|
My initial thoughts on converting the Arcana Unearthed Races for Pathfinder.
Note that, with the abandonment of racial levels, race-specific Feats seemed the route to go, although having races that add abilities later (at say, 4th and 6th levels) could also work (I chose Feats because it put the choice in the player hands, and didn't risk overpowering those races compared to core races, which *don't* get new shiny at 4th, 6th, etc.). The race-specific Feats I just kind of threw down there, and didn't detail greatly, so that would need to be cleaned up, if used seriously.
I started looking at converting some of the classes, but slapped the hell out of myself and stopped. I have enough to do. :)
|
|
Why would you abandon the racial levels?
They don't appear to be slated for use in Pathfinder (and, IMO, never worked well anyway).
Parceling them out as race-exclusive Feats better allows, IMO, each individual player to choose to develop racial heritage, without sacrificing class features (which, in Pathfinder, are intended to reward 'going all the way to 20,' again, discouraging racial levels).
Using Feats continues to assign a sort of 'cost' to a powerful race, or, at least, to a member of a race that wishes to further explore their heritage (such as a Giant that wishes to advance to size Large), while not holding them back and messing with encounter balance like a racial level, level adjustment or racial HD would.
Why would you abandon the racial levels?They don't appear to be slated for use in Pathfinder (and, IMO, never worked well anyway).
Parceling them out as race-exclusive Feats better allows, IMO, each individual player to choose to develop racial heritage, without sacrificing class features (which, in Pathfinder, are intended to reward 'going all the way to 20,' again, discouraging racial levels).
Let's take the Giant racial levels as an example. In three levels, you get (in AE) +2 Str, +2 Wis, +2 Con, large size and the giant spell template.
So if you change that to a string of feats, either (a) you convert it to two feats in order to give the same benefits in 3 levels (in which case those would be two of the most bad-ass feats in the game!), or (b) you stretch it out into 3+ feats (in which case it drags out over many levels and sucks up a lot of resources), or (c) you give a weaker subset of benefits with a couple of feats (in which case it's much less interesting, IMO).
I like the racial level idea better. It's not sacrificing class features any more than regular multi-classing or prestige classing.
|
|
Let's take the Giant racial levels as an example. In three levels, you get (in AE) +2 Str, +2 Wis, +2 Con, large size and the giant spell template.
And you'll note I didn't give all of that stuff out.
Ultimately, all racial levels do is ensure that, in an effort to be 'more Giant-y,' your character is behind at whatever profession they've chosen. The other spellcasters have their 3rd level spells, and you're still using 2nd levels spells, or even 1st level spells, if you chose to fully develop your Giant nature at the beginning of your career.
If you go for all three Giant levels and then all three evolved Giant levels, your Giant gonna-be-an-Iron-Witch-some-day has *NO Witch abilities at all* until 7th level, when she gains the abilities of a 1st level Witch.
The 7th level Sibbecai Warmain who spent a few feats to pick up racial characteristics like a Bite attack or Scent, has all the abilities of a 7th level Warmain, while your 6th level Giant / 1st level Iron Witch might as well have taken a Belt of Giant Strength and 6 levels of Warrior, (except, if she had, she'd have better weapon and armor proficiencies and 2 higher Base Attack).
So if you change that to a string of feats, either (a) you convert it to two feats in order to give the same benefits in 3 levels (in which case those would be two of the most bad-ass feats in the game!), or (b) you stretch it out into 3+ feats (in which case it drags out over many levels and sucks up a lot of resources), or (c) you give a weaker subset of benefits with a couple of feats (in which case it's much less interesting, IMO).
Or, (c), you could make a series of exclusive Racial Feats that are better than some starter feats, but not egregiously so (which I tried to do), and allow any member of any race to choose to develop their heritage *without* crippling themselves and becoming increasingly unbalanced for CR-appropriate challenges.
Using Feats, a Verrik Soulknife or Monk can become 'more Verrik-y' without sacrificing his class progression, BAB, saves, etc. Verrik levels, for example, aren't bad for a spellcaster with few level-dependent other class abilities, like a 3.X Sorcerer or Cleric, but are a huge drag for a Witch, Runethane or Pathfinder Wizard / Sorcerer / Cleric who has class-level dependent abilities, as the character could be stuck getting their 8th level class ability at 14th level, if they take the full set of Verrik levels.
But who cares. That's my solution. If y'all can come up with a decent set of racial levels that don't gimp a Verrik Monk or a Giant Witch, then I'll be utterly impressed and congratulate you heartily.
I just didn't feel it was worth the effort, since Pathfinder was moving away from LA-style mechanics and encouraging 20 level class progressions with capstone abilities. It felt like a lot of work to end up going in the opposite direction of the current design goals.
Let's take the Giant racial levels as an example. In three levels, you get (in AE) +2 Str, +2 Wis, +2 Con, large size and the giant spell template.And you'll note I didn't give all of that stuff out.
