My Tiefling character doesn't have any horns or glowing eyes

I recently made a new Tiefling character for the Extinction Curse adventure path and decided to go against how we normally portray Tieflings.
In short: No horns, pitch black eyes (like demons in the Supernatural series), a slender tail (but it were decapacitated a couple of years earlier - before campaign start, and may grow out again if Regenerated). His teeth is a little bit more pointy than what is seen in normal humans. And his skin is very pale and have a slight metallic sheen to it.

Is this ok? Does a Tiefling have to be red with rams horns, glowing red or yellow eyes and a thick lizard-like tail?

I recently made a new Tiefling character for the Extinction Curse adventure path and decided to go against how we normally portray Tieflings.

In short: No horns, pitch black eyes (like demons in the Supernatural series), a slender tail (but it were decapacitated a couple of years earlier - before campaign start, and may grow out again if Regenerated). His teeth is a little bit more pointy than what is seen in normal humans. And his skin is very pale and have a slight metallic sheen to it.

Is this ok? Does a Tiefling have to be red with rams horns, glowing red or yellow eyes and a thick lizard-like tail?

There is no standard configuration for them: they can be as outlandish or plain as you wish them to be [and that your Dm allows]: PF1 allowed for one that could pass for human so I don't see why you couldn't make one close to human like you did. It's not like the lore changed.

Yeah in Pathfinder (either edition) there’s no “default” look or type of Tiefling.

It’s just “you’re descended from a Fiend” and there’s a loooot of those.

People need to be able to make knowledge checks to know you're a tiefling, which is a pretty low bar to meet all things considering. What you describe should be just fine.

People need to be able to make knowledge checks to know you're a tiefling, which is a pretty low bar to meet all things considering. What you describe should be just fine.

Hmm. I forgot to add that he does have some slightly pointed ears.

So basically he looks human. At least from a distance. A pale looking dude who happens to possess a rather intimidating soulless look in his eyes. Even when his teeth are visible it won't scream "FIEND" to anyone.

Except if his tail ever grows back out, I suppose. ;-)

I made his appearance based on how Tieflings were described in the old Planescape setting made for 2nd ed. AD&D and in the 3.0/3.5 editions as well.
In PF1 we have the Blood of Fiends book which describes Tieflings as having a rather diverse appearance. But everytime I see them depicted in art we are back to the red or blue-gray skin, glowing eyes, a tail and big horns.
I would really like to see more diversity in Pathfinder art as well.

I recently made a new Tiefling character for the Extinction Curse adventure path and decided to go against how we normally portray Tieflings.

In short: No horns, pitch black eyes (like demons in the Supernatural series), a slender tail (but it were decapacitated a couple of years earlier - before campaign start, and may grow out again if Regenerated). His teeth is a little bit more pointy than what is seen in normal humans. And his skin is very pale and have a slight metallic sheen to it.

Is this ok? Does a Tiefling have to be red with rams horns, glowing red or yellow eyes and a thick lizard-like tail?

Please check out this thread.

"Even when his teeth are visible it won't scream "FIEND" to anyone."

But that's the thing, that is now a mechanical difference that is generally advantageous.
The rules don't care what the specific appearance is, and 1E had plenty of diversity in Tieflings to be inspired from,
but the point is there is something that is self evidently non-Human (or whateer else your base Ancestry is).
Just like a Human is evidently Human, a Dwarf is a evidently a Dwarf, and you need disguise check to appear otherwise.

Here is what 1E had to say on their appearance:
"No two tieflings look alike; the fiendish blood running through their veins manifests inconsistently, granting them an array of fiendish traits. One tiefling might appear as a human with small horns, a barbed tail, and oddly colored eyes, while another might manifest a mouth of fangs, tiny wings, and claws, and yet another might possess the perpetual smell of blood, foul incenses, and brimstone. Typically, these qualities hearken back in some way to the manner of fiend that spawned the tiefling's bloodline, but even then the admixture of human and fiendish blood is rarely ruled by sane, mortal laws, and the vast flexibility it produces in tieflings is a thing of wonder, running the gamut from oddly beautiful to utterly terrible. "

Since they are "spawned" from all types of fiends (devils, demons, daemons, divs, you name it) which are all very diverse even within their subtype, there isn't really a clear limit on what they can look like... Other than it is obviously a Tiefling. It is true that the art is often red-tinged with horns, but that is just art... You don't think humans really look like a Picasso painting do you? So don't take the artwork as so definitive, the artists are not the authors of the world and creatures, they are producing to order and often throw in their own assumptions that aren't even canon or certainly aren't "mandatory/universal" in this case. Sure, red horned tieflings exist, but that doesn't mean they are the majority or only kind. All the discussion of tieflings we see emphasizes their diversity, which wouldn't be done if they were JUST "red horned people".

