Speaking of the art, did anyone else get the feeling there was a bit more reused material than normal? It felt like almost 1/3 of the pictures were taken out of previous products. I don't know if this is standard procedure that I didn't notice before, the result of a larger than normal amount of images, or just random luck of what pages I flipped to, but it certainly stuck out at me.

** spoiler omitted **

I would agree on every point.

Why Aasimars can fly on their own wings and Tieflings can not?

I interpret it as Tieflings retaining the BoF 'their own blood works against them' ensuring that their wings are broken and torn. That said, I really wish they also had actual flying options :(

@Bardess
Two theories.
Asthetics

I love the book ... I knew I would.

But PURPLE DROW? Seriously?!!! WTF?!!

I mean, as a freelance artist, I know that sometimes an artist has to make choices in order to make highlights show up. But, in the past 10 years or so, this has become increasingly common to the point that they are actually painted in pruple. Not ebon with highlights, their actual skin tone is entirely purple.

And that has led to players assuming that is a correct skin tone, not just a artist's poor colour choices. Which has in turn - apparently - led publishers to actually writing in PURPLE as part of their physical description. I swear, if I ever see a player at a table with a PURPLE DROW, I will mock them relentlessly, all the while calling them n00bcakes.

If you didn't get a tone of silly-rant out of this, go back and try again. I wouldn't actually troll someone into oblivion for it, but, I would point it out to them.

Speaking of the art, did anyone else get the feeling there was a bit more reused material than normal? It felt like almost 1/3 of the pictures were taken out of previous products. I don't know if this is standard procedure that I didn't notice before, the result of a larger than normal amount of images, or just random luck of what pages I flipped to, but it certainly stuck out at me.

I noticed the same thing. It's good art, but I wouldn't want to see the trend continue/expand.

I love the book ... I knew I would.

But PURPLE DROW? Seriously?!!! WTF?!!

I mean, as a freelance artist, I know that sometimes an artist has to make choices in order to make highlights show up. But, in the past 10 years or so, this has become increasingly common to the point that they are actually painted in pruple. Not ebon with highlights, their actual skin tone is entirely purple.

And that has led to players assuming that is a correct skin tone, not just a artist's poor colour choices. Which has in turn - apparently - led publishers to actually writing in PURPLE as part of their physical description. I swear, if I ever see a player at a table with a PURPLE DROW, I will mock them relentlessly, all the while calling them n00bcakes.

If you didn't get a tone of silly-rant out of this, go back and try again. I wouldn't actually troll someone into oblivion for it, but, I would point it out to them.

I like purple elves better, but then, I prefer the WoW elf-dichotomy much better than the norm. Night elves are one of my favorite fantasy races, even if the writing for them is leagues beneath what it could be. Drow are too alien... too 'eeeebil.' For me anyway. Could be the whole "half the species is kept in bondage and traded like children's toys" that puts me off.

Of course Drizzt clones don't help, either.

What is the book is good stuff, but I was a bit disappointed there were not any trapfinding archetypes, unless I messed them.

Something like the Divine Disarmer: a halfling based Inquisitor archetype would have been cool.

Does anyone know if a thread has started for errata and stuff for ARG yet and if so have the link handy?

I like the purple myself. Gets rids of the kind of uncomfortable connotations that good elves = white, bad elves = black, that comes from the original depictions.

I like the purple myself. Gets rids of the kind of uncomfortable connotations that good elves = white, bad elves = black, that comes from the original depictions.

Purple/black is better than black/black?

Honestly, I've always preferred EQ's Dark Elves to DnD's. Drow worshiping the god of hate always seemed far more intimidating than the self destructive spider worshipers.

Plus the dudes had some awesome facial hair.

I like the purple myself. Gets rids of the kind of uncomfortable connotations that good elves = white, bad elves = black, that comes from the original depictions.