Ultimately, all racial levels do is ensure that, in an effort to be 'more Giant-y,' your character is behind at whatever profession they've chosen.
Except if your profession is being a big guy who beats the snot out of little people, then you're doing just great.
If you really believe that racial multi-classing should be removed, doesn't the same argument (you don't want to get behind at whatever profession you've chosen) logically lead to banning multi-classing altogether?
|
|
If you really believe that racial multi-classing should be removed, doesn't the same argument (you don't want to get behind at whatever profession you've chosen) logically lead to banning multi-classing altogether?
Or I could just eliminate the whole class-based system, while we're going into straw man-land! That'll work great with Pathfinder...
Or not. As I said;
If y'all can come up with a decent set of racial levels that don't gimp a Verrik Monk or a Giant Witch, then I'll be utterly impressed and congratulate you heartily.
I'm not interested enough in this to continue defend further levels of minutiae that distort the point I was making. Good luck with this project, I love a lot of the stuff in Arcana Unearthed and would love to see how it turns out.
If you really believe that racial multi-classing should be removed, doesn't the same argument (you don't want to get behind at whatever profession you've chosen) logically lead to banning multi-classing altogether?Or I could just eliminate the whole class-based system, while we're going into straw man-land! That'll work great with Pathfinder...
Or not. As I said;
If y'all can come up with a decent set of racial levels that don't gimp a Verrik Monk or a Giant Witch, then I'll be utterly impressed and congratulate you heartily.
To me that's not any different than saying: "If y'all can come up with a set of druid levels that don't gimp a Verrik Monk or a Giant Witch, then I'll be utterly impressed." That would be an interesting accomplishment, but currently not every class gets a benefit from multiclassing with every other class.
I'm not interested enough in this to continue defend further levels of minutiae that distort the point I was making. Good luck with this project, I love a lot of the stuff in Arcana Unearthed and would love to see how it turns out.
Too bad; I thought it was an interesting discussion.
|
|
To me that's not any different than saying: "If y'all can come up with a set of druid levels that don't gimp a Verrik Monk or a Giant Witch, then I'll be utterly impressed." That would be an interesting accomplishment, but currently not every class gets a benefit from multiclassing with every other class.
Class and Race are different things. As of 3rd edition, any race can be any class. Creating a series of six Giant levels that punish any spellcaster that takes them (by denying them six levels of class advancement and five levels of spellcasting progression to be 'Giants') is quite similar to going back to 1st edition and saying that Dwarves can't be Wizards (or that 1/2 Orcs can only be 4th level Clerics). [Forgive me if this example is not accurate, I don't have a 1st level PHB handy.]
Not every class needs to multiclass optimally with every other class, but *races* shouldn't *punish* members of the majority of the classes that take them. That's taking options out of the game, not adding them to the game, and, IMO, goes against the whole point of adding new races to the game.
If the Giant intends to become a Barbarian or Monk or Paladin or Fighter, she's *still* better-served to take levels in those classes, to benefit from increased BAB (in three of those cases) and advancement of Rage/Damage Reduction, Unarmed Damage/AC progression, Smite/LoH progression or Fighter bonus feats (and, in Pathfinder, other Fighter class abilities), instead of Giant levels. If a choice is *always* mechanically worse than any other choice (and will make CR-appropriate missions more difficult for the entire party, thus punishing every other player at the table for your choice), then it's not much of a choice at all, IMO. (And this entire darned paragraph about Giant levels being a horrible choice even for Barbarians, Fighters, Paladins and Monks wouldn't be needed if you hadn't taken exception at my example choices of Verrik Monk or Giant Witch, attacking *an example*, instead of the actual argument itself. It's why these internet discussions are so frustrating to me, because that's the most common disagreement tactic on the internet, to pick one single fiddly detail from a carefully-considered argument and ignore the thrust of the argument to focus on pecking-to-death that one detail.)
Like I said, bring your A game. Offer up some Giant (or whatever) racial levels that either meld better with class-based advancement, or are at least so incredibly awesome that they don't end up being weaker than the most optimal race/class combination, and *vastly* worse then the less optimal choices (like Psion + any racial level that doesn't improve manifester levels, or Warlock + any racial level that doesn't improve Eldritch Blast progression, or Druid + any racial level, ever).
Shooting down my ideas is easy. I shot down a couple of alternatives myself, before settling on Feats. I post new rules options or Golarion fluff almost every day, and I shoot down two things for every one that I think is worth wasting electrons posting. Back up your criticism of my choice by offering up a superior alternative, and I'm not being sarcastic at all when I say that I'll use a superior alternative in a cold second. This isn't me being defensive of something I wrote. I've written and edited professionally, and butchering your babies is the name of the game. If you can make something that meshes with the existing races & classes, play-balance and the Pathfinder style (which is moving away from LA) *better,* I'm eager to see it.