Does a Tiefling have to be red with rams horns, glowing red or yellow eyes and a thick lizard-like tail?

Here's a quote from James Jacobs.

The whole point of a tiefling is so a player can have some creative control (within the limits of the GM's approval, of course) over their character's biology and physiology and all that. Anything is possible, in other words.

So the OP's PC should be fine.

Didn't you both contribute to the aforementioned thread?

The very first PFRPG Adventure Path (Council of Thieves) HEAVILY leans into Tieflings and while it does speak about the ability for them to conceal their Tiefling-ness it has at least one section talking about how hiding this can be somewhat frustrating, time-consuming, and possibly even expensive to keep up appearances.

Given the backstory that you're working with, I think it is PERFECTLY reasonable to assume that you'll be able to take some minor pains to hide their Tiefling blood but I would suggest that perhaps you should make a habit of giving them a tad more "prep time" every morning to apply makeup, get dressed, maybe wear some shaded glasses and take some precautions against being easily recognized. Given that you're talking about the loss of your tail and choosing to not have horns or other super overt signs of their Heritage I believe that most any GM would be more than accommodating in allowing you to run with the idea but I don't think that you should expect this to just be simple or free, especially when it comes to whatever other Characters they have closer relationships with such as their adventuring party.

TLDR: I think you should be able to pull this off as long as you make sure to buy the right kind of clothes, use makeup and or a disguise kit regularly as part of a "beauty routine" and roleplay some modicum of conservative mannerisms which is TOTALLY and completely feasible.

Do the other tieflings make fun of him?

Do the other tieflings make fun of him?

Nope. He works as an aerialist in a circus and doesn't care what other people think. He KNOWS that he is perceived as a freak, but so is nearly everyone else who lives and travels in his caravan.

Besides, he is not a bad guy. He treats other people in a decent manner unless they bully him. In that case they should be just a little bit afraid...

The very first PFRPG Adventure Path (Council of Thieves) HEAVILY leans into Tieflings and while it does speak about the ability for them to conceal their Tiefling-ness it has at least one section talking about how hiding this can be somewhat frustrating, time-consuming, and possibly even expensive to keep up appearances.

Given the backstory that you're working with, I think it is PERFECTLY reasonable to assume that you'll be able to take some minor pains to hide their Tiefling blood but I would suggest that perhaps you should make a habit of giving them a tad more "prep time" every morning to apply makeup, get dressed, maybe wear some shaded glasses and take some precautions against being easily recognized. Given that you're talking about the loss of your tail and choosing to not have horns or other super overt signs of their Heritage I believe that most any GM would be more than accommodating in allowing you to run with the idea but I don't think that you should expect this to just be simple or free, especially when it comes to whatever other Characters they have closer relationships with such as their adventuring party.

TLDR: I think you should be able to pull this off as long as you make sure to buy the right kind of clothes, use makeup and or a disguise kit regularly as part of a "beauty routine" and roleplay some modicum of conservative mannerisms which is TOTALLY and completely feasible.

Radovan is a favourite of mine.. :-)

Regarding disguise kits, etc. he doesn't care that what other people thinks. He is very far away from his troubled past (where he had to get rid of his tail) and have spent a few years learning to cope without it (although he misses it greatly). He now works as an acrobat (aerialist) performer and count on his audience not being able to see his scar and eyes. Plenty of people have pointy ears and pale skin, so he doesn't worry too much about that. Then remains his "oddness" which might get on some peoples nerves (and animals hate him - especially horses, lol). But he travels a lot at have a safe haven in the circus where everyone knows him.

I dunno if it helps but I once played a Tiefling Sorcerer who was the son of a Rakshasa. His fiendish physical traits were Yellow Slit Pupils (think Witcher), Extraordinarily Sharp Teeth, and Long Wicked Claws. He wore a Keffiyeh and goggles in populated areas to make these aspects less noticeable. (I am also now aware that tigers do not have slit pupils and also I missed the backwards hands opportunity.)

In PF1, there were eleven different types of tieflings- the base, and ten different heritages or whatever they were called. They had extremely varied appearances, and there was even an alternate racial trait to appear human. We just happened to get two fairly similar tieflings as example art in PF2.

For the physical description section:

Two tieflings, even siblings or twins, might not look similar at all, for the influence of fiendish lineage manifests in unique and unusual ways. These variations never make a tiefling’s appearance so strange as to obscure their humanoid ancestry, but horns, a forked tongue, vestigial wings, a tail, or a cloven hoof in place of a foot are all common and obvious signs of their heritage.

