AMIA ARCHIVE • View topic

Well now that we finally have a good ruling on child characters, lets expand on it. Baby characters! Yes they exist...

I've seen some people walk around with their adult character and then by means of text post RP that they have their babies/childern with them. I've seen this happen in towns which is a normal place to see such senes but I've also seen the whole toddler family get dragged into Amia Forest or some other war zone. Some times people only mention that they have childern with them after several minutes or after they got a harmful spell cast on them. Really confusing and irrational.

So now I have a proposal. If you want to drag a baby/child along request one as a bottled companion, make it a weak and utterly useless one. That way we can see you have a child with you and take it into account. Also if you child gets blown up I'm really of firm opinion that that would be perma death for the child. Or else people are going to keep taking them into war zones with them and using them as human shields and all that frustrating none sense.

Yes I hardly see this kind of RP but still it exist and that's I say reason enough to make rules for it.

If you make rules for it, it means you openly accept it. I thought that was the reason they didn't make any for child characters - because the DMs in general don't like them, but will tolerate their existence.

I don't have problems with it being accepted, would just be nice to have some rules to guide it in the right directions. Because if you just tollerate it without rules people are going to play it how ever they want and we all know where that leads on amia.

I do not think it is common enough to really worry about.

Make one rule, have to make twenty five more....

Isn't that always so?

Pregnant characters fighting despite their "handicap."

If it's not viewable, and a product of another persons RP, its up to them.

A baby child is still a baby child, and isn't reflected in levels via the NWN system. Just text. Thus, it will never happen that a child is a PM dragon thing thats level 30, or something stupid. This was the main issue with children, they had physical representations that could gain levels the same as their fully a-...errrrr....grown up counterparts.

No need for a ruling on this.

A pregnant woman can fight, the matter becomes an IC choice of morality and ethics, not a matter for OOC discussion.

I see this being a discussion on the subject, and should probably be moved to General.

Moved as requested, as it doesn't belong in TtC.

Selvec Darkon wrote:

A pregnant woman can fight, the matter becomes an IC choice of morality and ethics, not a matter for OOC discussion.

I see this being a discussion on the subject, and should probably be moved to General.

And when she inevitably dies, then what?

The fetus would die shortly thereafter, and I rather doubt that you can raise a fetus. Depending on the nature, location & severity of the wound, there could still be complications after birth (brain damage, physical deformities, etc.). Of course, if it isnt raised, you get a whole bunch of other health issues for the mother.

You could perhaps return a toddler, in the sense that it might feel someone calling it (via the raise dead spell) and respond to that in a way that could result it its returning to life.

Or was that a rhetorical question, Chill?

It was semi-rhetorical but the fact that you responded (and in the manner you did) is proof enough that there needs to be an official statement made about such a situation. We've already got child-rules. This is just an addendum.

You want an Official Statement?

Children are to be seen and not heard, but go well with a nice Chianti.

Leggomi Eggolas wrote:

You want an Official Statement?

Children are to be seen and not heard, but go well with a nice Chianti.

Adventurers should be conquering land, slaying dragons, and overcoming the evils of the world.

Not conquering the bedroom, laying dragons, nor c... I'll stop that train of thought before I get a vacation.

No no no. If you're goofy enough to bring your baby into battle or into other dangerous situations I'm not gonna play DM Maury Povich. Bottled companions poof during hostile stuff anyways. Gonna be really funny to see a baby say "leggit" and run away.

Also if you're mentioning being pregnant/having a baby on your arm after getting swatted, then loldrama @ u.

Indeed. If you don't inform people you have a child in your arms/with you until after you back yourself into a PvP situation and get killed, that's 100% uncool. You should either take back the PvP RP, if the person who attacked you wouldn't have attacked you with a child in your arms, or be totally cool with RP that you hid the child and busted it out from behind you or a bag to use it as a shield. ::sag nod::

I don't think this is really a viable solution.

Quote:

DM Maury Povich

*Goes to make a DM avatar*

Colapops wrote:

Selvec Darkon wrote:

A pregnant woman can fight, the matter becomes an IC choice of morality and ethics, not a matter for OOC discussion.

I see this being a discussion on the subject, and should probably be moved to General.

And when she inevitably dies, then what?

Well firstly it's dependent on the player who is pregnant if they wish to fight. It's also dependent on how far along the person says they are.

As this is a part of another persons RP, their character infact, it's completely up to them if the child dies.

If it dies, it dies.