That stupidity is something that was unfortunately greatly reinforced in D&D 4E with an epic destiny for Drow whose final reward was being reborn as a white-skinned elf (seriously? Others become gods and you finally manage to "redeem" the skin colour you were born with? I never had problems with their black skin, which could be because my first contact with D&D Drow was in Baldur's Gate II. :D Having some moron claim that a Drow's skin colour comes from the blackness of their heart oozing through the skin instantly makes you take their side.

I would really love to see more good artworks with black skin and red eyes and with decent adventuring equipment instead of bondage gear. :(

Personally one of the things I liked about (3e) Elistraee and Vhelronn (however you spell his name) was that they gave other options for drow than 'hopelessly evil bastards' and 'lone scimitar weilding renegades'.

(Plus, I like the contrast of black and silver.)

Golarion Drow have been black through purple/blue since Second Darkness.

SD spoiler

I would like to ask a few things

1. Is there a link to the homebrew races for the ARG because my other thread went unanswered?

2. Is there a way that someone from Paizo could try and make a video or maybe step by step QnA for the ARG?

3. Is there a way to create your own racial traits and if there isn't has anyone else decided to try and do so? It would really help us GM's out who are trying to create more awesome races and are pretty limited.

Can't you slap on feats that the race can't change and effectively make a race from feats?

I mean, I can't do a lot of my cool things that my races from the play test could do in a heart beat but I'm honestly struggling with recreating most if not all of my races based on the new ARG rules...

Also, is there a way that you can purchase a feat for a race without it needing the pre reqs? If so, then most of my problems should be able to be done by effectively using that feat thing. If I can ignore Lunges pre reqs of BAB +6 if I spend an extra 2 rp to make it 4 I'd be perfectly content.

What is the book is good stuff, but I was a bit disappointed there were not any trapfinding archetypes, unless I messed them.

Something like the Divine Disarmer: a halfling based Inquisitor archetype would have been cool.

Sounds like a KQ pitch to me :-)

Games Workshop has had blue/purple/whatever color Chaos tainted them with Dark Elves forever. I, personally, have no issue with it. Makes for more interesting painting options.

I have barely looked through the book, but (So far) the only issues that bum me out is such 'new' races as Gillmen and Oreads have proper write-ups, yet classic 'alternative PCs' from back-in-the-day (Lizardmen, Gnolls) get a footnote entry as example races.

Oh, and Kobolds still aren't up to speed.Really, their stats just suck...

Kind of wish they had just gone with a 0 hd option for lizardfolk and Gnolls, back when they released the first bestiary.

Kobold stats are supposed to suck.

Kind of wish they had just gone with a 0 hd option for lizardfolk and Gnolls, back when they released the first bestiary.

Exactly

Kobold stats are supposed to suck.

Yes, we know, they suck. However, 6 pts in negative and 2 positive?

lordzack wrote:

Kobold stats are supposed to suck.

Yes, we know, they suck. However, 6 pts in negative and 2 positive?

Ugh... A +2 to one mental stat (Wis or Cha) wouldn't have killed the Devs...

The fact that they did that probably has to do with the fact that kobolds are a monster race, instead of a PC race.

I believe the frustration of Uriel393 comes from the idea that there are in fact some people that like the idea of playing some of these lesser appreciated monster races, and would appreciate it if they seemed more viable. I mean, gnomes and half-orcs work right?

Uriel393 wrote:

lordzack wrote:

Kobold stats are supposed to suck.

Yes, we know, they suck. However, 6 pts in negative and 2 positive?

Ugh... A +2 to one mental stat (Wis or Cha) wouldn't have killed the Devs...

The fact that they did that probably has to do with the fact that kobolds are a monster race, instead of a PC race.

Also they probably didn't want the core rulebook line to contradict itself by drastically changing the base starting package. And having options that are obviously more powerful is, well, lame.

After all, this is what the Race Building section is for. Beef up your kobolds!

After all, this is what the Race Cooking section is for. Beef up your kobolds!

So that's what I was doing wrong... {secures lid on slow-cooking kobolds, heads to store for oxtail and beef stock}

lordzack wrote:

Uriel393 wrote:

lordzack wrote:

Kobold stats are supposed to suck.

