AMIA ARCHIVE • View topic - New Rule: Of Wings and Curtains and becoming Quasimodo

As a new rule, the DM staff has decided that characters with wings cannot hide them under cloaks.

Wings which are large enough to carry the weight of a humanoid sized creature are by far too large to be hidden under a tiny sheet of cloth like a cloak. They'd always stick out unless you maybe wear a tent, but I guess we all agree that's not a very great disguise idea.

Please keep this rule in mind and use the cloaks which show the wings. We have plenty of those available.

How about like the old Gargoyles cartoon where the wings were the cloak? :twisted:

Oh thank God becuase that never made any sense to me XD

FastKev wrote:

How about like the old Gargoyles cartoon where the wings were the cloak? :twisted:

Yes, please. I need to watch that show again. So amazing.

Only if you get Disney's Copyright approval.

Bout damn time!

I doubt Disney could copyright that idea ;p

...

But, then again, we are talking about Disney.

I believe Disney might even be able to copyright the existance of Mice.

What's up with the trend of "you can't hide that" rulings lately? BG Aura of Despair, and the Phalemastery thread premised on how to make PM-ness un-hidable, and now wings?

I'm not complaining here, just curious. Is this all part of some sort of deliberate unified emerging trend in the DM team's philosophy? Or just coincidence?

Probably coincidence or just shoring things up.

It's absolutely never made any sense that wings could be hidden under a simple cloak, and the BG aura is supposed to be always-on, but I think that's buggy so it is activatable. I will note, also, that you can't turn off the AoD ;3

Huzzah!

There's no ruling on the BG Aura of Despair being unconcealable. Hell, I wouldn't even agree with that. That should probably stay in the Palemaster topic though, lest another topic get swarmed with it.

This is actually kind of the result of the Palemaster discussion.

The next ruling will pertain to pant-tenting. As per the unrealistic nature of hiding a fantasy-sized organ beneath a tiny patch of fabric like a tighty-whitey, male characters will no longer be allowed to wear any manner of leg-garments, including, but not limited to:

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.

That post made no sense and if you are trolling, you failed again. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

0/10 would not read again

Thank god... Something else I can not bother putting in my description. WYSIWYG FTW!

Naivatkal wrote:

That post made no sense and if you are trolling, you failed again. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

0/10 would not read again

Perhaps you upset that you do not have characters that possess a large phallic member.

Don't derail the topic, please.

Bini wrote:

The next ruling will pertain to pant-tenting. As per the unrealistic nature of hiding a fantasy-sized organ beneath a tiny patch of fabric like a tighty-whitey, male characters will no longer be allowed to wear any manner of leg-garments, including, but not limited to:

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.

lol

I will stand comfortably in my culottes.

As for hiding the wings, I'm glad this is finally a thing. I dislike the notion of hiding such massive things behind a cloak..

Cerpin Taxt wrote:

Naivatkal wrote:

That post made no sense and if you are trolling, you failed again. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

0/10 would not read again

Perhaps you upset that you do not have characters that possess a large phallic member.

I just let it swing.

Yes yes, I get that we need to have a larger imaginary member contest as this is the internet and what not, but, this thread is not the place guys.

Actually one of the most intelligent ways I saw about doing this was a cloak which has a sort of hybridized bag of holding in it- a pocket which was simply larger on the inside to allow for the wings. It showed an intelligent recognition of the mechanical problems the wings would cause with a cloak and is generally the only time I've been cool with it.

I'd be quite happy to see that little caveat remain for people who go to the effort to get such a thing made.

I think that's taking things just a little too far. If you have wings, roleplay them.

I can appreciate that Amia isn't exactly low magic, but convoluted things like cloak-pockets make me cringe.

Bini wrote:

I can appreciate that Amia isn't exactly low magic, but convoluted things like cloak-pockets make me cringe.

How can you not love wizard robes with a thousand bags of holdings hidden in them?

