Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Adventure Card Game Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Pathfinder Adventures Pathfinder Campaign Setting Pathfinder Player Companion Pathfinder Accessories Pathfinder Miniatures Pathfinder Fiction Pathfinder® Society™ Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Compatible Products Pathfinder Apparel & Gifts Pathfinder Licensed Products
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Advanced Race Guide (OGL)

****½ (based on 27 ratings)
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Advanced Race Guide (OGL)
Show Description For:
Non-Mint

Add Hardcover: $39.99

Add PDF: $9.99

Add Non-Mint: $39.99 $29.99

Facebook Twitter Email

Get the most out of your heritage with the Pathfinder RPG Advanced Race Guide! Embrace your inner monster by playing one of 30 iconic races from mythology and gaming history, or build an entirely new race of your own. If classic races are more your style, go beyond the stereotypes for elves, dwarves, and the other core races with new options and equipment to help you stand out from the crowd.

The Pathfinder RPG Advanced Race Guide is a bold new companion to the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook. This imaginative tabletop game builds on more than 10 years of system development and an Open Playtest featuring more than 50,000 gamers to create a cutting-edge RPG experience that brings the all-time best-selling set of fantasy rules into the new millennium.

The 256-page Pathfinder RPG Advanced Race Guide includes:

  • New rules and options to help you customize all seven of the classic core races, including new racial traits, racial subtypes, and racial archetypes.
  • 30 exotic races, from mischievous goblins and reptilian kobolds to crow-headed tengus and deadly drow, each with complete rules for use as player characters, plus archetypes, alternate racial traits, and other options for maximum customization.
  • A complete and balanced system for creating an unlimited number of new races, mixing and matching powers and abilities to form characters and cultures specific to your campaign.
  • Tons of new race-specific equipment, feats, spells, and magic items for each of the races detailed!
  • AND MUCH, MUCH MORE!

ISBN-13: 978-1-60125-390-3

Note: This product is part of the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscription.

Product Availability


Hardcover: Ships from our warehouse in 2 to 14 business days.

PDF: Fulfilled immediately. Will be added to your My Downloads Page immediately upon purchase of PDF.

Non-Mint: Ships from our warehouse in 2 to 14 business days. This product is non-mint. Refunds are not available for non-mint products. The standard version of this product can be found here.

Are there errors or omissions in this product information? Got corrections? Let us know at webmaster@paizo.com.

PZO1121


See Also:



Product Discussion (1,413)
251 to 300 of 1,413 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I remember awhile back that they were thinking of racial abilities you get based on your character level but I not sure why they change there minds. But as for me I like the idea always have.


Sorry if this has already been addressed elsewhere, but I was wondering if this means that playable races for PFS play will expand beyond the core 7. If so, then YAY!
If not, then ;_;

I'll still probably get it. Seems to be too interesting to pass up even if some of the things are going to be closed.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I haven't heard about any updates for the races for PFS ether.


I'm with Mikaze, hoping that some slight differences from the humanoid form will be possible in the race creation section, like Snaketails instead of legs or an extra pair of arms. The former especially shouldn't be a cause for huge imbalances, all it would probably do is change speed and a few movement related rules and maybe need something to deal with magical footwear.


Ajaxis wrote:
Golden-Esque wrote:
Mournblade94 wrote:
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.

Spartoi already exist in Pathfinder as undead warriors that spring from teeth planted in the ground. The singular form is Spartolos and the creature is listed in the bestiary for the Council of Thieves AP. They're undead warriors that spring-up from "Spartoi Seeds," which are teeth stained by ash. While usually appearing as dragon teeth, spartoi seeds sometimes also take the form of serpent, wolf, or human teeth. Spartoi gain special bonuses to flanking and channel resistance by working with other spartoi. Their illustration makes them look more like undead Roman legionnaires than any kind of dragon men.

Since the Spartolos appeared in Council of Thieves, hopefully it will be in Bestiary 3.


Paizo Charter Superscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
Threeshades wrote:
I'm with Mikaze, hoping that some slight differences from the humanoid form will be possible in the race creation section, like Snaketails instead of legs or an extra pair of arms.

Interesting what some people consider a "slight change".