Yes, we know, they suck. However, 6 pts in negative and 2 positive?

Ugh... A +2 to one mental stat (Wis or Cha) wouldn't have killed the Devs...

The fact that they did that probably has to do with the fact that kobolds are a monster race, instead of a PC race.

Also they probably didn't want the core rulebook line to contradict itself by drastically changing the base starting package. And having options that are obviously more powerful is, well, lame.

After all, this is what the Race Building section is for. Beef up your kobolds!

I think this is pretty well best said here.

I know no one wants to here the Rule Zero line, but putting together a book like this cannot be done without making some races look really, really bad without contradicting the pre-existing rules. I'm sure the developers know you want to be able play certain races, but they still have to work within the rules. As a very occasional freelance designer, I can say with absolutely certainty that you sometimes have to make design choices you don't like because you have to work with the framework that's already been established.

EDIT: Unrelated to the rest of this post, I would seriously like to know the pricing on the Dwarves' 'never slow down' movement ability. I cannot seem to locate it within the book, and it's certainly not included in their cost breakdown. I'd be inclined to put that at a 2 RP ability, but I can't find any example to back that idea up (and all we need is the dwarves' getting tossed another 2 RP to make people complain about it).

RE-EDIT: OK, don't know how I missed that under slow speed more than once. That said, I'd still like to see it priced as a separate ability, to be put on other, non-Medium sized races.

I don't know if anyone else thought of Archangel, but you could make a pretty interesting fighter now.

First think that came to my mind

hello again, is anybody out there able to tell me where each races came from, well I have the first two bestiaries but there are still some I can't find

please?

hello again, is anybody out there able to tell me where each races came from, well I have the first two bestiaries but there are still some I can't find

please?

Bestiary 3, and the Dragon Empires Gazetteer/Primer should cover the rest (I think).

Was there one in particular you were looking for?

Don't forget the Changeling. She is from Pathfinder Adventure Path #43: Carrion Crown - Haunting of Harrowstone

Wow, I REALLY love the Skulking Slayer archetype for the Half-Orc!

Glad to hear.

I'll have to check out how it works with scouts, I wish I could claim the synergy was deliberate :D

BTW, since dwarves cost more RP than a human does, and almost as much as a tiefling, does this mean that they're up there for level adjustment characters? That we should go by the chart of them being more than 10 RP so they should be considered a +1?

1) Tielfings don't have level adjustments, they're just like Humans in terms of being a 'PC race'.

2) *NO* race has a level adustment. The concept doesn't exist in PRPG.
The racebuilding section goes into how to deal with mixing low and high RP races within the same game (when you are aiming for parity between them), and basically it comes down to giving more 'bonus abilities' to the lower RP races to bring them up to par, basically making 'super humans, halflings, etc'.

[boilerplate disclaimer text]Haven't read the entire thread, so apologies if this has been mentioned already...[/disclaimer]

The Kobold alternate racial trait Gliding Wings on p. 133 replaces Crafty. The Draconic Glide feat on p. 136 assumes that it replaced the Fast movement trait instead.

Draconic Breath feat on p. 136 mentions that Kobold sorcerers with the appropriate bloodlines can use their Cha modifier instead of their Con modifier to determine the number of times per day they can use the breath weapon, but the feat text says that the breath weapon is only usable once / day.

.

I'm only up to Orcs, so far, but I'm *loving* some of the new alternate racial favored class bonuses. The Orc Druid bonus (+1/2 to natural attack damage for your animal companion), the Elven Summoner bonus (-1 round to summon eidolon, to a minimum of 1 round), the Dwarf Monk bonus (-1 hardness to metal, clay or stone items struck with unarmed attacks), the Half-Elf Alchemist bonus (+1 ft./level splash radius to bombs), etc. sound fun.

Personally one of the things I liked about (3e) Elistraee and Vhelronn (however you spell his name) was that they gave other options for drow than 'hopelessly evil bastards' and 'lone scimitar weilding renegades'.