_________________ *Inactive as of November 28, 2013*

Since we've already started this wacky crusade for ultimate wysiwyg-ness, I think we should take the next step forward and start banning/penalizing people who have full plates that have been crafted to not look like the heavy armors they are. For too long have people been allowed to look relatively stylish while wearing what D&D considers to be platemails of metal and steel that cover the entire body.

Who cares about artistic freedom when you can have realism in a fantasy game?

You can leave punishments to us. Noone ever said anything about banning. And this does not penalize anyone. It would had we installed that rule back in the days where you were unable to wear a cloak when you wanted the wings visible.

Those days are long over. We have many very beautiful cloaks which show wings. Also scarfs and other neat stuff. So this rule nowdays makes sense and does not give you any penalties.

People who pick a winged race are aware of this and get the bonus of flight availabity (and I do not want anyone here to start the flight feat discussion once more now in this thread or I will lock it)

And with our new option to pick other draconic visuals instead of wings, noone is forced to have wings either.

If you want them and activly choose them, you have to live with the fact you cannot hide them under a small piece of cloth.

And the award for overreacting goes to...

Claimh Solais wrote:

Who cares about artistic freedom when you can have realism in a fantasy game?

I'm still amazed that some people feel this decision wasn't the correct one. Classes don't just come with a block of bonuses, they also have their inherent drawbacks. And I'm not just talking mechanics here. Yet some think that the DM team enforcing these drawbacks is stifling their artistic freedom. I won't touch that, since Amarice explained so well in how many ways that statement is untrue, so I'll end on this: this isn't a discussion whether or not a new rule should be created, it's an announcement that the rule is now in effect. Arguing against it won't change that fact. Nor will it change the fact that most people agree that it's a good rule.

No, but voicing disagreement is still critically important to running a legitimate, player-centered server. If you resign to the belief that arguing about something won't change anything you've already failed in your duty as a player. Whenever a new restriction is introduced, it's pretty important that we consider the implications and whether we can swallow it.

I'm perfectly happy with this decision. It wasn't necessary, but I don't think it's a problem either. However, others may have perfectly valid feelings of annoyance about it, and of course they need to be discussed. How can you know whether something is a legitimate problem and worth discussing before you open the discussion?

Without wishing offense to anyone, I've yet to see a single legitimate reason on this thread for which this rule shouldn't be in effect. And I honestly don't see it happening either. This rule pretty much enforces what should be common sense.

That said, I suppose my post did come off as a bit dictatorial. It's my opinion as a player and nothing more. People are, of course, free to disagree or ignore it as they see fit. And yes, I will admit that people wanting to get all the benefits but none of the drawbacks of classes/races/anything is a pet peeve of mine.

slkNihilus wrote:

Without wishing offense to anyone, I've yet to see a single legitimate reason ...

"Legitimate" is wholly subjective. As someone who puts a lot of effort into making my characters look exactly how I want them, I can sympathize with the feeling that telling a player what clothing a character can and can't wear can feel a bit heavy-handed. I agree with the rule for the most part, but I can feel for the objectors, too.

Last edited by xordae on Wed, Mar 13 2013, 12:16 PM, edited 1 time in total.

Well, as one of the people who brought up the issue in relation to the Palemaster talk, I'm ambivalent about this. On the one hand, realism and believability is a cool thing. On the other hand, now a RDD can't 'pretend normal' anymore. If my arguments sounded like they were calling other classes out on their ability to hide while it was discussed that a Palemaster shouldn't, they were maybe not worded as succinctly as they should've been. I've always been in favor of player choice. This is one choice less, now.

Just be aware of the trend. If you tighten rules on characters hiding this, I understand it as paving the way for tightened rules concerning the others. While it's certainly the only way to make it more fair, I'm not sold on the general direction yet. We'll have to see how it plays out.

_________________ *Inactive as of November 28, 2013*

IronAngel wrote:

intelligence in text form

Ah, IronAngel... I could not have said it any better.

For those wondering what the point of my previous post was, know that I have absolutely nothing against this particular new rule: it is the odd movement of "moar WYSIWYG" rules and suggestions that is starting to give me the creeps. This thing could get severely out of hand pretty easily, if left unchecked. Let's not turn into an Arelith 2, folks.

