|
Drow needs to be included to make that $$$. I suppose half-dragons or something similar would make $$$ as well.
I would like a PC viable lizardman as well.
I also think more races should be viable for PFS as well, although it should not be the ones included in the boons this year in order to make them more special. Next Gen Con can have more different races also.
Would anyone know if this will have reprinted material from the
Pathfinder Companion: Elves of Golarion,Pathfinder Companion: Humans of Golarion, etc,etc....
Can't wait to see this as a polished product.
I can't wait to see what they put in the book from the wish list thread.
|
I would love to see a race that is half-cyclops. Perhaps this race use to be slaves to a cycloptian race on a different plane, and have just recently gained freedom through some calamitous revolt. Or catpeople of some sort works too! Regardless I'm looking forward to this book as well. It's nice that Paizo listens to it's player base and tries to implement these wishes as best as possible.
Half-cyclops? what, it has one and half eyes?
Doesn't sound very good to me.
andrew
Are we going to see iconic characters for the following races (?):
Aasimar, Dhampir, Drow, Duergar, Fetchling, Grippli, Ifrit, Kitsune, Nagaji, Oread, Samsaran, Strix, Sylph, Svirfneblin, Tengu, Tiefling, Undine, Wayang
Are we going to see iconic characters for the following races (?):
Aasimar, Dhampir, Drow, Duergar, Fetchling, Grippli, Ifrit, Kitsune, Nagaji, Oread, Samsaran, Strix, Sylph, Svirfneblin, Tengu, Tiefling, Undine, Wayang
Probably not until some more new classes are introduced, since an iconic is based on the class and not the race. Now, if this had come out before Ulitmate Combat, maybe we could have seen an iconic Gunslinger who happened to be a Tiefling or an iconic Ninja who happened to be a Kitsune.
I would like to see included in the entry for goblinoid races the fact that they are all trained in stealth, regardless of class as per the goblinoid subtype entry in the glossary.
Not to be a dick but here is what I would like to see ... the folks at Paizo take their time with the Advanced Race Guide.
It is very disappointing to see so many two and three reviews for Ultimate Magic and Ultimate Combat. I am one of the disappointed three star Ultimate Magic hardcover owners. Which in turn has made me gun-shy about purchasing Ultimate Combat.
I understand there is the need to keep money coming in every month to pay the bills. But I am also a consumer who is speaking with their wallet. If you don't produce products at a certain quality level, you don't get my money.
Underdeveloped, underperforming and luke warm products are not what Paizo needs, what Paizo is known for, or what Pathfinder players and followers want. It was a problem at Wizards of the Coast with 3.5, and I would hate to see it happen so early on in Paizo's Pathfinder line.
To the folks at Paizo perhaps take a couple big steps back and take a good third and forth look at the Advanced Race Guide as it continues to develop. Maybe even bring in an outside consultant to review and give feedback on the project. Sometimes those on the inside are too close to the project to see the big picture, to see what is missing, underdeveloped, or needs more polishing on a product. Another suggestion would be to read through the Advanced Race Guide Messageboard posts from players (your consumers).
Don't get me wrong I love the Pathfinder game system and play it two to four times per month. But three underperforming products in a row starts to leave players (consumers) hesitating and wondering whether to invest more money in Paizo products.
I thought that the last few books were great for a number of different perspectives. There were options for both the player AND the GM. A large number of negative reviews only centered on the player perspective which is a lackluster way to approach it.
Any news as to when we might see a playtest availible for the race creation rules? I'd love to have them as early as possible so we the players and GMs can start running rampant with them and report back on what works and what doesn't. After all I think thats what made magus come out complete gold was the fact that we had it early and got to fine tune and give you feedback.
Of all the things that could be playtested. I think this is the #1 that customers are looking forward to and that needs to be put through its paces before it hits the printers.
Look forward to any news the fantastic people at Paizo can give us!
Any news as to when we might see a playtest availible for the race creation rules?
Soon!
It's my prerogative as a female... so is it April now? :)Impatient are we, well I also hate waiting. But if the product is to be done right, it needs time bake into the best possible ARGIs it April yet?Every race in the book includes new material. It's not just the stats you already have from the monster book presented in Core Rulebook format.Erik, can you settle a question for me? Is the dhampyr going to have abilities that it does not already have as a result of the previously printed material? I'm holding up a decision based on this for our next campaign. Thanks.You should read the description. Every playable race in the entire game will be in this book.
Plus new ones you can make from scratch.
Nope.
Still not April.