This is something a number of the race entries were really hurting for lacking IMO. In fact, the lead-in to the second chapter pretty much offerse "lone renegade" as the only idea to work with for those races. It's not a big deal where the individual race entries offer a range of possibilities, and many of them do, but when they don't...

Patrick McGrath wrote:

What is the book is good stuff, but I was a bit disappointed there were not any trapfinding archetypes, unless I messed them.

Something like the Divine Disarmer: a halfling based Inquisitor archetype would have been cool.

Sounds like a KQ pitch to me :-)

KQ?

[boilerplate disclaimer text]Haven't read the entire thread, so apologies if this has been mentioned already...[/disclaimer]

The Kobold alternate racial trait Gliding Wings on p. 133 replaces Crafty. The Draconic Glide feat on p. 136 assumes that it replaced the Fast movement trait instead.

Draconic Breath feat on p. 136 mentions that Kobold sorcerers with the appropriate bloodlines can use their Cha modifier instead of their Con modifier to determine the number of times per day they can use the breath weapon, but the feat text says that the breath weapon is only usable once / day.

.

I'm only up to Orcs, so far, but I'm *loving* some of the new alternate racial favored class bonuses. The Orc Druid bonus (+1/2 to natural attack damage for your animal companion), the Elven Summoner bonus (-1 round to summon eidolon, to a minimum of 1 round), the Dwarf Monk bonus (-1 hardness to metal, clay or stone items struck with unarmed attacks), the Half-Elf Alchemist bonus (+1 ft./level splash radius to bombs), etc. sound fun.

Yeah, I had brought up the Kobold issues earlier. Just seems like there is some poor editing of things cut from the book which left other parts hanging in the wind.

Matthew Morris wrote:

Patrick McGrath wrote:

What is the book is good stuff, but I was a bit disappointed there were not any trapfinding archetypes, unless I messed them.

Something like the Divine Disarmer: a halfling based Inquisitor archetype would have been cool.

Sounds like a KQ pitch to me :-)

KQ?

Kobold Quarterly

EDIT: Also I am really liking the Ironskin Monk Archetype for Hobgoblins (and that picture of the hobgoblin is sweet). Take a level in fighter and you have a monk in plate mail!

EDIT: Also I am really liking the Ironskin Monk Archetype for Hobgoblins (and that picture of the hobgoblin is sweet). Take a level in fighter and you have a monk in plate mail!

Tell me more, tell me more (like does he have a car?)

Random art thoughts;

*Loving* the new hobgoblin look on p. 121 and especially p. 122! Such an improvement!

Also loving the horned dark-handed Aasimar on p. 87 and both of the Fetchling pictures!

The Ifrit on p. 129 remains one of the coolest (hottest?) pictures. Very nice.

The female Orc on p. 140 is funky. Those tusks she's wearing look awesome!

The Oread Summoner on p. 148 is very cool. More Summoner-friendly art, I'm seeing (that, the half-orc summoner on p. 54, or the Fetchling using a summoning spell on p. 112).

Both of the Ratfolk are excellent. I love that the little guy with the crossbow is chewing a bit of grass! Such an odd detail!

The Tiefling on p. 172 is very hot, yanno, for a red-skinned devil-spawned chick with horns and hooves and a gigantic holy symbol of Sarenrae totally covering her jumblies...

Very interesting take on the Undines. I like the female better, but still, both are neat.

The Kitsune on p. 192 is in a very dynamic action pose, and that's cooler than having her just sort of standing there.

The Ogre in platemail on 229 is scary. Yikes.

The human spellcaster on p. 240 is distinctive, and I love the (hobgoblin?) pirate on 244 and the tengu with the awesome hat on 246. I have no idea what the dude on 247 is, but he looks badass!

The only bit of recycled art (that I recognized as such) I would have preferred not being used was the Halfling from 'Accelerated Drinker.' The art from Big Little Folk 'o Golarion may have been a bit cleaner / simpler style (more comic-book-ish, perhaps, with the sharper outlines), but I liked it better (particular the slinger on p. 22) than Potion Tosser Lad.