Edit:

xordae wrote:

If you tighten rules on characters hiding this, I understand it as paving the way for tightened rules concerning the others. While it's certainly the only way to make it more fair, I'm not sold on the general direction yet. We'll have to see how it plays out.

This.

Be assured, we judge every case individually.

Also if something is installed, it does not mean it cannot be uninstalled again if it prooves to bring too many problems. Like the entry raise vs. server crashes which now got changed again.

If your character has two great big wings stuck to their back, pretending to be normal should be rather difficult as a result. I mean, have you ever worn a backpack (a proper hiking one) and then tried to wear a coat over the top of it? Thats what your character would look like hiding wings under a cloak.

xordae wrote:

Well, as one of the people who brought up the issue in relation to the Palemaster talk, I'm ambivalent about this. On the one hand, realism and believability is a cool thing. On the other hand, now a RDD can't 'pretend normal' anymore. If my arguments sounded like they were calling other classes out on their ability to hide while it was discussed that a Palemaster shouldn't, they were maybe not worded as succinctly as they should've been. I've always been in favor of player choice. This is one choice less, now.

Just be aware of the trend. If you tighten rules on characters hiding this, I understand it as paving the way for tightened rules concerning the others. While it's certainly the only way to make it more fair, I'm not sold on the general direction yet. We'll have to see how it plays out.

RDD's aren't normal, nor should they really (in my opinion) even wish to pretend. Dragon blood comes with a lot of pride, they should be shoving their wings in peoples faces screaming "LOOKIT ME, I'M BETTER THAN YOU!" Or whatever. Palemaster and RDD come with huge boons and we've not really enforced their drawbacks, the IC ones, until now. Some people don't like freakish dragon hybrids, now they can see the wings and know who they are (as they should be able to tell on first glance), some people dislike animated corpses and now (or soon perhaps) they'll be able to tell who the palemasters are.

This isn't just about the player who decided to be an RDD's choice, but the choice of other players too, they can now react to an RDD with wings as they would. Instead of say, one of my characters Nsi, getting all buddy-buddy with an RDD and then finding out he/she has wings protruding from his back that was amazingly concealed behind a cloak. It's a two way street.

_________________ *Inactive as of November 28, 2013*

Manarethan wrote:

If your character has two great big wings stuck to their back, pretending to be normal should be rather difficult as a result.

Well, to be absolutely honest here, those wing models aren't THAT big. From what can be told from a WYSIWYG standpoint, the in-game cloak models are more than big enough to conceal them. Perhaps we should increase the wings' size to make them stand out more?

Yeah, it should be massively difficult to hide skin and wings. The NWN engine allows for normal looking skin and cloaks, and a lack of description in the bio field, all of which are cop-outs. Totally agreed.

But also look at the assumption you're making. A RDD has to be prideful about his heritage. He couldn't be shunned, suffer from self esteem issues or whatever? Why is that not a possibility? As I see it, this assumption would touch on the very sensitive spectrum of what a character can and can't be. I'm sure you didn't mean anything by it, but it serves well to illustrate the point I also made in the PM topic. Different strokes for different folks.

The assumption isn't that an RDD has to feel some certain way about anything. The assumption is that wings are big.

If an RDD wasn't proud of their blood why would they go through the rituals to empower it? But that's a completely different issue, I'm not in the business of dictating how people roleplay. I'll leave all the draco-lore to the experts, but I figured the charisma bonus they received sort of represented the bloated ego they inherit from their draconic ancestors.

If an RDD wants a tiny pair of wings then that'll probably require a request, and they can compensate for their tiny wings with a huge battle axe (and, of course, never fly.)

As I understand it, an RDD does take pride in their blood. But they still might hide it, if they have a reason to do so. If some crazy axe-wielding maniac is running around murdering anything even vaguely draconic, they might cover it up. But in normal life? Eh... Depends on the character, but is somewhat unlikely.