Something I would like to see is a race similar to Shifters. I thoroughly enjoyed playing them in 3.5 Eberron and have made one of my first shifter characters in multiple fantasy tabletop game settings that had a "fuzzy race". I know Paizo would be hard pressed to get the rights to shifters, but who knows, maybe with the rumored "Create-a-Race" rules I can finally play a "shifter" in Pathfinder.
If by "shifter" you mean "shapeshifter," the kitsune race from the Dragon Empires Gazeteer is supposed to be a shapeshifting race.
No OmNefarious means a race that is descended from Lycanthropes. They were an exclusive race next to the Warforged and Changling in the Ebberon Campaign Setting.
It provided folks an lycanthrope type option without delving into the LA problems.
less sabertooth more thundercats...
or more feral just less dead, not a fan of sabertooth....
I would like to see them like the Hani feline race from CJ Cherryh's The Pride of Chanur and it's sequels.
More like the new Thundercats but all of them have tails not just a some of them. I wonder what kind of cat or cats they based on. It would be cool to choose wich one, so it gives you some kind of trait/ability/bonus based on the type of cat.
I don't think I'll ever understand the all-pervasive compulsion for catfolk... I do understand peoples' love of their pet cats and all that entails. I just don't understand the payoff for roleplaying a humanoid that has a cat's face. The vast majority of catfolk I've seen created over the years seem to focus on things like improved agility and heightened senses. These two groups of bonuses are easily acquired without also mandating that one be descended from felines. So... what else motivates so many people so strongly to want to play a catfolk? Is it the furry ears? The fluffy tail? The whiskers? What? I'm also surprised that we don't see even a tiny fraction of a demand for dogfolk - aren't they just as popular and beloved a pet as cats?
Can anyone actually explain this gamer fetish for catfolk? Please? All I've ever gotten in response in the past are people claiming I hate cats (I don't) or that I'm trolling (I'm not).
I don't think I'll ever understand the all-pervasive compulsion for catfolk... I do understand peoples' love of their pet cats and all that entails. I just don't understand the payoff for roleplaying a humanoid that has a cat's face. The vast majority of catfolk I've seen created over the years seem to focus on things like improved agility and heightened senses. These two groups of bonuses are easily acquired without also mandating that one be descended from felines. So... what else motivates so many people so strongly to want to play a catfolk? Is it the furry ears? The fluffy tail? The whiskers? What? I'm also surprised that we don't see even a tiny fraction of a demand for dogfolk - aren't they just as popular and beloved a pet as cats?
Can anyone actually explain this gamer fetish for catfolk? Please? All I've ever gotten in response in the past are people claiming I hate cats (I don't) or that I'm trolling (I'm not).
I have to agree. I am in a LARP where mostly the ladies LOVE to play Cat peole, we call them Kalatani. I will admit they look good, but generally those ladies look good no matter what race they are playing.
I think alot of it has to do with the characteristics that cat lovers attribute to cats.
In my Larp, I had an encounter with a bunch of he cat people and I threw a ball of yarn at them.
Additionally, the Advanced Race Guide offers meaty sections on a dozen “spotlight” races that make interesting and exciting player character options, such as goblins, aasimar, tieflings, dhampyrs, drow, the elemental races from Bestiary 2, and several others.
While "dhampyr" is a valid way to spell it, the Bestiary 2 spells that race "dhampir." I'm guessing this is maybe a temporary product description, but the spelling difference should probably still be corrected.
Also, I just created a level 3 dhampir inquisitor of Sarenrae for a local game. (His light sensitivity means he perceives Sarenrae's presence all the more acutely.) I'm looking forward to seeing the new dhampir options.
I don't think I'll ever understand the all-pervasive compulsion for catfolk... I do understand peoples' love of their pet cats and all that entails. I just don't understand the payoff for roleplaying a humanoid that has a cat's face. The vast majority of catfolk I've seen created over the years seem to focus on things like improved agility and heightened senses. These two groups of bonuses are easily acquired without also mandating that one be descended from felines. So... what else motivates so many people so strongly to want to play a catfolk? Is it the furry ears? The fluffy tail? The whiskers? What? I'm also surprised that we don't see even a tiny fraction of a demand for dogfolk - aren't they just as popular and beloved a pet as cats?
Can anyone actually explain this gamer fetish for catfolk? Please? All I've ever gotten in response in the past are people claiming I hate cats (I don't) or that I'm trolling (I'm not).
