How To Be A Female Satyr Without Breaking The Rules: a wizard did it To elaborate (and be less funny), just put in your background that you were male but then a wizard turned you into a female. Since all satyrs are only naturally male, nothing in this is breaking the Rule That Should Not Be A Rule that seems to be the main issue around this.
This still breaks the rule. The rules does not say that all satyrs are naturally male. It said, and I quote, "All Satyrs are male". If you are a Satyr, you cannot be anything other than male. If you are anything other than male, you cannot be a Satyr. "A wizard did it" or any other background exception still breaks the rule.
The fact that "A Wizard did it!" still breaks this rule just further demonstrates how stupid it really is.
Well, regardless of the wording, it's technically a racial feature, so it would sorta be the equivalent of saying "My halfling is no longer small because a Wizard did it" (Granted small has a lot more rules implications, but hey, maybe you have one of "those" DMs that make your gender relevant) Which I suppose even further emphasizes how stupid the thing is, but I digress.
Zammm = Batman. Bronies unite. "I'd call you a genius, but I'm in the room." It's my sig in a boxShow
Funny story: InQuest Magazine (I think it was InQuest) had an oversized Chaos Orb which I totally rooked someone into allowing into a (non-sanctioned) game. I had a proxy card that was a Mountain with "Chaos Orb" written on it. When I played it, my opponent cried foul:
Him: "WTF? a Proxy? no-one said anything about Proxies. Do you even own an actual Chaos Orb?" Me: "Yes, but I thought it would be better to use a Proxy." Him: "No way. If you're going to put a Chaos Orb in your deck you have to use your actual Chaos Orb." Me: "*Sigh*. Okay."
I pulled out this huge Chaos Orb and placed it on the table. He tried to cry foul again but everyone else said he insisted I use my actual Chaos Orb and that was my actual Chaos Orb. I used it, flipped it and wiped most of his board.
Unsurprisingly, that only worked once and only because everyone present thought it was hilarious.
My DM on Battleminds:
no, see i can kill defenders, but 8 consecutive crits on a battlemind, eh walk it off.
Hi guys! So, I'm a sort of returning player to Magic. I say sort of because as a child I had two main TCG's I liked. Yu-Gi-Oh, and Pokemon. Some of my friends branched off in to Magic, and I bought two pre-made decks just to kind of fit in. Like I said, Yu-Gi-Oh and Pokemon were what I really knew how to play. I have a extensive knowledge of deck building in those two TCG's. However, as far as Magic is concerned, I only ever used those two pre made decks. I know how the game is played, and I know general things, but now I want to get in the game for real. I want to begin playing it as a regular. My question is, are all cards ever released from the time of the inception of this game until present day fair game in a deck? Or are there special rules? Are some cards forbidden or restricted? Thanks guys, and I will gladly accept ANY help lol.
I have the same problem with women.
Is this my new ego sig? Yes it is, other BarryShow
And that's why you should never, ever call RP Jesus on being a troll, because then everyone else playing along gets outed, too, and the thread goes back to being boring.
See, this is why RPJesus should be in charge of the storyline. The novel line would never have been cancelled if he had been running the show. Specifically the Slobad and Geth's Head talkshow he just described.
Not only was that an obligatory joke, it was an on-topic post that still managed to be off-topic due to thread derailment. RP Jesus does it again folks.
It was wonderful. Us Johnnies had a field day. That Timmy with the Grizzly bears would actually have to think about swinging into your Mogg Fanatic , giving you time to set up your silly combo . Nowadays it's all DERPSWING! with thier blue jeans and their MP3 players and their EM EM OH AR PEE JEES and their "Dewmocracy" and their children's card games and their Jersey Shores and their Tattooed Tenaged Vampire Hunters from Beverly Hills
Seriously, that was amazing. I laughed my *ss off. Made my day, and I just woke up.
ArtVenn You're still one of my favorite people... just sayin'.
You... You... Evil something... I actualy made the damn char once I saw the poster...
Now you made me see it again and I gained resolve to put it into my campaign. Shell be high standing oficial of Cyrix order. Uterly mad and only slightly evil.
And it'll be bad. Evil even. And ill blame you and Lizard for it :P.
I’ve removed content from this thread because off-topic discussions are a violation of the Code of Conduct.
You can review the Code here: www.wizards.com/Company/About.aspx?x=wz_...
Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks. You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively.
If you wish to report a post for Code of Conduct violation, click on the “Report Post” button above the post and this will submit your report to the moderators on duty.
...Am I the only one that thinks this is reaching the point of downright Kafkaesque insanity?
I condone the use of the word Kafkaesque. However, I'm presentely ambivalent. I mean, that can't be serious, right? We're April 1st, right? They didn't mod RPJesus for off-topic discussion when the WHOLE THREAD IS OFF-TOPIC, right?
Save or die. If you disagree with this, you're wrong (Not because of any points or arguements that have been made, but I just rolled a d20 for you and got a 1, so you lose).
HOW DID I NOT KNOW ABOUT THE BEAR PRODUCING WORDS OF WILDING?! WHAT IS WRONG WITH ME?!
That's what RPJesus tends to do. That's why I don't think he's a real person, but some Magic Card Archive Server sort of machine, that is programmed to react to other posters' comments with obscure cards that do in fact exist, but somehow missed by even the most experienced Magic players.
And then come up with strange combos with said cards. All of that is impossible for a normal human to do given the amount of time he does it and how often he does it.
He/It got me with Light of Sanction , which prompted me to go to RQ&A to try and find if it was even possible to do combat damage to a creature I control (in light that Mark of Asylum exists).
Blue players get all the overpowerered cards like JTMS. I think it's time that wizards gave something to people who remember what magic is really about: creatures.
Initially yes, Wizards was married to blue. However, about a decade ago they had a nasty divorce, and a few years after that they began courting the attention of Green. Then in Worldwake they had a nasty affair with their ex, but as of Innistrad , things seem to have gotten back on track, and Wizards has even proposed .
You are my favorite. Yes you. And moments like this make it so. Thank you RPJesus for just being you.
Those tons of supplemental books are creating a pretty bad habit on D&D Players, the habit of making absurd stuff up and wanting to play as it. Yeah fine, it is a fantasy setting but what is wrong with the old races? When Satyrs weren't playable I've never seen discussions on how viable "female" Satyrs were. If a player comes to me with some crazy character idea that he or she wants to play in the game I'll just try to tailor this idea to a limit, negociating with the player to try and fit his character in the lore. Now I don't know what this whole thing about Skalds and Satyrs is all about and I don't know what being female has to do with it but really, just stick to the setting, if a DM starts to bend the rules for every player the game starts to lose shape and becomes something that might be fun at the beginning but as time goes on, it becomes harder to balance stranger characters. And why does it have to be a Satyr? Can't it be any other Fey race like an Eladrin or an Elf?
Speaking for myself, I'm tired off them. That's all we had for decades. They're trite, they're cliche', they're boring. WotC could drop humans, elves, dwarves, halflings, gnomes and orcs (and any halfs- thereof) from the next edition and I would be elated.
Stick to the setting? Really? Fine ... my setting has female satyrs. Done.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
Those tons of supplemental books are creating a pretty bad habit on D&D Players, the habit of making absurd stuff up and wanting to play as it. Yeah fine, it is a fantasy setting but what is wrong with the old races? When Satyrs weren't playable I've never seen discussions on how viable "female" Satyrs were. If a player comes to me with some crazy character idea that he or she wants to play in the game I'll just try to tailor this idea to a limit, negociating with the player to try and fit his character in the lore. Now I don't know what this whole thing about Skalds and Satyrs is all about and I don't know what being female has to do with it but really, just stick to the setting, if a DM starts to bend the rules for every player the game starts to lose shape and becomes something that might be fun at the beginning but as time goes on, it becomes harder to balance stranger characters. And why does it have to be a Satyr? Can't it be any other Fey race like an Eladrin or an Elf?
a. at least it's not as bad as it was last edition, with all the variants and half-everydamnthings. :P
2. I'd rather have new stuff like wilden and vryloka than the things from "a".
Mostly, though, I've wanted to play a satyr for years. I still want them to release centaurs as a player race.
Speaking for myself, I'm tired off them. That's all we had for decades. They're trite, they're cliche', they're boring. WotC could drop humans, elves, dwarves, halflings, gnomes and orcs (and any halfs- thereof) from the next edition and I would be elated.
Stick to the setting? Really? Fine ... my setting has female satyrs. Done.
Also, this. I've never imagined Satyrs not being both sexes, because I read poetry and saw art depicting them, and read CS Lewis, long before I ever had a teacher try to get me to care about greek mythology.