So: tieflings certainly don't need to be red, have horns, have red or glowing eyes, or have a thick lizard-like tail, you do have some physical indicators, and it's up to the GM how big of a deal or obvious being a tiefling is anyway. (Grimspawn for example almost certainly wouldn't be red with goat horns and a lizard-like tail; daemons look nothing like that.)

In short: you're good! As always, check with your GM.

Part of the reason I love tieflings so much is because of how much freedom a player has in designing what they look like. My gnome teifling earth elemental sorcerer looks like a gargoyle, having earth constantly growing out of his skin, small tusks, wings, a tail, hooves and claws.

Part of the reason I love tieflings so much is because of how much freedom a player has in designing what they look like. My gnome teifling earth elemental sorcerer looks like a gargoyle, having earth constantly growing out of his skin, small tusks, wings, a tail, hooves and claws.

Yes, exactly the fun, getting to play around with the appearance so much more than if you were playing a human or dwarf.

And gosh, that Tiefling appearance quirks thread (and the Aasimar appearance quirks one) was fun. :)

Gaulin wrote:

Part of the reason I love tieflings so much is because of how much freedom a player has in designing what they look like. My gnome teifling earth elemental sorcerer looks like a gargoyle, having earth constantly growing out of his skin, small tusks, wings, a tail, hooves and claws.

Yes, exactly the fun, getting to play around with the appearance so much more than if you were playing a human or dwarf.

And gosh, that Tiefling appearance quirks thread (and the Aasimar appearance quirks one) was fun. :)

The varied appearance of Tieflings together with their tendencies to come with a huge variety of background stories is what makes this "race" so appealing to me. I don't like how Tieflings suddenly only looked like a boiled lobster with ram's horns and cloven feat in most visual art because of DnD 4e. The 1000 different looks in PF and earlier DnD versions always were more my kind of thing.

The Tiefling Quirks post were indeed rather fun to read.

Set wrote:

Gaulin wrote:

Part of the reason I love tieflings so much is because of how much freedom a player has in designing what they look like. My gnome teifling earth elemental sorcerer looks like a gargoyle, having earth constantly growing out of his skin, small tusks, wings, a tail, hooves and claws.

Yes, exactly the fun, getting to play around with the appearance so much more than if you were playing a human or dwarf.

And gosh, that Tiefling appearance quirks thread (and the Aasimar appearance quirks one) was fun. :)

The varied appearance of Tieflings together with their tendencies to come with a huge variety of background stories is what makes this "race" so appealing to me. I don't like how Tieflings suddenly only looked like a boiled lobster with ram's horns and cloven feat in most visual art because of DnD 4e. The 1000 different looks in PF and earlier DnD versions always were more my kind of thing.

The Tiefling Quirks post were indeed rather fun to read.

I'm the opposite. Dwarves are all uniformly short and stocky. Elves all uniformly have pointed ears. They're not "human, but with this one difference" or "human, but with this second difference but not the first" or "human with a third difference and not the first two". It gives them a coherence as a race that tieflings prior to 4E didn't have. Sure, I could (and did) go out of my way to have every tiefling character I made share the same traits (horns, tail, hooves, reddish skin), but knowing that the tiefling race at large in the game world didn't made my efforts all feel hollow. So when 4E standardized the tiefling appearance (and 5E continued that practice), I was very pleased.

I will say that I can see how it was a crossroads. Prior to P2E, tieflings were all statted up as their own race, all while being described as a unique example of "this other race, but with some fiendish heritage showing through". So when 4E and 5E standardized the race, I saw that as just making the description match the stats. Conversely, P2E made "tiefling" a thing to be applied to other ancestries and thereby made the stats match the description. Not the direction I would go, but at least there being 1001 traits is finally justified.

As long as it looks fiendish in any way it's okay.

It's like the "scion of humanity" or "almost human" alternate traits from 1e.

Cool Tiefling wrote:

Set wrote:

Gaulin wrote:

Part of the reason I love tieflings so much is because of how much freedom a player has in designing what they look like. My gnome teifling earth elemental sorcerer looks like a gargoyle, having earth constantly growing out of his skin, small tusks, wings, a tail, hooves and claws.

Yes, exactly the fun, getting to play around with the appearance so much more than if you were playing a human or dwarf.

And gosh, that Tiefling appearance quirks thread (and the Aasimar appearance quirks one) was fun. :)

The varied appearance of Tieflings together with their tendencies to come with a huge variety of background stories is what makes this "race" so appealing to me. I don't like how Tieflings suddenly only looked like a boiled lobster with ram's horns and cloven feat in most visual art because of DnD 4e. The 1000 different looks in PF and earlier DnD versions always were more my kind of thing.

The Tiefling Quirks post were indeed rather fun to read.