Also: Giant wings are the greatest idea.

Yeah I don't think you can really argue that it's even typical for DDs to not want to hide their wings. Not that it really matters because the physics of hiding wings is just... well, I don't think anyone is really arguing that they can be hidden fine.
Of course it is a bit of a double-standard since realistically most winged flying creatures in fantasy settings, would not be capable of flight... but y'know this is why we sit at home playing NWN and not out learning how to ride genetically-engineered dragons or something!

I didn't have a point to this post, sorry.

Bumblebees still proof us wrong that sometimes our idea of what physically should be able to fly and what should not is not always correct!

That's a good point, though we can probably still safely rule out winged humanoids and dragons and whatnot!

_________________ *Inactive as of November 28, 2013*

serbiris wrote:

Of course it is a bit of a double-standard since realistically most winged flying creatures in fantasy settings, would not be capable of flight...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DM-UnV9TEzY

Topic derails are go.

I seem to recall something dragons being able to fly because they're powered primarily by magic or some-such. Seems like a bit of a cop-out, but there you go I suppose >.>

So two appendages of a smaller, thinner dimension than an arm, with a thin membrane of connective tissue can't fold away to be hidden beneath a cloak? The basis of the ruling is excessively flawed. Not being able to use Cloak Models to visualise the ability to fold those wings away is far more counter-intuitive to role-play than any Pro-Argument yet made. Membranous Wings are delicate and would also be filled with nerve endings and in cold weather cause extreme discomfort and be susceptible to the onset of frostbite.

A Dragon Disciple can be proud of their blood. . .a Dragon Disciple doesn't necessarily need to be stupid to the point they cause them-self harm. Also what of the Dragon Disciple who sought to unlock his Draconic blood without realising the aesthetic repercussions of his actions? At this point the rule further limits the scope of RP that I can pursue with my Dragon Disciple.

As for the implication that having wings would cause the individual to look like Quasimodo I point you to the Bat and the Flying Fox, the wings of which are the -basis- for the design of the wings of many fantasy dragons to the point that some source entries even describe a Dragons wings as "Bat-like" (Draconomicon, Dragons of Faerun)

Example: Australian Flying Fox
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FK9tWT5pA4

Wingspan can reach up to two meters and is over 200 percent larger than it's frame and yet folded away is ~5% of that and folds easily against the body. The wings are made up of a bone structure that resembles hands; Humerus, Radius, Ulna, Metacarpals, Carpals, Phalanges with evolutionary changes to provide connective tissue to enable flight. Many Bats also possess a greater than 180 degree range of motion at the Scapula/Clavicle.

The only cases where the ruling presented holds truth and water, and barely then, is for those characters with birdlike wings, which have the additional bulk of feathers, and yet they still basically achieve the same folding action and would therefore be nearly possible to conceal. . .and we have a few Great cloak models in the HAK.

Summation: Don't get this rule, doesn't have any basis on the biology of wings, further limits the scope of the RP of a class even more so than that scope has been limited with the arbitrary Alignment Ruling.

The problem I see with the second part of your post, Mosh, is that the class is called "dragon disciple" not "fox disciple". The aesthetic look should, in my mind at least, resemble the dragon type of the DD. Dragon wings, as depicted in any and all D&D source books, are nothing like the wings of the two mammals you used as an example.

As for the first part of your post, I could argue that if the wings are as thin and flimsy as all that, then they should never ever allow for flight. So that would mean one either has to get a bigger wing model, to show that they should be capable of flight or get tiny undersized things that are in all other ways completely useless but can be hidden behind a cloak. Even then I'd still argue that the volume of said wings wouldn't make it easy, by any stretch of the word, to conceal them; they're limbs, they only bend in certain ways, making for the Quasimodo effect that was mentioned.

Also bats don't have arms they need to navigate when folding up their wings.

I never thought I'd agree with MoshingChris on something, but I do agree with him here.

New Rule: Of Wings and Curtains and becoming Quasimodo

Who is online