And I'm tired of elves. At this point, they're almost as boring as humans. I just don't care. Halflings and gnomes are still cool, and some settings make other classics cool, like orcs and elves in Eberron, but mostly I'd rather play a Satyr, or a Vryloka, or Shadar-kai. Maybe a Kenku. Definately the occasional Goliath.
Stick to the setting? Really? Fine ... my setting has female satyrs. Done.
Proves my point, this whole discussion is pointless.
Not quite. Those of us who argue against the restriction do so for a couple of reasons.
a. We don't like silly stuff like this being in the stat block. Leave it in the fluff text so that it's the default assumption, but not RAW for every setting, and we dont' have to houserule for something as inane as character sex.
2. We shouldn't have to houserule this anymore than we should have to houserule if we want elves with beards, or dwarves without them.
A pointless restriction just shouldn't be there.
More sex and gender equality and racial equality shouldn't even be an argument--it should simply be an assumption for any RPG that wants to stay relevant in the 21st century.
Not quite. Those of us who argue against the restriction do so for a couple of reasons.
a. We don't like silly stuff like this being in the stat block. Leave it in the fluff text so that it's the default assumption, but not RAW for every setting, and we dont' have to houserule for something as inane as character sex.
2. We shouldn't have to houserule this anymore than we should have to houserule if we want elves with beards, or dwarves without them.
A pointless restriction just shouldn't be there.
It all is subjected to the group and the DM. Books only give guidelines and nothing more. If "houseruling" is such a dishonnor to you as a player or DM then it is all up to you as it is to any who play with you. If playing as a female satyr generates disconfort to any player or the DM, it is probably best that you just adapt your idea to another one that doesn't bother your group, in the end, it serves only to create pointless conflicts and discussions between groups. As far as it is "official" however, satyrs are male only and this is a fact, just live with it.
When Satyrs weren't playable I've never seen discussions on how viable "female" Satyrs were.
Back before Satyrs were playable, they could be female. Check your Monster Manual. Not a single thing in the Satyr entry suggests that they are limited to being male.
As far as it is "official" however, satyrs are male only and this is a fact, just live with it.
No. Why should we? Why shouldn't we complain about things that are bad? If we don't complain about the parts of the game that the designers got wrong, then they won't know what we don't like and won't fix it and will continue giving us what we don't like. I don't know what people act like complaining doesn't serve a purpose. It does. Saying "just live with it" is just rude and counterproductive.
Speaking of things that were badly designed, please check out this thread for my Minotaur fix. What have the critics said, you ask? "If any of my players ask to play a Minotaur, I'm definitely offering this as an alternative to the official version." - EmpactWB "If I ever feel like playing a Minotaur I'll know where to look!" - Undrave "WoTC if you are reading this - please take this guy's advice." - Ferol_Debtor_of_Torm "Really full of win. A minotaur that is actually attractive for more than just melee classes." - Cpt_Micha
Also, check out my recent GENASI variant! If you've ever wished that your Fire Genasi could actually set stuff on fire, your Water Genasi could actually swim, or your Wind Genasi could at least glide, then look no further.
Finally, check out my OPTIONS FOR EVERYONE article, an effort to give unique support to the races that WotC keeps forgetting about. Includes new racial feature options for the Changeling, Deva, Githzerai, Gnoll, Gnome, Goliath, Half-Orc, Kalashtar, Minotaur, Shadar-Kai, Thri-Kreen, Warforged and more!
No. Why should we? Why shouldn't we complain about things that are bad? If we don't complain about the parts of the game that the designers got wrong, then they won't know what we don't like and won't fix it and will continue giving us what we don't like. I don't know what people act like complaining doesn't serve a purpose. It does. Saying "just live with it" is just rude and counterproductive.
Please, care to explain why it is so blatantly important that if we don't have female satyrs this simple decision might ruin an entire D&D experience for someone? Really, as far as design options go this complaint is as pointless as anything else, fine have your female satyrs, what will it bring for you besides being able to have a female satyr as a playable character? There are so many flaws in the 4.0 system in regards to originality, like playing a Warforged that doesn't feel like one at all, instead this whole thread discusses about female satyrs!? Is it part of some ground breaking class/race combo or something? Please someone care to explain why this discussion is so important?
you loads