I'm the opposite. Dwarves are all uniformly short and stocky. Elves all uniformly have pointed ears. They're not "human, but with this one difference" or "human, but with this second difference but not the first" or "human with a third difference and not the first two". It gives them a coherence as a race that tieflings prior to 4E didn't have. Sure, I could (and did) go out of my way to have every tiefling character I made share the same traits (horns, tail, hooves, reddish skin), but knowing that the tiefling race at large in the game world didn't made my efforts all feel hollow. So when 4E standardized the tiefling appearance (and 5E continued that practice), I was very pleased.

I will say that I can see how it was a crossroads. Prior to P2E, tieflings were all statted up as their own race, all while being described as a unique example of "this other race, but with some fiendish heritage...

That the thing though, tieflings were cool mutant people :P Them having uniform design removes best part about them

Tectorman wrote:

Cool Tiefling wrote:

Set wrote:

Gaulin wrote:

Part of the reason I love tieflings so much is because of how much freedom a player has in designing what they look like. My gnome teifling earth elemental sorcerer looks like a gargoyle, having earth constantly growing out of his skin, small tusks, wings, a tail, hooves and claws.

Yes, exactly the fun, getting to play around with the appearance so much more than if you were playing a human or dwarf.

And gosh, that Tiefling appearance quirks thread (and the Aasimar appearance quirks one) was fun. :)

The varied appearance of Tieflings together with their tendencies to come with a huge variety of background stories is what makes this "race" so appealing to me. I don't like how Tieflings suddenly only looked like a boiled lobster with ram's horns and cloven feat in most visual art because of DnD 4e. The 1000 different looks in PF and earlier DnD versions always were more my kind of thing.

The Tiefling Quirks post were indeed rather fun to read.

I'm the opposite. Dwarves are all uniformly short and stocky. Elves all uniformly have pointed ears. They're not "human, but with this one difference" or "human, but with this second difference but not the first" or "human with a third difference and not the first two". It gives them a coherence as a race that tieflings prior to 4E didn't have. Sure, I could (and did) go out of my way to have every tiefling character I made share the same traits (horns, tail, hooves, reddish skin), but knowing that the tiefling race at large in the game world didn't made my efforts all feel hollow. So when 4E standardized the tiefling appearance (and 5E continued that practice), I was very pleased.

I will say that I can see how it was a crossroads. Prior to P2E, tieflings were all statted up as their own race, all while being described as a unique example of "this other race, but

...

I might agree with you if my first exposure had been mechanically represented similar to how P2E does it (i.e., you pick your race first (human, dwarf, gnome, lizardfolk, whichever), then use your 1st-level character feat on "Tiefling", which gives you some mutation that isn't necessarily the same as the mutation that someone else with "Tiefling" might have).

But it wasn't. I saw them as their own independent race, not cool mutations of other races, because they were presented as the former, not the latter. Having a uniform design gets rid of the only thing holding them back.

I might agree with you if my first exposure had been mechanically represented similar to how P2E does it (i.e., you pick your race first (human, dwarf, gnome, lizardfolk, whichever), then use your 1st-level character feat on "Tiefling", which gives you some mutation that isn't necessarily the same as the mutation that someone else with "Tiefling" might have).

But it wasn't. I saw them as their own independent race, not cool mutations of other races, because they were presented as the former, not the latter. Having a uniform design gets rid of the only thing holding them back.

Whatever makes you happy and floats your boat. ;-) Just know that I have been playing AD&D back when Planescape .. and thus Tieflings .. were first conceived. I fell in love instantly.

My favourite version of Tieflings is the one from D&D 3.0 Forgotten Realms were even godly avatars were producing offspring, Tieflings, and this offspring were not somebody with rams horns instead of hair. I really don't like those horns.. LOL.

So my take on Tieflings is to steal whatever I like from horror flicks and TV series and apply these ideas to my Tieflings. Even though I (truth be told) does like the appearance of 4E and 5E Tieflings, I just don't like them enough to want them as a uniform race. Sorry, but I really don't.

That would take away too many storytelling opportunities from me.

And now a comment that goes to everybody:
In regard to the 1000 traits post of Tieflings which there's a link to earlier in this tread, I just want to say that although it is a funny read, I will not be using it much since Tieflings with those mutations hail more from a Nurgle demon or other Warhammer Fantasy/40K demon than from a succubus/incubus demon or erineyes devil (old AD&D devil counterpart to a Succubus) or other fairly plausible netherworldly ancestor.

The reason why Tieflings are usually weirdly colored, have horns, and glowing eyes is mostly because of DnD. Those tieflings are most definitely portrayed with those characteristics, which also aligns with Pitborn (Demon-Spawn), Hellspawn (Devil-Spawn), Spitespawn (Div-Spawn), and Hungerseed (Oni-Spawn).