A child is a human (or elf, etc) between birth and puberty. Hence an infant is also still a child and the rule applies to it. I am all for enforced rules needing to be written down in the rules and lore section so that they can be enforced, but this "loophole attempt "just seems silly to me.

Well my biggest problem with the whole situation was that if it isn't visible you don't know if you walk into the situation. And well can't espect someone to keep typing *has three small childern with them* whenever someone new gets within range. Putting the info clearly in ones bio would be the very least one could do. Though I prefer some sort of more obvious indication for it.

Because if you wander into say amia forest and see a group of people one amongst them being a known necromancer or so. Well you aren't going to ask everyone or hang around for half an hour to see who got aditional life forms with them. You're just going to do the quickest thing that results in massive nastiness.

Rping children that aren't there is already forbidden by the rules if you think about it, you are not allowed to rp more than one of your characters at a time or take over npcs as is. So saying I got my child here with me should be treated the same way as a character claiming that their bodyguard/brother/friend is actually present and showed them out of the way of an attack or whatever. You can't rp the presence of another person if they are not actually there, adult or child.

Moonangel wrote:

Rping children that aren't there is already forbidden by the rules if you think about it, you are not allowed to rp more than one of your characters at a time or take over npcs as is. So saying I got my child here with me should be treated the same way as a character claiming that their bodyguard/brother/friend is actually present and showed them out of the way of an attack or whatever. You can't rp the presence of another person if they are not actually there, adult or child.

This actually seems pretty reasonable to me.

I've seen people DC'd while emoting their child, so it is clearly not against the rules.

Its against the rules to PLAY a child character as a PC. Not to RP having a child with you, or a baby.

You have misunderstood the rule.

It is against the rules to rp having another character with you period, if he's not there, he can not act or affect the world and others. This technically applies to any and all characters regardless of age. It's usually ignored in the case of children if the rp isn't causing any trouble, but I would put this up with pnp spells in needing permission from all present.

I'm pretty sure if someone is RPing nursing their infant, and you just pretend it's not happening you're at fault for ignoring RP, not them for not asking your 'permission'.

What if someone was rping an adult character being there and doing things?

Then they'd be breaking the rules. However, that's a strawman as it's not the argument I'm making. Since DMs have rewarded the behaviour, it's clearly not illegal. Of course, this reasoning doesn't seem to be impressing you, so I'll leave it to a DM to establish whether one can RP having a baby, or whether you need to get another player to make a new character that just cries and poops all day.

Ah, my mistake. I thought the rule was about people playing infants as player characters. I think having a baby in your arm as a player character is quite alright.

TormakSaber wrote:

Make one rule, have to make twenty five more....

If you make directives though, you only need one more for each one you create. This is so that when someone quote the wrong directive number, you can look at them in bewilderment asking how exactly that helps in the current situation.

To be honest, I have no idea why someone living on Amia would take their infant or child away from the relative safety of home, not to mention, exposing them to all sorts of strange and harmful stimuli. It's not unreasonable to assume that the wealthy can afford to have someone look after their children while they're gassing in the square.

Selvec Darkon wrote:

Colapops wrote:

Selvec Darkon wrote:

A pregnant woman can fight, the matter becomes an IC choice of morality and ethics, not a matter for OOC discussion.

I see this being a discussion on the subject, and should probably be moved to General.

And when she inevitably dies, then what?

Well firstly it's dependent on the player who is pregnant if they wish to fight. It's also dependent on how far along the person says they are.

As this is a part of another persons RP, their character infact, it's completely up to them if the child dies.

If it dies, it dies.

Pregnant woman can actually do things IRL too people! Maybe not so much in her last month but pregnant women are capable of doing just about anything anyone else can do.

Ravenousfaerie wrote:

Pregnant woman can actually do things IRL too people! Maybe not so much in her last month but pregnant women are capable of doing just about anything anyone else can do.

Very true. But the quotes below apply equally to pregnant women as to those who have already given birth.

Lally wrote:

If you're goofy enough to bring your baby into battle or into other dangerous situations I'm not gonna play DM Maury Povich.

Selmak wrote:

To be honest, I have no idea why someone living on Amia would take their infant or child away from the relative safety of home, not to mention, exposing them to all sorts of strange and harmful stimuli.

Anyone who leaves the relative safety of the towns for monster-infested lands. I expect that woodcutters and hunters would go in large, armed parties. No pregnant woman with any sense would be harvesting apples where kobolds and goblins are known to be found. In other words, a pregnant woman shouldn't be out adventuring. It would be monumentally stupid to do so.