Changing legs to a snake tail shouldn't be possible for a humanoid. Snake tails should not appear on humanoids; that's for monstrous humanoids (four arms, too, probably), and I don't think changing creature type should be a bigger thing.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Merfolk are humaniods so having a snake tail is not that different.


Paizo Charter Superscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
Dragon78 wrote:
Merfolk are humaniods so having a snake tail is not that different.

Huh, you're right. I always thought that humanoids were supposed to be, well, humanoid. :)

The rules for the humanoid creature type say "A humanoid usually has two arms, two legs, and one head, or a human-like torso, arms, and a head." Ah well, just usually, then.

For the monstrous humanoid type it says "Monstrous humanoids are similar to humanoids, but with monstrous or animalistic features." That makes me think that races like the merfolk should actually be filed in this category.


Zaister wrote:
Dragon78 wrote:
Merfolk are humaniods so having a snake tail is not that different.

Huh, you're right. I always thought that humanoids were supposed to be, well, humanoid. :)

The rules for the humanoid creature type say "A humanoid usually has two arms, two legs, and one head, or a human-like torso, arms, and a head." Ah well, just usually, then.

For the monstrous humanoid type it says "Monstrous humanoids are similar to humanoids, but with monstrous or animalistic features." That makes me think that races like the merfolk should actually be filed in this category.

Well the description also fits gnolls and lizardfolk, both now humanoid (as opposed to 3.5 where they were monstrous humanoids) the category got broader I guess.


Threeshades wrote:
Well the description also fits gnolls and lizardfolk, both now humanoid (as opposed to 3.5 where they were monstrous humanoids) the category got broader I guess.

In 3.5 gnolls were humanoid (gnoll) and lizardfolk were humanoid (reptilian)


HalifaxDM wrote:
Threeshades wrote:
Well the description also fits gnolls and lizardfolk, both now humanoid (as opposed to 3.5 where they were monstrous humanoids) the category got broader I guess.
In 3.5 gnolls were humanoid (gnoll) and lizardfolk were humanoid (reptilian)

Then it was 3.0.

Anyway the only major difference between a lizardfolk and a humanoid with a snaketail for legs or a merfolk is a pair of limbs, and that doesn't have to affect the rules any more than modifiying speed.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I remember Gnolls and Lizardfolk being classified as Humaniods since 3rd edition started, they were never Monstrous Humaniods.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The mechanical difference between Humanoid and Monstrous Humanoid is currently defined by what spells affect and Favored Enemy details, for the most part. The tails, wings, etc has shrunk to the level of Fluff, again, for the most part. All in all, I think it works better.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I still would love some options for serpentine lower body, fish, horse, lion, etc.

hooved feat would be nice.

Magical Beast, Dragon, and Aberration choices.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Hooved feet without requiring the race to not be humanoids would be great, as would, again, snake-tail/no leg options and other such support for stranger anatomy.

I'm really hoping the calls for that stuff in the playtest forum were taken to heart.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Yes but deffinetly have to be monstrous humaniod, aberration, or outsider to have tentacles. Well of course plants would have tendrils or vines.

The only tiny sized creature type I would play would be Fey, but having the option for other types would be nice for variaty's sake.


Dragon78 wrote:

Yes but deffinetly have to be monstrous humaniod, aberration, or outsider to have tentacles. Well of course plants would have tendrils or vines.

The only tiny sized creature type I would play would be Fey, but having the option for other types would be nice for variaty's sake.

Don't forget the star-nosed mole: Youtube star-nosed mole

They have tentacles on their noses.

Guessing there are also some other creatures of the animal type that have tentacles.

Of course I suppose that's less relevant if we're talking about player races. But if gnolls are humanoids, then star-nosed mole people could be too. Or Squid people.


Dragon78 wrote:
Yes but deffinetly have to be monstrous humaniod, aberration, or outsider to have tentacles.

Why is that?

What exactly makes you draw the line at tentacles?

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Threeshades wrote:
Dragon78 wrote:
Yes but deffinetly have to be monstrous humaniod, aberration, or outsider to have tentacles.

Why is that?

What exactly makes you draw the line at tentacles?

Have to ask the same question.

I'd really rather not force any race intended to be a player option out of the stock "humanoid" classification for a lot of reasons, many of which involve rules effects which don't make any sense for the flavor.