However, if you look at the other heritages found in PF1 you have: Faultspawn (Asura-Spawn) which tend to be androgynous or hermaphrodites, with weird faces: Grimspawn (Daemon-Spawn) which tend to look like corpses or extremely sick, think Smeagol but uglier: Foulspawn (Demodand-Spawn) which tend to look like ogre or ogrekins, with similar behaviors: Shackleborn (Kyton-Spawn) which tend to be born severely mutilated, but otherwise might appear like a regular person, also heavily favor tattoos and piercings: Motherless (Qlippoth-Spawn) tend to look like something straight out of lovecraftian lore: Finally, the Beastblood (Rakshasa-Spawn) tend to look like a human with animal features, think ThunderCats.

Blood of Fiends has an official list of alternate feature. List of alternate Tiefling appearance, the list is at the bottom of the page.

*****************************

Speaking of races that don't get the right art. Aasimars suffer the same fate. Most Aasimars are drawn as being angels of some kind.

However they have these: Idyllkin (Agathion-Blooded) which tend to look like humans with animal traits: Musetouched (Azata-Blooded) which tend to have almost impossible color eyes and hair, think anime character: Plumekith (Garuda-Blooded) which tend to have features of birds and eagles: And finally, Emberkin (Peri-Blooded) which to have flaming features. Heck Angelkin (Angel-Blooded) can look like the Silver Surfer or Doctor Manhattan.

here is the list of official alternate traits from Blood of Angels, again at the bottom of the page.

*****************************

Also Scion of Humanity and Pass for Human specifically say that you look human. Any weird trait is so insignificant or so commonly misunderstood that now one would even notice it without you pointing it out.

The reason why Tieflings are usually weirdly colored, have horns, and glowing eyes is mostly because of DnD. Those tieflings are most definitely portrayed with those characteristics, which also aligns with Pitborn (Demon-Spawn), Hellspawn (Devil-Spawn), Spitespawn (Div-Spawn), and Hungerseed (Oni-Spawn).

However, if you look at the other heritages found in PF1 you have: Faultspawn (Asura-Spawn) which tend to be androgynous or hermaphrodites, with weird faces: Grimspawn (Daemon-Spawn) which tend to look like corpses or extremely sick, think Smeagol but uglier: Foulspawn (Demodand-Spawn) which tend to look like ogre or ogrekins, with similar behaviors: Shackleborn (Kyton-Spawn) which tend to be born severely mutilated, but otherwise might appear like a regular person, also heavily favor tattoos and piercings: Motherless (Qlippoth-Spawn) tend to look like something straight out of lovecraftian lore: Finally, the Beastblood (Rakshasa-Spawn) tend to look like a human with animal features, think ThunderCats.

Blood of Fiends has an official list of alternate feature. List of alternate Tiefling appearance, the list is at the bottom of the page.

*****************************

Speaking of races that don't get the right art. Aasimars suffer the same fate. Most Aasimars are drawn as being angels of some kind.

However they have these: Idyllkin (Agathion-Blooded) which tend to look like humans with animal traits: Musetouched (Azata-Blooded) which tend to have almost impossible color eyes and hair, think anime character: Plumekith (Garuda-Blooded) which tend to have features of birds and eagles: And finally, Emberkin (Peri-Blooded) which to have flaming features. Heck Angelkin (Angel-Blooded) can look like the Silver Surfer or Doctor Manhattan.

here is the list of official alternate traits from Blood of Angels, again at the bottom of the page.

*****************************...

Blood of Fiends is one of my favourite supplements for Pathfinder. I do hope that it will be redeveloped for 2nd edition. Especially the artwork is noteworthy for its many varied takes on Tiefling appearances.

If i had rolled on the list of alternate features my rolls would be the following:

19: Ears: Pointed
25: Eyes: Other (Black orbs)
60: Skin: Other (Pale - slightly metallic)
62: Tail: Fiendish (Slim/barbed)
67: Teeth: Fanged
??: Aura: Animals gets tense or aggressive when within 10'

Gaulin wrote:

Part of the reason I love tieflings so much is because of how much freedom a player has in designing what they look like. My gnome teifling earth elemental sorcerer looks like a gargoyle, having earth constantly growing out of his skin, small tusks, wings, a tail, hooves and claws.

Yes, exactly the fun, getting to play around with the appearance so much more than if you were playing a human or dwarf.

And gosh, that Tiefling appearance quirks thread (and the Aasimar appearance quirks one) was fun. :)

Still. Is.

