Racial feats, Racial favored class bonus, Racial traits
that was mentioned in the first post.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This
I'd like to see racial archetypes for classes they're most apt to take levels in.
Elven Archmage anyone?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
OK, I'm going to throw Lizardfolk out there. Yes, I know they aren't 0hd. That's a shame, really. They'd work really well using class levels only.
One of the first non(demi)-human characters outlined for the game was Phoebus in the original Rogue's Gallery. They're Neutral alignment, so they don't have any fussy morality baggage to mess with. They're big, they're bad, they're green.
And just look at that Trampier artwork.
Admit it. You need some lizard in your campaign.
One thing i really want in this is somewhere written that these are not NPC race options for GM's and how they are for players to play without any adjustment to be even with the core races.
Suli (Jann-descended folk) from the Qadira book are mentioned in Humans of Golarion and thus might merit an update.
For an old-school throwback, the following races appeared in Player's Options: Skills and Powers in 1995 (2e):
Aarakocra, Alaghi, Bugbear, Bullywug, Centaur, Flind, Giff, Githzerai, Gnoll, Goblin, Hobgoblin, Kobold, Lizard man, Minotaur, Mongrelman, Ogre, Orc, Satyr, Swanmay, Thri-kreen, and Wemic.
Its predecessor, the Complete Book of Humanoids (1993) (also 2e) had additionally the Beastman, Fremlin, Giant-kin (Firbolg), Giant-kin (Voadkyn), Half-ogre, Pixie, and Saurial.
Aarakocra are bird-people.
Alaghi resemble Bigfoot, more or less.
Bullywug are more or less Grippli and Boggards.
Giff are Hippo-people. (I doubt they will be back...)
Swanmays are Wereswans/Swan-maidens.
Wemic are lion-bodied Tauric creatures.
Fremlins are non-malicious winged gremlins.
Voadkyn, btw, are identical to Wood Giants, from Bestiary 2.
Saurials are dinosaur-people.
I realize most of these names are PI but the concepts are generally drawn from fantasy literature or mythology.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is already in there, but I'd like to expand on what I'd like to see in it.
Section on how to build custom races for your games. I'd prefer if this were a very detailed section, with a walkthrough of one of the races in the first part of the book, discussing how it was built using those rules and guidelines.
I'd also like a big chunk of weighted race features. For example, Lowlight, Thermographic, Claws, Flight, Bonuses to fight X race, all the core racial traits, and a bunch more of them, all given a weight. That way, you can not only set up your own races, but build them and their alternate racial traits and help keep yourself balanced. There's a good thread on here about how the core races can be built as if by a point system, I suggest the Devs look at that for ideas.
I hate to say it, but think of the Eidelon. I don't want anything that powerful, but the piecemeal building approach is the general idea. Couple that with rules and guidelines, and I would be thrilled.
OK, I'm going to throw Lizardfolk out there. Yes, I know they aren't 0hd. That's a shame, really. They'd work really well using class levels only.
One of the first non(demi)-human characters outlined for the game was Phoebus in the original Rogue's Gallery. They're Neutral alignment, so they don't have any fussy morality baggage to mess with. They're big, they're bad, they're green.
And just look at that Trampier artwork.
Admit it. You need some lizard in your campaign.
Seconded.
|
I would like to see more on the Dhampir. They really seem to fill a niche that I see a lot of my players want. The Darkly Aspected/Angst Ridden archetype. Emo adventurer types. Basically the character that one assumes is evil, but is actually just tragic and angsty.
Drow are a popular choice for players who want to play that, but Drow are too evil as a general rule, and the "rogue Good Drow" thing is just...it just hurts to see it. You can't stop the Drizzt jokes. He's just too iconic, and all Drow feel like knockoffs to players of a certain age. Also the drow is a little too powerful. Tieflings are supposed to fill this role (that's their purpose in 4E), but they're really too demonic and scary looking - I have trouble imaging a tiefling not attracting crowds of angry peasants with pitchforks and torches demanding he leave town, which gets annoying for the rest of the party. But, as DM, not doing it really breaks my sense of verisimilitude.
The Dhampir, by virtue of being a half-race, doesn't have the powerful association with an evil culture, and being more or less human looking -- I'm not sure if the black skin on the one in the bestiary is supposed to be a shadow effect or their actual skin tone, but I don't see why something that was half-vampire would looking anything other than human at first glance. It's also not overpowered like the Tiefling and Drow, having a cool and unique power that isn't game disrupting and doesn't offer a massive combat advantage (like casting darkness).
For the Dhampir, and every other new race included, I would like to see the following:
- 1/2 page of Basic Information (physical description, society, relations with other races, alignments and religion, male names, female names) comparable to what's in Core for the core races.
- An expanded Adventurers section comparable to what's in the APG for the core races.