Besides, not every homebrew world is going to adhere to the same strict standard expectations. That and I don't really see this body type as being any more monstrous than a merperson.

To require a race to be of a specific type to qualify for tentacles is like requiring a race to be Fey in order to be Tiny, really.


Exactly. Why create artificial restrictions to certain things when they're not necessary?

It's not like we're asking for options to make something completely insane like a snake-tailed, winged zombie-pigman with 3 heads, 17 eyes and 8 tentacles for arms, merely the option to exchange one or two humanoid features for something else, which doesn't even have to be an inherent bonus but can come with both advantages and disadvantages, simply for more variety.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Options for one eye or more then two eyes.

Andoran

If I missed this, I apologize - I only skimmed through the six pages worth of posts and did not really follow the playtest much.

It seems like most, if not all of the playable races are of the less than CR 1 type. Has there been any discussion about how more powerful monsterous races can be a balanced, playable PC race? Obviously there is no more level adjustment ...


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Marc Radle wrote:

If I missed this, I apologize - I only skimmed through the six pages worth of posts and did not really follow the playtest much.

It seems like most, if not all of the playable races are of the less than CR 1 type. Has there been any discussion about how more powerful monsterous races can be a balanced, playable PC race? Obviously there is no more level adjustment ...

One suggestion was in the playtest document and will likely be in the book.

Andoran

Azure_Zero wrote:
Marc Radle wrote:

If I missed this, I apologize - I only skimmed through the six pages worth of posts and did not really follow the playtest much.

It seems like most, if not all of the playable races are of the less than CR 1 type. Has there been any discussion about how more powerful monsterous races can be a balanced, playable PC race? Obviously there is no more level adjustment ...

One suggestion was in the playtest document and will likely be in the book.

Do you by any chance recall what that was?

Cheliax

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Marc Radle wrote:
Azure_Zero wrote:
Marc Radle wrote:

If I missed this, I apologize - I only skimmed through the six pages worth of posts and did not really follow the playtest much.

It seems like most, if not all of the playable races are of the less than CR 1 type. Has there been any discussion about how more powerful monsterous races can be a balanced, playable PC race? Obviously there is no more level adjustment ...

One suggestion was in the playtest document and will likely be in the book.
Do you by any chance recall what that was?

Depending on how many points you use to build the race, and your character level, there is an adjustment to the APL of the party so that more difficult creatures turn up.

One of the example races in the back of the playtest doc is the Frost Giant, so the system is pretty capable...


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Marc Radle wrote:
Azure_Zero wrote:
Marc Radle wrote:

If I missed this, I apologize - I only skimmed through the six pages worth of posts and did not really follow the playtest much.

It seems like most, if not all of the playable races are of the less than CR 1 type. Has there been any discussion about how more powerful monsterous races can be a balanced, playable PC race? Obviously there is no more level adjustment ...

One suggestion was in the playtest document and will likely be in the book.
Do you by any chance recall what that was?

On Page 3 of the ARG playtest

Challenging Advanced and Monstrous Races
Because they have powerful racial traits and abilities, advanced
and monstrous races require greater challenges, especially
at lower levels. The basic guideline for accomplishing this is
to treat a group of characters with advanced and monstrous
races as a level or more higher for a number of levels based
on their total RP spent, using the following chart. When you
create encounters or adventures for the group, treat them as
the adjusted level instead of their actual level. For groups with
mixed power levels, average the RP and round the results to
the nearest multiple of 10.
____________________Level
RP __1–5 ___ __6–10_ _11–15__ __16–20_
20 (+1 level) (+0 level) (+0 level) (+0 level)
30 (+2 level) (+1 level) (+0 level) (+0 level)
40 (+3 level) (+2 level) (+1 level) (+0 level)


Didn't they have a sneak peek of the real cover?

Grand Lodge

Are we going to see additional favored class options, like what we saw in Advanced Player's Guide? Specifically, are we going to see an addendum to those rules to make up for the classes that came after that book was published, namely the Magus, Gunslinger, Ninja, Samurai, and Antipaladin?*

*Yes I know antipaladin was in APG.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Strife2002 wrote:

Are we going to see additional favored class options, like what we saw in Advanced Player's Guide? Specifically, are we going to see an addendum to those rules to make up for the classes that came after that book was published, namely the Magus, Gunslinger, Ninja, Samurai, and Antipaladin?*

*Yes I know antipaladin was in APG.