I *wanted* to use a system that was more 'true' to what Monte Cook had provided in Arcana Unearthed, but I found it to be to be, to someone of my skills, unworkable. If I had a few months to work on it *and was being paid,* I might figure something out. I might not. Clearly Monte, who is far better at game design than I, didn't succeed at it, as the racial levels he provides are strictly worse than advancing in almost any PC class that has level-dependent progression (which, last I checked, was all of them, with both the Arcana Unearthed and Pathfinder classes, both much more 'filled' with level-based progressions, such as Witch talents or new Runes, being even *less* suitable for use with Racial levels).
*I say 'almost,' because, before Pathfinder added level-dependent progression abilities via Sorcerer Bloodlines, the Verrik and Loresong racial levels (and Human Evolved levels, especially!) were, at most levels, better than advancing single-class Sorcerer, and sometimes even Wizard or Cleric. Since this conversion is intended for Pathfinder, the loss of Sorcerer Bloodline advancement or Wizard School power advancement, or a Clerics Domain powers advancement, again becomes an issue. Again, another paragraph necessitated by the nature of internet discourse, as I attempt to intercept incoming fire.
Class and Race are different things. As of 3rd edition, any race can be any class. Creating a series of six Giant levels that punish any spellcaster that takes them (by denying them six levels of class advancement and five levels of spellcasting progression to be 'Giants') is quite similar to going back to 1st edition and saying that Dwarves can't be Wizards (or that 1/2 Orcs can only be 4th level Clerics). [Forgive me if this example is not accurate, I don't have a 1st level PHB handy.]Not every class needs to multiclass optimally with every other class, but *races* shouldn't *punish* members of the majority of the classes that take them. That's taking options out of the game, not adding them to the game, and, IMO, goes against the whole point of adding new races to the game.
Certainly a giant non-melee spellcaster can make a sub-optimal choice and take levels in the giant racial class. Similarly, with your proposed racial feats, a giant non-melee spellcaster can make a sub-optimal choice and take "Ancient Strength" and "Blood Awakening". That doesn't make your racial feats a "punishment" any more than the racial class is.
If the Giant intends to become a Barbarian or Monk or Paladin or Fighter, she's *still* better-served to take levels in those classes, to benefit from increased BAB (in three of those cases) and advancement of Rage/Damage Reduction, Unarmed Damage/AC progression, Smite/LoH progression or Fighter bonus feats (and, in Pathfinder, other Fighter class abilities), instead of Giant levels.
That's a matter of opinion. Personally, I would take three levels of Giant in a heartbeat if I were playing one of those classes (maybe not Paladin).
Like I said, bring your A game. Offer up some Giant (or whatever) racial levels that either meld better with class-based advancement, or are at least so incredibly awesome that they don't end up being weaker than the most optimal race/class combination, and *vastly* worse then the less optimal choices (like Psion + any racial level that doesn't improve manifester levels, or Warlock + any racial level that doesn't improve Eldritch Blast progression, or Druid + any racial level, ever).
I look at the racial levels as something like a racially restricted prestige class. For instance, consider the Arcane Archer prestige class. The fact that it exists and isn`t very appropriate for a cleric doesn`t mean that an elven or half-elven clerics are being punished somehow. An even better example is the Warforged Juggernaut prestige class from Eberron. It doesn't progress spellcasting or manifesting. So does that mean that the prestige class is a slap in the face to a warforged psion? I played a warforged psion and I certainly didn't think so.
At any rate, if you think the racial feats work better, great! I`d be willing to give them a try if I was playing in your game.
P.S. I should point out that there are some racial classes I dont like very much; the Mojh and Verrik levels are pretty crappy in comparison to the Dracha, Giant, and Spryte levels, IMO, and the Loresong evolved levels are ridiculously good for a magister.
|
I already posted this in the Homebrew section, but I used the Arcana Unearthed system to come up with a unified magic system where you add all of your caster levels together to get a total caster level.
You can read about it on my blog,
http://www.prestonpoulter.com/2009/10/a-more-unified-magic-system-for-arcan a-unearthed/
Yeah I know a lot of folks are going to hate this idea, but I like it actually.
I'm a HUGE fan of getting rid of spell lists and the arcane/divine divide. After all, a vast number of spells are already BOTH arcane AND divine to begin with. So the line between the two has already been blurred.
Honestly either make it such that NO spell is both arcane and divine or just go with a unified spell progression system.
I really like this approach a lot.
The Mojh levels look great to me. That is, if you're a primary caster such as a wizard, then why on Earth wouldn't you take them. The add to your caster level, give you a better hit die, better base attack bonus, a breath weapon attack, an extra feat, and +2 natural armor class.
I can't see any logical reason why it would be considered weak.
The evolved levels are good, but I don't like the racial levels; I don't think the spell-like abilities they give are worth losing a caster level.