Wildling PCs not attacked by Animals

[InTheKingdomOfBlind...]

If done it should be something a DM wands a specific character, yes. Also the favored class of stargazers is barbarian. There goes your stealth, invisibility, and any magical solutions right there.

Actually, it's Rogue as all midgets. It's hardcoded and the website lies.

[Mort]

I implanted a better version of this with AE, but that also prevents our animal to randomly attack creatures that are WAY stronger than them... They might do it a bit still, but it should be better than what it was before.

There might be some glitching in touchy situation, please report odd behaviors.

[Big Orc Man]

Why, exactly, should wildling PCs not be attacked by animals?

I would think they'd understand and be a part of the system of nature, which includes fighting for survival.  Druids hunt and fish.

[Aethereal]

Why, exactly, should wildling PCs not be attacked by animals?

I would think they'd understand and be a part of the system of nature, which includes fighting for survival.  Druids hunt and fish.

Assuming Wildling in this case refers to druids and other extremely rare breed of people who have a magical or truly deep connection to the land and wilds. (Those who are not druids are fair game):

I think you have a good point BOM. They are not attacked in-game to represent mechanically their ability to tame wild beasts simply through their presence; understanding their behaviours, knowing what to do and what not to do to meld in with nature.

Just as you might witness in certain documentaries. Those people know not to intrude territorial creature's spaces; they know the behaviour of the animal through and through. And in this fantasy setting, they even have magics to help them.

With that said. It does not make sense for every single "wildling" concept or character; or even the majority. It is generally restricted to druids and those with animal empathy. If you don't have this and aren't granted that rogue perk. Then I guess too bad.

Although I too support this:

I think this would be a viable suggestion for characters that have made in game steps toward being more understanding toward the animals of ymph, and are more comfortable in the wilderness - perhaps something that could be apped for that would be appropriate for a select few characters; similar to panpipes for example.

[Ebok]

The Argument is as follows: In order to have something to protect, the wildlings choose animals, because this is the most dynamic way of understanding how people respect/disrespect the natural world. You can skin for pelts = most evil. You can take the meat = survival + respect. You can just kill them all = wanton slaughter. However the best situation is if you do not kill any of them at all. It's a tradition that's been pretty standard in efu for the longest time, to be a wildling you must be able to walk the wilds without watering the earth with blood.

However, due to the fact that stealth and methods of hiding from animals are limited to only a certain few classes, some have made the argument that if you have AE or likewise, then the animals will respect you as well. Allowing you to be an active defender of the wilds, rather then just living in it. A hunter attacks a cave bear or two, You intervene, you beat them down, cave bears eat you both.

Here is a specific example, gazers all worship the cats of ymph, the cats are not hostile to the gazers. Specific tribes of the gazers all worship another animal, why would those animals be different then a cats? IE wolf tribe gazer is attacked by any wolves, and they cannot ae them and move a pack because the entire pack will cannibalize the Ae'd wolf.

Now I don't really agree with any of the idea's posited above, but that is how the wilds determines who is in their club and who isn't. I personally like the idea that animals that cannot win would not attack (except for boars maybe) simply because it's a bit more dynamic. However I would be disappointed if only the dire-wolf from a pack of wolves attacked me while passing.

The issues come down to the fact that the wild-lings have conceptualized themselves as on team nature (this concept is relatively modern; ex: save the trees!, no animal experimentation! Meat is murder!), rather then as common predators living in a wilderness that has no artificial divisions. That's my observation anyway. My preference is for animals to attack anyone they can make food out of, that makes the most sense to me. The Scout perk is a Huge deal for Rogues, look at what they have to give up to get it? Getting it via Application cheapens the ability 100fold.

Assuming Wildling in this case refers to druids and other extremely rare  breed of people who have a magical or truly deep connection to the land  and wilds. (Those who are not druids are fair game):

Druids already have an AE aura of non hostility.

[Aethereal]

The issues come down to the fact that the wild-lings have conceptualized themselves as on team nature (this concept is relatively modern; ex: save the trees!, no animal experimentation! Meat is murder!), rather then as common predators living in a wilderness that has no artificial divisions. That's my observation anyway.

It does not matter what "wildlings," conceptualise themselves as. The world is the world, it is an unforgiving mistress/master and it will do as it pleases. You either adapt or you perish.

It is foolish to say, anyone, except for druids who possess nature magics to literally fraternise with other creatures could walk through a forest with all its predators, flora and fauna and go not only unnoticed but without garnering negative attention.

It is even worse to say a whole tribe walking together through the forest with one really loud barbarian recklessly wading through and perhaps unknowingly destroying a creature's lair would not be attacked; even if the others went along unseen, non-threateningly.

Drink your invisibility potions, walk in stealth, cast your soft steps / invisibility magics, avoid the direct gaze of creatures.

You are wildling, this is what you do.

[Ebok]

It does not matter what "wildlings," conceptualise themselves as. The world is the world, it is an unforgiving mistress/master and it will do as it pleases. You either adapt or you perish.

That was my point.

The conceptualization is the first step to how players realize themselves in the world. If you are in the order and you think the triad are evil sinful destroyers then you'll approach someone of ilmater differently then someone who believes a bit of both.

My reference was answering BOM's question, "that's why they want it."  I am not supporting that idea of a Hunter/Gatherer society at all.

[Aethereal]

That was my point.