- Alternate Racial Traits
- Favored Class Options
- Height, Weight and Age tables
That ensures that any new races are as supported as the core races, and thus not likely to be seen as "weak sisters" by players. A bunch of new races that never get used due to lack of support is just WOTC's Races of splats all over again.
While I hate all of these, the following basic archetypes seem popular with players:
[list]
I am not thrilled by the elemental kin. I think the sorcerer bloodlines covers that just fine, and I think the elemental kin just double-stack a sorcerers bloodline.
But okay, if we're going to have them, then let's go whole hog. The Dhampir cover the Undead bloodline (or the Sanguinary one, or both), but lets get races for the other bloodlines so they can all have the advantage of double-downing on their bloodline, and so that players can all choose to make "x-bloodline that eschewed sorcery for the sword" fighter/rogue/whatever.
Some of these would be really cool. I'd like to see the half-Aberrant race, and the half-Protean race, and the half-Dreamspun race.
But mostly I want to triple dog dare Erik Mona to include the half-Destined race and call that race Destiny's Children. And I will totally make a destined bloodline sorceress named Beyonce.
In summation: MOAR DHAMPIR!
|
|
Fremlins are non-malicious winged gremlins.
Stupid fremlins. Skating through the first five levels because nothing has a magic weapon that can hurt them.
Giff are Hippo-people. (I doubt they will be back...)
Giff are only cool if they get to keep their guns and the snazzy British uniforms, complete with monocle. Otherwise you suddenly realize how very dumb they are.
I would like to see more on the Dhampir. They really seem to fill a niche that I see a lot of my players want. The Darkly Aspected/Angst Ridden archetype. Emo adventurer types. Basically the character that one assumes is evil, but is actually just tragic and angsty.
Drow are a popular choice for players who want to play that, but Drow are too evil as a general rule, and the "rogue Good Drow" thing is just...it just hurts to see it. You can't stop the Drizzt jokes. He's just too iconic, and all Drow feel like knockoffs to players of a certain age. Also the drow is a little too powerful. Tieflings are supposed to fill this role (that's their purpose in 4E), but they're really too demonic and scary looking - I have trouble imaging a tiefling not attracting crowds of angry peasants with pitchforks and torches demanding he leave town, which gets annoying for the rest of the party. But, as DM, not doing it really breaks my sense of verisimilitude.
The Dhampir, by virtue of being a half-race, doesn't have the powerful association with an evil culture, and being more or less human looking -- I'm not sure if the black skin on the one in the bestiary is supposed to be a shadow effect or their actual skin tone, but I don't see why something that was half-vampire would looking anything other than human at first glance. It's also not overpowered like the Tiefling and Drow, having a cool and unique power that isn't game disrupting and doesn't offer a massive combat advantage (like casting darkness).
For the Dhampir, and every other new race included, I would like to see the following:
- 1/2 page of Basic Information (physical description, society, relations with other races, alignments and religion, male names, female names) comparable to what's in Core for the core races.
- An expanded Adventurers section comparable to what's in the APG for the core races.
- Alternate Racial Traits
- Favored Class Options
- Height, Weight and Age tables
That ensures that...
I agree with everything you say....well except more racial favored class options but I can just ignore those....
If you have a problem with Drow because of Drizzt jokes....you don't think the Dhampir won't suffer the same fate of bad jokes? Either related to Blade(seen those alot) or questions of 'Do you sparkle in sunlight?'
While I like the idea of 1/2 vampires myself...I see them get more fun poked at them than any player w/ a drow character.
what is a strix?. i dont have the inner sea guide (yet) and saw it mentioned in a previous post.
A strix is a tall grey skinned humaniod with wings and can fly who also have a racial hatred of humans.
Catgirls please-no cha penalty but maybe a cha bonus
playable fey, plant, construct, monstrous humaniod, and maybe magical beast
A giant blooded race
A dragon blooded race but more human in apperance like what happens to the decentants of all those half dragons
Plane touched races for chaos, law, and the positive energy plane
First, this sounds like it could be quite cool!
As for things I'd like so see...
I'd love some more options/info on the Tengu. Looks like there should be since it's an available PC race anyway. I have a soft spot for these guys.
Also some way to create an undead race. I don't think I've ever seen this done really well in 3/3.5.
A construct race of some sort would also be cool.
Honestly, everything else I can think of has either been mentioned or is already going to be in the book. I'm especially looking forward to the section on creating your own races.
-Kcinlive
Edit: Thought of a couple more things.
I also dislike the incorrect use the the race names: Ifrit another name of Effet, Oread is a Mountain nymph, Sylph is an air spirit, and Undine is a water nymph using the orginal folklore from where they came.I'm quite happy they chose those names actually, and what's saying the ifrit, oread, sylph and undine aren't the elemental spirits from where they got their names? That's at least how I use them. On their abilities, I'm more in agreement with you...they seem a bit bland, but at least appropriate for the race. And the Elemental Affinity can be used by others than Sorcerers, as far as I recall...