That was requested and is likely to be printed, but no guarantees at this point.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm pretty sick of Aasimar and Tieflings; I was hoping for Lawful and Chaotic plane-touched getting equal billing. Surely I can't be alone in this?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
RedBeardSean wrote:
I'm pretty sick of Aasimar and Tieflings; I was hoping for Lawful and Chaotic plane-touched getting equal billing. Surely I can't be alone in this?

I wouldn't mind seeing those and a Neutral plane-touched as well.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

Well, at least we are getting at least some sort of description for the various races. If I remember correctly, we did not get that kind of treatment of these races in 3.5.

Concerning something else, I will be playing a newly created Sylph air elementalist wizard in a new campaign. Did anything change concerning the abilities of the Sylph? Most importantly, does Air Affinity now help with being an air elementalist wizard (as it currently helps a sorcerer and a cleric, but not a wizard)?

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber

I know there's going to be plenty of mechanics present for these races, but I wonder how much flavor is going to be there for the races getting the 6-page treatment, especially since it doesn't have to be bound to what's canon in Golarion. Could we see some interesting non-always-evil cultural details or suggestions for races like orcs, goblins, etc.?

Contributor

Mikaze wrote:

I know there's going to be plenty of mechanics present for these races, but I wonder how much flavor is going to be there for the races getting the 6-page treatment, especially since it doesn't have to be bound to what's canon in Golarion. Could we see some interesting non-always-evil cultural details or suggestions for races like orcs, goblins, etc.?

Hopefully a lot of flavor!

Qadira RPG Superstar 2009 Top 4

Well... it seems there's a lot more stuff to add the Ogerkin templete to.


Spiral_Ninja wrote:
RedBeardSean wrote:
I'm pretty sick of Aasimar and Tieflings; I was hoping for Lawful and Chaotic plane-touched getting equal billing. Surely I can't be alone in this?
I wouldn't mind seeing those and a Neutral plane-touched as well.

Trippo and ditto.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I believe the actual cover of the book is previewed in the back of the Pathfinder Society Scenarios just released.

Page 25 of #03-11
Page 25 of #03-12

~@~

Cheliax

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Cards, Companion, Maps, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The cover art is also in the newest Wayfinder #6


Will this book give us back things like "wood elves" or "forest gnomes" and the like?

Cheliax

Lord Fyre wrote:
Cat Girls?

Bestiary 3 has it.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

So how many pages are the base races getting?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

Can't wait the book to come out.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Troy70 wrote:
Can't wait the book to come out.

Your not the only one.

I would like it now, but would prefer a well polished product than a half-baked one.


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Gururamalamaswami wrote:
Will this book give us back things like "wood elves" or "forest gnomes" and the like?

Not as a separate subrace, but probably as Alternate Racial Traits. With the exception of the Drow, Paizo has done a good job at preventing subrace bloat (and even then, the drow are a classic subrace that are actually interesting. Wood Elves are just elves that live in the woods and have slightly different racial stats to make the min-maxers happy).


I thought wood elves were already discussed in Elves of Golarion?


With the addition of gunslingers in Ultimate Combat I would love to see the Giff make an appearance.


Thunderforge wrote:
With the addition of gunslingers in Ultimate Combat I would love to see the Giff make an appearance.

A Giff gunslinger with a brace of a half dozen pistols and a wide bore musket. Johdpurs and monocle required.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Leo_Negri wrote:
Thunderforge wrote:
With the addition of gunslingers in Ultimate Combat I would love to see the Giff make an appearance.
A Giff gunslinger with a brace of a half dozen pistols and a wide bore musket. Johdpurs and monocle required.

Don't forget your epaulettes!

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion Subscriber

Giffs are WotC IP, so no go.

Lantern Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
Gorbacz wrote:
Giffs are WotC IP, so no go.

So, folks can just create their own homebrewed race of pachyderm-like humanoids with a penchant for firearms and travel to otherworlds with an urge to conquer... four-armed Elephant Men of Mars... er, Castrovel... FTW! ;)

251 to 300 of 1,413 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / paizo.com / Product Discussion / Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Advanced Race Guide (OGL) All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.



©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.