The conceptualization is the first step to how players realize themselves in the world. If you are in the order and you think the triad are evil sinful destroyers then you'll approach someone of ilmater differently then someone who believes a bit of both.

My reference was answering BOM's question, "that's why they want it."  I am not supporting that idea of a Hunter/Gatherer society at all.

Indeed. And it is an unjustified want. Unless it has been provenly earned in game perhaps.

I can of course see some cases where an "oneness with the natural world," let's call it, may be applied for a non druid through a successful application. But it probably makes little sense to offer such a boon for most non druid concepts. Even if they had such an ability and were not a native, they would have to acclimatise to Ymph's ecosystems and the mythallar probably stripped their powers, abilities etc like everyone else.

[Spiffy Has]

Ugh...

This is desired because an animal isn't stupid and it will run from a loosing battle. Most wildlings, stargazers, true nature characters, have an intimate link with nature. In a setting that has magic, This link often takes form of an empathetic bond.

You do not hunt when you do not need food. In the case of most wildlings, they are not want of food, and the animals they do kill are often going to get left behind to rot because they are heading in a direction other than the resource gathering quest/they are to high level to do this quest.

A script that prevents animals from attacking drastically more powerful persons is an improvement in my book and should be kept simply for the sake of role play. If you spend 90% of your time in the wilds, you will know how to avoid that wolf pack or act in a way to make them ignore you. Or be powerful enough for them to fear you.

[TheImpossibleDream]

Take a ranger level if you don't want to deal with your situation or just suck it up. Part of playing a nature pc who isn't a ranger/druid is having to find creative ways to evade the animals of the wild if you lack druid or ranger levels.

Animals don't attack the stargazers for the same reason many of the more territorial dinosaurs(non meat eating) do not attack Chultans. They've been living together for hundreds of years and built a trust. Non stargazers are strangers to the land and their kind have been murdering the animals left and right, so naturally they aren't granted the same cover.

If you spend 90% of your time in the wilds, you will know how to avoid that wolf pack or act in a way to make them ignore you.

This is true, indeed you will know to do one of the following: go the long way around, have an empathic bond, be stealthy, or go invisible.

[EfUA_undercover]

I don't see why an animal should know that the lvl 9 barb is too powerful while another human is fair game.

Of course animals should not attack everyone with a bond to nature, i.e. rangers/druids/gazers. In most cases AE did the job just fine imo. For the other cases, that dont have access to AE an app and wanding would be perfect (in case of gazers that could be done when wanding them before entering the game world in any case, atleast for their totem). That said, I don't know if it is possible or worth the effort as there are already plenty of ways to avoid them/not disturb them.

Anyway, animals not attacking other more powerful animals is a great improvement. What about the other side of the coin though? Like a pack of wolves directly next to a bunch of orcs? Some of those orcs might have a bond to nature aswell, while most would likely destroy the wilds/chop down every tree, when it helps their war efforts.

[TheImpossibleDream]

I implanted a better version of this with AE, but that also prevents our animal to randomly attack creatures that are WAY stronger than them... They might do it a bit still, but it should be better than what it was before.

There might be some glitching in touchy situation, please report odd behaviors.

The only time I've noticed the script failing to function is when the docile animal finishes attacking something else. For example if you pass by a cat that would otherwise be docile while it is fighting a sea gull it will then turn and fight you if you are within sight range despite your animal empathy. I'd assume similar things are happening between the npc.

[Yalta]

I don't see why an animal should know that the lvl 9 barb is too powerful while another human is fair game.

I would think its reasonable that average animals (badgers/rats/wolves/boars) would be wary of those who are:
 
Covered in swirling magics
Heavily armoured
Hugely muscled
Extremely confident
 
Dependant on the PC class etc. these would be reasonable traits to expect from the range of PC's that have hit lvl 7+ or so.
 
Bears/Tigers/Panthers however may still want to make a meal of you.
 
Sounds like a great logical tweak to me.

[TheImpossibleDream]

I would think its reasonable that average animals (badgers/rats/wolves/boars) would be wary of those who are:
 
Covered in swirling magics
Heavily armoured
Hugely muscled
Extremely confident
 
Dependant on the PC class etc. these would be reasonable traits to expect from the range of PC's that have hit lvl 7+ or so.
 
Bears/Tigers/Panthers however may still want to make a meal of you.
 
Sounds like a great logical tweak to me.

You're assuming the animal is capable of perceiving these traits. More likely an animal will perceive a human, not a strong human or a weak human, just a human. Gauging the strength of another species is difficult enough for a human let alone an animal.

[Mort]

This isn't wildling PCs. Only Pcs with Animal Empathy (i.e. Druid/Rangers of certain levels). What I did was bugfix this so that when animals are in battle, they'll still not attack these PCs when the battle is over. This system has been there from the start of EFU. It was just buggy.

As for the argument against why animals shouldn't attack everything in sight... I'm very surprised I have to even explain this.

I dont think gauging the strength of another specie is 'difficult'. We make it difficult on EFU to avoid metagaming, but in reality, the level 8 Barbarian will look tougher than the level 2 wizard. This is why Hyenas/coyotes dont fight lions. Why wolves dont attack bears.

We've always wanted a better AI for animals to avoid the 'rats'/'wolves'/'little critters' running all to their death, etc. You also have to be SIGNIFICANTLY stronger. I wont share the exact algorithm for it, but it makes sense. No need for a big debate regarding this...