I've never understood the appeal of Tolkien-influenced elves (not the short elves from fairy tales, but the immortal elitist developers of magic and archery) at all. I just can't see myself ever playing a two-century old pointed-eared snob. And as you can see (or rather, read), this frustration with the popularity of elves has metastasized into a bile-covered revulsion. Understand that I don't hate elves in general, just how D&D's archetypal elves are presented and flavored.
The same can't be said for halfings. I've always f~&@ing hated halflings beginning from the first time I read The Hobbit.
Like Mournblade94 said, those of us that like catfolk are drawn to the race because in many ways, we easily identify with cats and their behavior. Others just want new races to replace races they actively dislike.
Playing catpeople is a way of playing a "monstrous" race without having to be something seen as a "bad guy". That or someone somewhere in the internet would say we are all closet furries.
About 83% of people are closet furries because of Disney, if you define a 'furry' in the loosest of terms :).
Regardless of whether or not this book specifically has cat people in it (I think I read somewhere that it will because of the Bestiary 3, but I could be wrong), the build-a-race section will probably work wonders, if it is done properly.
Now all I need is an official Prestige Class and Archetype building guide so I can feel more confident about my creations, and I will be content. After all, there's guides for building monsters (Bestiary) and guides for building spells (Ultimate Magic) and guides for building NPCs and Worlds (GameMastery Guide), so why not have a guide for building archetypes and prestige classes? We'll call it ... the GameMastery Guide II!
(re-posting this from the Store Blog comments section)
Was it intentional to change Dreamspeaker's benefits from those listed in the elf's racial variants in the APG? In the APG the +1 bonus was to divination spells and sleep effects, whereas here it is a +1 bonus to divine spells and spells that produce sleep effects.
Divination spells get a huge boost, becoming divine spells of any sort, and sleep effects get a nerf, becoming spells that produce sleep effects (no spell-like/supernatural sleep effects here). All in all, it seems a net gain, though.
Dreamspeaker: A few elves have the ability to tap into the power of sleep, dreams, and prescient reverie. Elves with this racial trait add +1 to saving throw DCs for spells of the divination school and sleep effects they cast. In addition, elves with a Charisma of 15 or higher may use dream once per day as a spell-like ability (caster level is equal to the elf’s character level). This racial trait replaces the elven immunities racial trait.
Dreamspeaker (2 RP): Prerequisites: None; Benefit: Members of this race gain a +1 bonus to the saving throw DCs of divine spells and spells that produce sleep effects that they cast. In addition, if a member of this race has a Charisma of 15 or higher, it may use dream once per day as a spell-like ability (with a caster level equal to the individual’s character level).
Also, Weapon Familiarity seems better than the standard version. Auto-proficiency with racial weapons, not just treating them as martial weapons.
And, is it assumed that Charisma is the default ability for the Spell-like Ability ability?
Prehensile tail has a typo. the second 'cannot' should be 'can.'
Still reading.
I love the concept, and will have a lot of fun playing with it.
Stuff about Dreamspeaker
Considering how you can't spell "divination" without "divin" and using a divination spell is called 'divining,' I'd be willing to bet at least one vestigial organ that the Advanced Race Guide version of dreamspeak is a typo.
I think it goes either or for Weapon familiarity. Elves have the same thing where they're auto-proficient with specific martial weapons and then treat a specific exotic weapon as martial. In short, it's free proficiency if it's martial and if you pick an exotic weapon (basically a weapon you'd normally need a feat for), it's now martial.
Charisma is always the default stat for Spell-like abilities unless noted otherwise (like the Spell Expertise feat).
|
Although they're probably copyright-protected, I'd love to see Draconians make an appearance in Pathfinder. Dragonlance was always my favorite setting and after reading Kang's Doom Brigade's storyline I was hooked by the idea of playing one in a campaign.
Probably just wishful thinking, but still worth a shot.
Although they're probably copyright-protected, I'd love to see Draconians make an appearance in Pathfinder. Dragonlance was always my favorite setting and after reading Kang's Doom Brigade's storyline I was hooked by the idea of playing one in a campaign.
Probably just wishful thinking, but still worth a shot.
You certainly could not call them Draconians. But I do not think that creating a race of Dragon Warriors can be copyrighted. I remember a cool Dragon article from the 80's before dragon lance came out, where you cast spells on a Dragon's Tooth, plant it in the ground and a Dragon Warrior formed.
You certainly could not call them Draconians. But I do not think that creating a race of Dragon Warriors can be copyrighted. I remember a cool Dragon article from the 80's before dragon lance came out, where you cast spells on a Dragon's Tooth, plant it in the ground and a Dragon Warrior formed.
