Wylderkin racial choices

[norman b]

Please show me where either ARC or the ARB state that a portion of a card can be used during an event.

Edit: Moreover, restricting Racial Prof, specifically, but allowing the card can potentially have a cascading effect on the card (by rendering the card ineligible for PTDs/Parry/Riposte). I don't think the ARB intends for that to be possible.

The ARB (as quoted so many times):
This choice can be vetoed by your game’s
Plot Committee if it is inappropriate, and other
Alliance games have the right to refuse your
character’s skills if they are not reasonable.

It does not state that they can refuse your character card.

And per ARC:

While ARC prefers that this happen as little as possible, Plot has the ability to temporarily alter a card for any number of reasons if they choose to do so. In a case like this the effects should not continue past the end of an event. In general, ARC encourages plot teams to consider maintaining a significant deference to the original chapter's determination of acceptable skills so as to avoid issues like this.
Again, not stating that they would refuse the character outright just the skills.

Ultimately though as the above which is underlined: ARC encourages plot teams to consider maintaining a significant deference to the original chapter's determination of acceptable skills.

Therefore, a racial prof SHOULD not be denied, therefore, the problem is moot.

 

[Draven]

The ARB (as quoted so many times):
This choice can be vetoed by your game’s
Plot Committee if it is inappropriate, and other
Alliance games have the right to refuse your
character’s skills if they are not reasonable.

It does not state that they can refuse your character card.

1) We're in agreement that the ARB does not state they can refuse your card. However, the ARB does not state you can play with a portion card either. So, what does it mean to have your skills refused? Does it mean they simply aren't on your card? Does that mean those build points are floating in some weird void? Does it mean you can temporarily spend those build in something else? Who knows?

I interpret that refusing the skills without authorizing an alteration means the card can't be played. But I -could- be wrong on that, but I wouldn't accept the ARC ruling or the ARB as evidence of this, because they don't actually state that a person can play with an incomplete card.

And per ARC:

While ARC prefers that this happen as little as possible, Plot has the ability to temporarily alter a card for any number of reasons if they choose to do so. In a case like this the effects should not continue past the end of an event. In general, ARC encourages plot teams to consider maintaining a significant deference to the original chapter's determination of acceptable skills so as to avoid issues like this.
Again, not stating that they would refuse the character outright just the skills.

Ultimately though as the above which is underlined: ARC encourages plot teams to consider maintaining a significant deference to the original chapter's determination of acceptable skills.

Therefore, a racial prof SHOULD not be denied, therefore, the problem is moot.

2) ARC's encouragement doesn't mean ARC requires. ARC's actually stating that Plot can -totally- deny that Racial Prof on your Butterflykyn, they would just rather prefer that Plot didn't do that. So yeah, that Racial Prof shouldn't be denied...but it totally could be. So the problem isn't moot at all. It's still a problem. Example:

Billy Goodguy approves a Arctic Rabbitkyn, because Rabbitkyn are believable, so he says "Good to go!" on that Resist Element. The character travels to Chapter Bananas, and in Chapter Bananas, Jimmy Badguy, Head of Plot, says, "No, that's stupid. I'm refusing those skills. No Resist Element for you!" But no alteration to the card is authorized either, because Jimmy thinks that an Arctic Rabbitkyn is just dumb, regardless of what skills it might have.

So, what happens to the card? I don't think it can just have a weird blank space where those skills should be. Maybe it turns into refunded build points for that event, or maybe it doesn't, but neither ARC nor ARB state what happens. So I interpret that as character refusal.

If you want, we can ARC that specific inquiry.

 

[norman b]

Sure. Lets ARC this

 

[Alavatar]

Does it need to be ARC'd? I mean, the Alliance Community is generally pretty good about working with it's players. I haven't heard of a jerk Plot team that whole-sale modified a Kyn's card, or refused to modify a card, simply because of denying Racial skills, nor do I expect there to be a jerk Plot team in the future that would do that. I believe this falls into the "trust your Plot team(s)" camp. We're a community and for the most part we are all actually good people (despite potential forum perception), so I don't think your concern requires additional clarification.

Edit to add: And if the owner found out his/her Plot team was pulling the kind of shenanigans you're insinuating ... Woo boy, I wouldn't want to be in that plot member's shoes.