When it comes to aasimar, I personally like making them just as weird as tieflings, as opposed to basically "really pretty humanoid with a couple of renaissance angel features"

The halfling aasimar alchemist I'm playing right now has curved, ram like horns, translucent insectoid wings, a spined tail with a tapered tip, and blue/purple sectoral heterochromia, and distills the inert venom in her saliva to make her blight bombs, dread ampoules, abd alchemical poisons. In reality, most of her traits are a mutation of the thyrlien azata mixed in with a bunch of other stuff from both CG and NG celestials, but in practice she looks more like an unseelie fey or odd succubus; neither of which are helped by the fact that she favors the use of deception and disguises in her exploration and downtime activities

If I were your GM I would tell you that your character can look like whatever you want (within reason) but everyone is still going to know what ancestry you are, to the extent that any ancestry is obvious.

If people can know a dwarf is a dwarf, a human is a human, and an elf is an elf then they know a tiefling when they see one without a check.

Otherwise you're getting a benefit of passing for human (or whatever base ancestry) without paying a price.

If I were your GM I would tell you that your character can look like whatever you want (within reason) but everyone is still going to know what ancestry you are, to the extent that any ancestry is obvious.

If people can know a dwarf is a dwarf, a human is a human, and an elf is an elf then they know a tiefling when they see one without a check.

Otherwise you're getting a benefit of passing for human (or whatever base ancestry) without paying a price.

Sorry to correct you here, but Tiefling is now considered a Heritage - NOT an Ancestry. So my Tiefling character IS a human being who just happens to have a cursed bloodline. So within your own reasoning my character just passes for what he already is.

Half-orcs and Half-elves are just as recognizable as Dwarves or Halflings. As are Tieflings.

Half-orcs and Half-elves are just as recognizable as Dwarves or Halflings. As are Tieflings.

Except for the Tiefling bit you are quite right in your assumption.

But not in regard to Tieflings. Tieflings in PF2 is not a race with a standardized look. Had they had the "good" looks of the DnD 4e or 5e Tieflings then they would have been recognizable from quite a distance. But this doesn't hold true in the Pathfinder universe. Whether that being in novel fiction (Radovan is not immediately recognizable as a Tiefling) nor rulebooks (Blood of Fiends)

And I am talking about recognization from a distance. Not close up, were any Tiefling is likely to get identified as such within a very short timeframe unless they have been disguised. Tbh, I thought this were made clear from previous entries to this thread (and not only my own comments)

Bonus: I just altered my Avatar to another picture of a male Tiefling. He looks more like an elf than like a standard Tiefling, right? And this is an official depiction of a Tiefling!

Radovan looks like a perfect example of what the PF1 Pass for Human race trait is.

Also all versatile heritages are as identifiable as the half heritages. Aasimar and Teiflings are no different then a Changeling, Dhampir, or Duskwalker.

In fact unless there is a feat that says otherwise, or a GM rules otherwise, there is always a mark or sign of the strange heritage. It should be easy enough to see any of the strange features without using a disguise. Ex: Duskwalker's distinctive skin.

Changelings and Aasimars do have an easier time.

Radovan looks like a perfect example of what the PF1 Pass for Human race trait is.

Also all versatile heritages are as identifiable as the half heritages. Aasimar and Teiflings are no different then a Changeling, Dhampir, or Duskwalker.

In fact unless there is a feat that says otherwise, or a GM rules otherwise, there is always a mark or sign of the strange heritage. It should be easy enough to see any of the strange features without using a disguise. Ex: Duskwalker's distinctive skin.

Changelings and Aasimars do have an easier time.

Remember that this isn't PF1. You only gain a human with Low Light vision and a strange past when selecting the Tiefling Heritage. Everything else you gain buy acquiring Ancestry Feats.

But I never said that my Tiefling wasn't identifiable as such. Only that you had to look him in his face to do so. Or be riding close by on a horse... in which case the horse would flung you off and start stomping my poor boy. :-D

I did not mean that Tieflings are recognizable because they all look the same, but because they do look different.

TBH, I have no problem with the description of your character as a Tiefling. And I could see the additional disadvantage of being offensive to animals as worth being otherwise almost indistinguishable from a human.

I did not mean that Tieflings are recognizable because they all look the same, but because they do look different.

TBH, I have no problem with the description of your character as a Tiefling. And I could see the additional disadvantage of being offensive to animals as worth being otherwise almost indistinguishable from a human.

I'm not unreasonable. While having a Tiefling with good looks I wouldn't miss out on some good roleplaying situations. And at some point he will definitely regain his lost tail. ;-)

Temperans wrote:

Radovan looks like a perfect example of what the PF1 Pass for Human race trait is.

Also all versatile heritages are as identifiable as the half heritages. Aasimar and Teiflings are no different then a Changeling, Dhampir, or Duskwalker.