Considering that the concept of planting a dragon's tooth into the ground and warriors popping out is directly from Greek mythology and is therefore a trope "Older Than Writing," you are in deed correct in that it cannot be copyrighted :).
Celebrating here!
This is exactly the book I've been waiting for since APG.
Yes this one interest me more than ultimate combat and ultimate magic did. Also I like the race creation point system and can't wait to see wat the guys at Paizo do with the finished product.
|
You certainly could not call them Draconians. But I do not think that creating a race of Dragon Warriors can be copyrighted. I remember a cool Dragon article from the 80's before dragon lance came out, where you cast spells on a Dragon's Tooth, plant it in the ground and a Dragon Warrior formed.Considering that the concept of planting a dragon's tooth into the ground and warriors popping out is directly from Greek mythology and is therefore a trope "Older Than Writing," you are in deed correct in that it cannot be copyrighted :).
I'd forgotten all about that. How about Spartoi ("sown" per the Wikipedia entry) as the race of dragon-men.
Okay, most folks don't like this idea, but some do, myself included. I like races and classes that go hand and hand. If I wanna play this Ninja, I make up a race that goes with the back story, and this class. I want a perfect story, with all the draw backs, so if I can get something in the future that gives my players guide lines for the home-made characters, that would be sweet. Maybe a few examples of races geared for classes along with their back stories. I just wanna have a rule I can reference to back me up when my players go CRRRASEY. Yeah, that was supposed to be, "gay", no offense.
-I hope the race building section gives options for the Aberration, Dragon, and Magical Beast types
-That there will be lots of racial feats
-That there will be racial favored class bonuses
-A lot of new racial traits
-Maybe some racial magic items, spells, or weapons/tools
I'm just hoping they allow goblins a way to function as wizards or alchemists while still being illiterate. I like the flavour it gives the race, but does mean they need a work around - even if it costs them their first level feat.
|
|
I'm just hoping they allow goblins a way to function as wizards or alchemists while still being illiterate. I like the flavour it gives the race, but does mean they need a work around - even if it costs them their first level feat.
Goblins of Golarion states that goblin alchemists are perfectly fine, their formula books are pictures only, no text.
Wizards are kinda shafted, tho :)
-I hope the race building section gives options for the Aberration, Dragon, and Magical Beast types
-That there will be lots of racial feats
-That there will be racial favored class bonuses
-A lot of new racial traits
-Maybe some racial magic items, spells, or weapons/tools
Using Ultimate Magic and Ultimate Combat as a guide, combined with the fact that Ultimate Equipment is due our in Q3 of the same year, I'd highly doubt that we'd get racial magic items / weapons / tools.
I'd honestly be a little surprised if we didn't get racial Cleric domains for the base races, sort of like what Forgotten Realms did (i.e. Human domain, Goblin Domain, etc.). Heck, you could even go about making a lot of the subraces into subdomains, i.e. Human could have Tiefling and Aasimar as subdomains, Drow could be an Elf subdomain, etc.
Favored Class bonuses all but have to be in this book, in my opinion. There aren't any options for Magus / Gunslinger in their respective books and one of the major factors that makes core races a little bit better than monstrous races are the various favored class bonuses that the core races receive. Racial Feats are all but a given, in my opinion. There are some in the APG, UM, and UC, so it would make sense for them to add a bunch of options in the Core book.
I personally think that a lot of the Bestiary Races (I'm looking at you, Elemental Races) need a slew of alternate traits in order to be playable. Since not every Sylph wants to be a Sorcerer ....
A trait for Dhampirs to have a bite attack would be nice and some other vampire related abilities through traits, alternate racial abilities, and feats.
Loved the alternate racial abilities in the APG as well. Hope to see them for the not so standard races like Aasimar, Catfolk, Sylph, Grippli,etc.
Can't wait to see the art for this but that will be awhile before that happens.
But of course this makes me even more exited for the Beastairy 3.
-I hope the race building section gives options for the Aberration, Dragon, and Magical Beast types
-That there will be lots of racial feats
-That there will be racial favored class bonuses
-A lot of new racial traits
-Maybe some racial magic items, spells, or weapons/tools
I like all of that, but I have a bigger over-arching desire: I would like your racial choice to matter beyond low-levels, mechanically speaking. I would like to see racial powers develop, rather than be set at first level. Racial feat trees would be an acceptable solution, but they should really reflect something of the racial mechanics already there, not be a feat anyone could take that just happens to have to word "orc" or "elf" thrown in requirements section. I'm looking at you, APG bard feats...