 

[mikestrauss]

Also, while I have never looked at the ownership contract, this may actually be covered by the ownership agreement, rather than the rules book. I wouldn't be surprised if the ownership agreement includes rules that prohibit denying a legitimate character from another chapter, unless campaign rules are published in advance that would prohibit the character (like build limits, for example).

Also, removing skills isn't really some unheard of problem. Every time you play a character with unspent build, you effectively have "removed skills". If you deem Racial Proficiency is not reasonable for a Cricketkyn (I feel like we all naming increasingly ridiculous Wylderkin just for kicks and giggles) and you are also so unreasonable that you won't let the character replace it with an alternate skill, that just means the PC has 10 unspent build. Heck, it isn't even a problem if the character used the Prof as a pre-req for buying other skills. I have seen plot teams make temporary alterations to character sheets, removing some build purchased skills. That doesn't invalidate the other purchased skills. It is simply a TEMPORARY plot effect that removes access to a specific skill, with NO cascading effect. Sure, it has a direct effect (the Cricketkyn swings 1 point of damage less than normal), but that is all.

-MS

 

[Avaran]

I interpret that refusing the skills without authorizing an alteration means the card can't be played. But I -could- be wrong on that, but I wouldn't accept the ARC ruling or the ARB as evidence of this, because they don't actually state that a person can play with an incomplete card.

Stopping someone from playing their legitimate character is - in my mind - an absurd idea and as far as I am aware, not allowed; if a character is in the DB, it has to be admitted into any chapter for play unless there are extenuating factors (like level cap) that are applied to ALL characters equally. If certain skills have to be changed to accommodate, then those get changed, though even then that ought to be done sparingly.

For better or worse, I trust that other plot teams know their players, their game, and understand the Alliance in general to trust that they won't allow any a character or concept that will be ruinous to my chapter, or other chapters.

I genuinely don't think this needs an ARC post. Plot teams aren't stupid, and they make decisions as best they can, often finding the best middle-ground so that everyone can have a good time. No reasonable plot team is going to refuse a character for this (if they do, they need to be talked to about it, imo). Who genuinely gives a flying fornication if a Grasshopper Kin has a Racial prof? Or an Owl Kin has Resist magic? No one should care as long as it passed muster with the character's home chapter (except Gypsy Curse for a Kin, imo).

Get the hell over it, it isn't ruining the game; move on.

 

[Draven]

It's pretty clear that despite my own personal experience on this subject that people think this subject isn't a big deal.

So, I'm going to step out of the conversation. It's gotten a bit too heated.

 

[Avaran]

It's pretty clear that despite my own personal experience on this subject that people think this subject isn't a big deal.

I'm interested in hearing about your experiences (in PM, not a place for this thread).

So, I'm going to step out of the conversation. It's gotten a bit too heated.

Dunno if you're talking about me or not, but I'm not heated; just speaking plain and direct, like Capt. Mal would want me to. *sage nod*

 

[mikestrauss]

No one should care as long as it passed muster with the character's home chapter (except Gypsy Curse for a Kin, imo).

What is with all of the Gypsy Curse concern on this thread. Gypsy Curse has to be the LEAST power-gamey racial skill ever invented. It, literally, by rule book definition, has no mechanical effects. It is purely roleplay. Yet many people here seem to be acting like it is the most broken skill in the game.

If the answer is that it is for roleplay reasons, I will remind you that Gypsy Curse is mechanically identical to Lesser Fey Curse (again, literally). I know the skill is called Gypsy Curse, but when it is used in-game, there is nothing about the use of it that differentiates it from a Lesser Fey Curse, or some other random cursing mechanism. In other words, you can effectively roleplay it as if the character card said Baboonkin Curse, and it would have no negative effect on the game.

TLDR; I find it crazy that people are objecting to the least mechanically powerful racial skill and seemingly defending the "priority control" of a skill that belongs to a race that has no racial drawback.

-MS

 

[Muir]

I think the only one who objected to it was MissDraGun. I just don't think, as a roleplay only effect, that it should be a build-purchased racial. Using the mental abilities as a template, curse should just be an inherent racial ability.