In fact unless there is a feat that says otherwise, or a GM rules otherwise, there is always a mark or sign of the strange heritage. It should be easy enough to see any of the strange features without using a disguise. Ex: Duskwalker's distinctive skin.

Changelings and Aasimars do have an easier time.

Remember that this isn't PF1. You only gain a human with Low Light vision and a strange past when selecting the Tiefling Heritage. Everything else you gain buy acquiring Ancestry Feats.

But I never said that my Tiefling wasn't identifiable as such. Only that you had to look him in his face to do so. Or be riding close by on a horse... in which case the horse would flung you off and start stomping my poor boy. :-D

My statement was a response to the first half were you said tieflings don't have to be recognizable because "pathfinder tieflings are dont have 'standardized looks'". But tieflings are not recognized because their look is standard, they are recognized because they look different from normal.

PF1 Golarion lore is still cannon unless stated otherwise. And tieflings in lore were very recognized because of their strange features. Pass for Humans, was a mechanical effect with in lore consequence, which PF2 does not replicate. Its a matter of GM and Players agreeing what is reasonable, for the lore/mechanics of that table.

If you look Variable Heritages do in fact change the appearance, because you are no longer "just a human" or "just an Gnome". Each one states how the appearance changes or may change. Changelings will have weird eyes, Duskwalkers and Dhampirs will have weird skins, Aasimars and Tieflings will have any number of different traits.

My statement was never about your character.

Cool Tiefling wrote:

Temperans wrote:

Radovan looks like a perfect example of what the PF1 Pass for Human race trait is.

Also all versatile heritages are as identifiable as the half heritages. Aasimar and Teiflings are no different then a Changeling, Dhampir, or Duskwalker.

In fact unless there is a feat that says otherwise, or a GM rules otherwise, there is always a mark or sign of the strange heritage. It should be easy enough to see any of the strange features without using a disguise. Ex: Duskwalker's distinctive skin.

Changelings and Aasimars do have an easier time.

Remember that this isn't PF1. You only gain a human with Low Light vision and a strange past when selecting the Tiefling Heritage. Everything else you gain buy acquiring Ancestry Feats.

But I never said that my Tiefling wasn't identifiable as such. Only that you had to look him in his face to do so. Or be riding close by on a horse... in which case the horse would flung you off and start stomping my poor boy. :-D

My statement was a response to the first half were you said tieflings don't have to be recognizable because "pathfinder tieflings are dont have 'standardized looks'". But tieflings are not recognized because their look is standard, they are recognized because they look different from normal.

PF1 Golarion lore is still cannon unless stated otherwise. And tieflings in lore were very recognized because of their strange features. Pass for Humans, was a mechanical effect with in lore consequence, which PF2 does not replicate. Its a matter of GM and Players agreeing what is reasonable, for the lore/mechanics of that table.

If you look Variable Heritages do in fact change the appearance, because you are no longer "just a human" or "just an Gnome". Each one states how the appearance changes or may change. Changelings will have weird eyes, Duskwalkers and Dhampirs will have weird skins, Aasimars and Tieflings will have any number of different traits.

My statement was never about your character.

Then I don't think that we disagree at all.

I see what you mean, but I think the assumption is unwarranted. Baseline Tieflings do not look just like humans IMO.

I also see what you mean, but I agree with Raven Black with one difference. Baseline tieflings/variable heritages look like the base ancestry, with cosmetic difference. As said previously the GM and player must agree on what a reasonable appearance is.

Also PF2 has not done a lot with how races look in this edition. Its still to soon to decided was is baseline and what is not.

In fairness, Cool Tiefling's character *did* have an unusual, very obvious trait that would have made them immediately identifiable as not just human, until they sawed off their tail.

Given that you need a society check to identify humanoids, I'm not even really sure it can be accurately claimed that ancestry is inherently obvious.

Like, there's probably a reasonable assumption that you could tell members with exaggerated features apart without a roll, but halflings and gnomes are sometimes described as looking similar to human children, and given that they share a size category, a short, stocky human may very well look like a dwarf.

To go on the versatile heritages, like, heterochromia exists in non changelings too, so someone with mismatching eye colors isn't a surefire sign (though it's 100% valid to say your setting/culture has superstitions about heterochromatic people). The blue skin of a duskwalker might also be misconstrued as either a tiefling or aasimar trait to someone who doesn't know much about either, azata (and by extension, azata aasimars) are frequently described as looking like fey (lyrakiens are explicitly mistaken for fey extremely frequently), agathion aasimar and rhakshasa tiefling both have animal features, etc.

Like, seems to me the assumption that ancestry is always easily identifiable is more of player and dm side assumption than anything lore wise

Given that you need a society check to identify humanoids, I'm not even really sure it can be accurately claimed that ancestry is inherently obvious.