I loved that the dwarf with the war-boar from Seeker of Secrets made it to the Dwarf cover page. Outside of WAR's Harsk pictures, that's one of my favorite dwarven pictures. (Indeed, given how awesome the art in Seeker of Secrets was, I'm surprised that the little guy from p. 59 didn't score the Gnome cover page!)

Random art thoughts;

I'm seeing a lot of my favorites turning up in that list.

As far as others, page 79 in particular makes some old desires for certain area setting books flare up again.

Does anyone know if a thread has started for errata and stuff for ARG yet and if so have the link handy?

Ta-da..

Vaelkas wrote:

EDIT: Also I am really liking the Ironskin Monk Archetype for Hobgoblins (and that picture of the hobgoblin is sweet). Take a level in fighter and you have a monk in plate mail!

Tell me more, tell me more (like does he have a car?)

Nope, no car :p

The Ironskin monk is, as the name says, a monk based on shrugging off attacks. Rather than focusing on mobility, they focus on ... tanking, almost. It replaces the Wisdom to AC and the AC bonus, but unfortunately (for the platemail idea at least) still loses Flurry of Blows and Fast Movement if he wears armor.

Hi, quick question.

I was under the impression that the Advanced Races Guide was similar to the Advanced Players Guide - i.e. adding more variety to the core game but which could ultimately stand on its own.

I've been reading some threads where the posters are posting races that state that they get abilities from Ultimate Magic or Ultimate Combat.

As someone who's only bought the 'core' set of Pathfinder books (Core Rulebook, GM Guide and Bestiary I), how critical are UC and UM to being able to fully utilise the ARG?

As someone who's only bought the 'core' set of Pathfinder books (Core Rulebook, GM Guide and Bestiary I), how critical are UC and UM to being able to fully utilise the ARG?

"Not important at all." The book reprints some material from APG and Golarion-specific sources, but nothing has jumped out as requiring UC or UM (except perhaps a small number of Magus and Gunslinger archetypes). There may also be references to UM or UC feats or spells, though I haven't noticed any specifically. If it does come up, you can check the PRD or d20pfsrd for any material that needs referencing. But again, the vast majority of the book can be used as-is in combination with the core rules and APG, without even acknowledging the existence of UC or UM.

Lemaire Clément wrote:

hello again, is anybody out there able to tell me where each races came from, well I have the first two bestiaries but there are still some I can't find

please?

Bestiary 3, and the Dragon Empires Gazetteer/Primer should cover the rest (I think).

Was there one in particular you were looking for?

well

Fetchling
and chapter 3 race minus Kitsune and Merfolk

yeah I know thats quite a lot

thanks in advance

Benchak the Nightstalker wrote:

Lemaire Clément wrote:

hello again, is anybody out there able to tell me where each races came from, well I have the first two bestiaries but there are still some I can't find

please?

Bestiary 3, and the Dragon Empires Gazetteer/Primer should cover the rest (I think).

Was there one in particular you were looking for?

well

Fetchling
and chapter 3 race minus Kitsune and Merfolk

yeah I know thats quite a lot

thanks in advance

Fetchling: Bestiary 2

I think.

Petty Alchemy wrote:

Vaelkas wrote:

EDIT: Also I am really liking the Ironskin Monk Archetype for Hobgoblins (and that picture of the hobgoblin is sweet). Take a level in fighter and you have a monk in plate mail!

Tell me more, tell me more (like does he have a car?)

Nope, no car :p

The Ironskin monk is, as the name says, a monk based on shrugging off attacks. Rather than focusing on mobility, they focus on ... tanking, almost. It replaces the Wisdom to AC and the AC bonus, but unfortunately (for the platemail idea at least) still loses Flurry of Blows and Fast Movement if he wears armor.

Actually the only thing he should lose from the armor would be Resilience (Evasion for Fort saves). Tough as Nails replaces Fast Movement so no worries there. I don't see any thing in flurry of blows that says you lose it in armor, am I missing something?

EDIT: Added the bit about Tough as Nails.