popularity from other games and enforces its monopoly, despite being only suited to certain style of gaming that even isn't that popular.
"Minor" Reskinning is cool though. Like "this weapon which is mechanically x is really weapon y which is not described in the rulebooks". As long as it makes some minimal sense. Actually it's cool when rules are vague enough to give you such options without actual reskinning - like warhammer fantasy RP, at example, where you just have "one handed weapon" as a weapon, and you decide what's it - sword, axe or mace, so you can decide purely by what you like and not "bcuz stats" and not suffer the cosequences of "lol, no optimization".
>>45834016
I've nothing against reskinning, but I usually prefer to pick other elements and tune them together so the global power is equivalent, since pure reskinning tends to create fluff-crunch conflicts.
In you example, someone with heat-based vision would be able to see the fireballs hurled at him, but not the bottles.
It doesn't help that we are a group of'arguing grognards.
Don't see a reason why chakram would have different states than axes, but then I'm not a throwing weapon specialist.
So long as the reskin isn't too much of a logical leap I'd allow it. I also approve of reskins of races: halflings in D&D games I run end up being rabbitfolk.
>>45837636
That all sounds about right
>>45834599
Where does the belief come from that it doesn't? 3rd and 4th are the least friendly systems to rule zero and it isn't that hard to find articles that point this out by referencing direct quotes from each editions' rules in regards to DM agency. Despite your clever 'its bullshit' argument, the bloat of 3.pf was an attempt to minimize the instances of rulings by providing an abundance of rules
>>45838008
>But that changes the composition of their poops, how they interact with caltrops, and lowers their gestation period
>my imagination simply can't allow that
>I need the game company to tell me what I can imagine
I like the idea, but this thread is hilarious
>>45834738
>Savage Worlds
This. Giving powers trappings or general fluffing them is the only real way to go with how generic the system is with magic.
Although it does give suggestions for mechanical effects if, say, you're firing lightning bolts instead of chunks of supercooled water vapour
It depends.
Potions as Spells Doesn't work because you need to talk to be able to cast Arcane/Divine spells.
Potions as Psionic powers might work if you fluffed them like Bioshock plasmids.
Weapons are almost entirely interchangeable. I let people fluff Great Axes as Great Swords and vice versa because all the system cares about is the fact that it's a two handed slashy thing thing.
Reluff is fine provided it doesn't lead to bizarre scenarios that don't make sense.
>45839356
>But that changes the composition of their poops, how they interact with caltrops, and lowers their gestation period
None of this is necessary.
>>45840403
That's the entire point of his post. Sometimes, people are sarcastic, or make jokes!
>>45840403
Just like everything else brought up in this thread.
>>45835152
I'll say, "What is a sling?" Alex. How something gets from Point A to Point B can just be special effects with no mechanical effects.
I reskin a lot of shit in my 5E group.
Player wants a katana? Reskinned longsword. Player wants a katar? Reskinned sickle that does piercing damage. Player wants a spell to do a different damage type? As long as there's a fluff reason and you commit all your uses of that spell to that type, go for it. Player wants to be an alchemist? Your spells are potions and bombs now, pick them with flavor in mind. Player wants to be a satyr? Reskinned Wood Elf. You get the general idea.
House rules are for when reskinning is impossible and it happens too often for an on-the-fly ruling to be enough.
>>45835152
>How are you going to get that fireball potion out to long range?
Lighter-than-air gasses in the compound make it carry itself the range your throwing arm cannot.
>Why does that lightning potion work in a line?
The potion is a tracer for the current. The lightning bolt is fired from a small tesla device on my gauntlet.
>How does chain lightning work?
Single-use charge device and a cloud of ionizing dust particles.
>Flaming Sphere?
Psychic link to a clockwork ball suspended in pyrophoric fluid. I'm using magic potions, I'm at least partially a wizaman here.
Creativity, nigga. If you really can't think of how to make a spell into some alchemy and artificery, use that as one of those spells you picked up while learning to harness magic into your science.
>>45835152
Fireball? Slingshot.
Lightning potion in a line? Take the stopper out of the bottle, it leaks lightning until the end of its trajectory.
Chain lighting works because the potion is specifically designed to not act with the ground as a base, as so that discharging into other fleshbags would be the only avenue for all that energy.
Flaming Sphere is a weird one, but I'd say a canned flaming homunculus that only survives for the duration of the spell and obeys its master to the best of its ability sounds appropriate.
>>45841180
>>45841219
That anon did a way better job than I did. Props for going full mechanic weird science, I like it a lot.
11/10, will likely play in the future.
>>45835225
This. What happens if another PC picks up the shovel, do they suddenly gain the ability to use it as a greatsword, or does it suddenly have shovel stats?
a greatsword has meaning. 2d6 is hefty damage, and clusters around 6 damage, and has a higher crit chance.
A greatsword is SWINGY. sure, massive crit damage, and sure, on average you're doing 6 damage per hit, but the rolls don't cluster at all. you're just as likely to roll a 1 as a 12.
while i'm all for reskinning, i don't think you should reskin a wolf as a troll. [troll as a wolf though, that'd be a badass "big bad wolf"]. Stats have meaning, and don't you forget that while you're doing your cool reskinning.
I read an article about reskinning, and I think my favorite one is reskinning green dragons as "medusa queens," half serpentine, giant wings, no human eyes, sleeps beneath the waves.
>>45841453
What the hell? 2d6 averages 6 damage, now? And you're as likely to roll a 1 as a 12 from 2d6?
Typically I don't allow it, as I usually play in hard-written settings. Refluffing generally either breaks something in the setting or could be better handled with homebrew material.
>>45841453
the second instance of "greatsword" should be greataxe, I suppose 7 instead of 6.
>>45839822
WHEN you come up with a situation where the verbal component matters, you can come up with a justification AT THAT TIME.
Otherwise, who cares?
You don't need to work out every single edge case for something you're doing at your table for fun.
>>45840501
Greentext is often used for sarcastic or incredulous restatement. It is not just a highlighting tool.
I remember when I was new, but I lurked and figured it out before I decided to start posting.
>>45835152
>How are you going to get that fireball potion out to long range?
Duh, use another fireball potion to boost the primary potion warhead.
>Why does that lightning potion work in a line?
Because that's how it comes out of the bottle when you shake the bottle up.
>How does chain lightning work?
A large puddle of lightning.
>Flaming Sphere?
Point a shook up bottle straight up, it fountains up and out around you.