Like, there's probably a reasonable assumption that you could tell members with exaggerated features apart without a roll, but halflings and gnomes are sometimes described as looking similar to human children, and given that they share a size category, a short, stocky human may very well look like a dwarf.

To go on the versatile heritages, like, heterochromia exists in non changelings too, so someone with mismatching eye colors isn't a surefire sign (though it's 100% valid to say your setting/culture has superstitions about heterochromatic people). The blue skin of a duskwalker might also be misconstrued as either a tiefling or aasimar trait to someone who doesn't know much about either, azata (and by extension, azata aasimars) are frequently described as looking like fey (lyrakiens are explicitly mistaken for fey extremely frequently), agathion aasimar and rhakshasa tiefling both have animal features, etc.

Like, seems to me the assumption that ancestry is always easily identifiable is more of player and dm side assumption than anything lore wise

I agree 100% here.

I am currently playing an elven sorceress with the draconic bloodline. As such she possesses many of the features of black dragons, including unnatural red eyes, horns, patches of black scales, and clawed feet.

When our party encountered city ruins populated by tieflings, she had no problem infiltrating the community due to her tiefling-like appearance.

Like, really, if we wanted to take it a step further, a "humanoid covered in fur with a cat like head, paw like hands, and digitigrade legs" matches not only rakshasa tieflings and agathion aasimar, it also matches the perfectly mundane, not supernatural catfolk.

So maybe instead of making people jump through hoops and pay feat taxes to have their character look like another ancestry, we just simply let them do it. Being discriminated against isn't a tiefling mechanical feature, so letting them pass as a human provided they take appropriate steps isn't a mechanical advantage. If, for whatever reason, it's dramatic or w/e for the tiefling's real nature to be discovered, just take inspiration the the bajillion shapeshifting trickster mythos out there.

Like, really, if we wanted to take it a step further, a "humanoid covered in fur with a cat like head, paw like hands, and digitigrade legs" matches not only rakshasa tieflings and agathion aasimar, it also matches the perfectly mundane, not supernatural catfolk.

None of those, however, look human, which was what the discussion is about. If any tried to pass as pure human, all would do so at a disadvantage.

If you want to argue that a Rakasha catfolk tiefling, Agathion catfolk aasimar, and a more standard clawed catfolk would all be phsyically indistinguishable from each other, that would make more sense. But even there, the versatile heritages say you have some obvious manifestation that separates you from your base ancestry, not just from looking human.

I'll continue to assume that Tieflings and Aasimar look obviously different from, though still clearly like a member of, their base ancestry.

When it comes to aasimar, I personally like making them just as weird as tieflings, as opposed to basically "really pretty humanoid with a couple of renaissance angel features"

The halfling aasimar alchemist I'm playing right now has curved, ram like horns, translucent insectoid wings, a spined tail with a tapered tip, and blue/purple sectoral heterochromia, and distills the inert venom in her saliva to make her blight bombs, dread ampoules, abd alchemical poisons. In reality, most of her traits are a mutation of the thyrlien azata mixed in with a bunch of other stuff from both CG and NG celestials, but in practice she looks more like an unseelie fey or odd succubus; neither of which are helped by the fact that she favors the use of deception and disguises in her exploration and downtime activities

get in there!

But even there, the versatile heritages say you have some obvious manifestation that separates you from your base ancestry, not just from looking human.

Dhampirs look like pale humans and changelings look like humans with heterochromia. Hell, the aasimar just looks like a really pretty human. In golarian lore, you can totally make your tiefling look totally normal except for a subtle, easy to hide/not very noticed trait, or your aasimar to look so otherworldly weird it looks more like a demon than angel. I'm not seeing were you're drawing the conclusion that all versatile heritages are obviously not human (or not their base ancestry, as it were)

I'm not seeing were you're drawing the conclusion that all versatile heritages are obviously not human (or not their base ancestry, as it were)

I'm not. The two specific versatile heritages that I named both say that members of that heritage have physical traits that set them apart from their base ancestry. My comment was restricted to those specific ones, not versatile heritages in general.

Although, in fact, all of them do have specific physical traits that set them apart, changelings and dhampir specifically mostly pass as their base ancestry.

Edit: As to those particular heritages, I draw my conclusion from the heritage entries:

While an aasimar is recognizably a member of their humanoid ancestry, they always bear a few physical traits that set them apart, such as glowing eyes, a faint halo of light above their head, feathers for hair, antennae on the brow, a metallic sheen to the skin, lack of a belly button, a strangely musical voice, or a naturally pleasing floral scent.

You descend from fiends or bear the mark of the fiendish realms, manifesting as some unusual feature that belies your heritage, such as horns or a tail.