Mind you, adventurers are not noted for their scintillating wisdom and foresight...

I agree- I never said it was a smart thing to do. I personally would never do it. I mean go out of town while pregnant.

Who honestly cares?

Maybe the people posting in this topic? Just a thought, Mr. Aloof and Unaffected.

Dear people.

Take a gander at the thread on modern stuff in NWN before posting, as I'm seeing a lot of information being stated as a reason to enforce certain things, that wouldn't be known in the FR world.

So yea, take a gander at said thread.

Thanks.

Wyjyn: Loving all of you (and above all Disco) since 11 Jan 2007.

o0GuNz_N_RoSeZ0o wrote:

Indeed. If you don't inform people you have a child in your arms/with you until after you back yourself into a PvP situation and get killed, that's 100% uncool. You should either take back the PvP RP, if the person who attacked you wouldn't have attacked you with a child in your arms, or be totally cool with RP that you hid the child and busted it out from behind you or a bag to use it as a shield. ::sag nod::

The amount of pregnant characters my character has pvp'd always amazes me and I enjoy it so damn much OOC. "he attacked a pregnant woman!" Sure did, AWESOME. The funny thing is that I am fairly certain that its been done a few times to try to make my character seem even worse and get at me in some way OOC and I just lol at it.

Wyjyn wrote:

The amount of pregnant characters my character has pvp'd always amazes me and I enjoy it so damn much OOC. "he attacked a pregnant woman!" Sure did, AWESOME. The funny thing is that I am fairly certain that its been done a few times to try to make my character seem even worse and get at me in some way OOC and I just lol at it.

This.

Respect++.

Galenson wrote:

Who honestly cares?

Colapops wrote:

Maybe the people posting in this topic? Just a thought, Mr. Aloof and Unaffected.

Galenson wrote:

Who honestly cares?

Colapops wrote:

Maybe the people posting in this topic? Just a thought, Mr. Aloof and Unaffected.

That's nice. I'd just like to mention that this whole topic is just creating rules and issues where they aren't needed. Hence my phrase:

Who honestly cares.

Unless it breaches server rules or is something that defies the law of faerun's existence, play as you see fit.

Something that defy's the law of Faerun's existence. Hmm...

Dunno why anyone would want to play a child character/infant/pregnant woman anyway. This is a game of sword & sorcery adventure, not The Sims: Medieval Edition.

My wild guess is because some people like that? Not everyone has to like the same cup of tea.

Yurell wrote:

My wild guess is because some people like that? Not everyone has to like the same cup of tea.

However, not everyone needs to respect how others do things.

Colapops wrote:

Selvec Darkon wrote:

A pregnant woman can fight, the matter becomes an IC choice of morality and ethics, not a matter for OOC discussion.

I see this being a discussion on the subject, and should probably be moved to General.

And when she inevitably dies, then what?

We created a chance roll that she would lose the child each time. A fixed DC and then added mods based on things like how the death happened and how long. There's no lore for what happens to a unborn child's soul anywhere of course so it's not unreasonable to say that the soul of such would be bound to the mother's soul in the rez.

That being said Dan wanted to kill Arial himself everytime she wouldn't just sit out of harms way :evil:

I'm with Lesquille on this one. It already takes a stupid individual to want to play a character that runs around dangerous places with a baby. This is a recipe for drama every single time.

With the recent change for child characters, I would just outright ban babies as PC controlled NPCs in a double ruling.

xordae wrote:

I'm with Lesquille on this one. It already takes a stupid individual to want to play a character that runs around dangerous places with a baby. This is a recipe for drama every single time.

With the recent change for child characters, I would just outright ban babies as PC controlled NPCs in a double ruling.

Actually I'd be just fine with an official rule of "If you RP having a baby with you and die in PvP, you don't get to dictate what your killer does with your spawn."

The lesson would be hard, drama-filled, and brutal, but taught once.

Ace of Swords wrote:

xordae wrote:

I'm with Lesquille on this one. It already takes a stupid individual to want to play a character that runs around dangerous places with a baby. This is a recipe for drama every single time.

With the recent change for child characters, I would just outright ban babies as PC controlled NPCs in a double ruling.

Actually I'd be just fine with an official rule of "If you RP having a baby with you and die in PvP, you don't get to dictate what your killer does with your spawn."

The lesson would be hard, drama-filled, and brutal, but taught once.

Ah. This is a good idea.

Quote:

"If you RP having a baby with you and die in PvP, you don't get to dictate what your killer does with your spawn."

Makes sense.

Baby and Children.

Who is online