I just like thing matching up to their source, thats all
and yes your right about Elemental Affinity it covers a specific sorcerer bloodline and one cleric domain, it feels like the favored class system of 3.5's return with it, when added as a mandatory default variant of the race, heck I rebuilt them for my campaigns
Catgirls please-no cha penalty but maybe a cha bonus
A giant blooded race
A dragon blooded race but more human in apperance like what happens to the decentants of all those half dragons
NekoShoujo sweet idea
giant-blood races cool, (make both 1/2 and touched templates of hill, frost and fire giants, and maybe a racial feat for humans to make them 1.25x bigger, but 2x heavier, and act more like large creatures, but still be medium)
Bring back the draconic template, and the racial (0HD race) class idea from Races of the dragon to allow 1st level start with low to moderate LA race template.
Another one with roots in 3.5 Unearthed Arcana, but twisted a bit.
Racial Flaws,
i.e. 1/4 elf (flaw)
requires: half-elf, first level only,
flaw: lose all racial abilities, except low-light vision
benefit: gain bonus feat.
adds new twists to the races, don't it.
this could be really useful to power-down more powerful races to a more PC race level.
This
I'd like to see racial archetypes for classes they're most apt to take levels in.Elven Archmage anyone?
I would buy the book for that alone!
Throw in a elven archer ranger build just for icing.
But mostly I want to triple dog dare Erik Mona to include the half-Destined race and call that race Destiny's Children. And I will totally make a destined bloodline sorceress named Beyonce.
There are no words to express how much I'm stealing that.
I'd like to see sample architecture of various races. How their cities and houses are setup.
For me, i think we need rule about half-something.the problem about this race it s :
I m half elf but my mother or father it s only a human or he can be an orc, a dwarf or another thing ?
Well maybe we can have all half-dwarf, gnome or other species, ?
Or it's impossible ?
well i'm curious about this part of species in Pathfinder.
James Jachobs actually answered this in the "ask James Jachobs" thread. Well, as much as he answers any such questions.
Some races are more compatible (genetically presumably, but it's fantasy, so yea) than others. Hence some "half" races exist and others don't.
|
|
Pretty much echo a lot of what has been said already. Except for one thing. No and No to level asjustment. I hated and despised it in 3.5. Sometimes certain races deserved it. More often than not most races were not that strong to warrant a level asjudtment. I'm glad Paizo ditched that annoying "were going to screw you over for taking a non-standard race" rule. Almost everyone I know who ran D&D tossed that out the window. The only person who benefits from level adjustments are the DMs imo who feel the need to control every aspect of the game with an iron fist. I have never ever meet a player happy with that. Why would any player be happy to have to take longer to level up than anyone else. If Paizo had level adjustments from the start that would be another story. To implement them now would be a step backwards. Perhaps as an optional rule and only then.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Heheheheh
Ah, I see everyone's itching to get furries in their RPG.
Next I suppose we'll be seeing furry fan fic with, like, an ocelot as Seoni :)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
A naga race, a sphinx race, a medium-sized centaur race, a Small Powerful Build race, a Small race with Normal Speed, a Flying race, a anti-magic race, a living construct race, a living dead race, a plant-based race (not necessarily cactus folk or mandrakes), a giant-blooded race, a fey race, beast-blooded race, an animal-headed generic race or template, a tiny race. Rules for playing awakened animals as PCs.
Also, lots of neat little magic items tied to the race of the wielder, or that give an additional benefit to a specific race.
Here here, some great ideas in this thread. For my part I would like to see the genie boon template and some details on common mannerisms for the various races.
Pretty much echo a lot of what has been said already. Except for one thing. No and No to level asjustment. I hated and despised it in 3.5. Sometimes certain races deserved it. More often than not most races were not that strong to warrant a level asjudtment. I'm glad Paizo ditched that annoying "were going to screw you over for taking a non-standard race" rule. Almost everyone I know who ran D&D tossed that out the window. The only person who benefits from level adjustments are the DMs imo who feel the need to control every aspect of the game with an iron fist. I have never ever meet a player happy with that. Why would any player be happy to have to take longer to level up than anyone else. If Paizo had level adjustments from the start that would be another story. To implement them now would be a step backwards. Perhaps as an optional rule and only then.
I semi-agree with you on Level Adjustment, When I ran 3.5 I limited the LA from 0 to 3, broke down the LA into level sized chunks and they gained one after every class level, til they got the full LA, and over the rest of the campaign had the LA slowly disappear.
Note For LA of 1, I just generally removed the LA after their 2nd class level.I use a slightly modified version Of the above system for pathfinder as the pathfinder exp system does not take into account varying character levels in a party, where 3.X exp system did. I run the LA level chunks in parallel with their class levels, until the LA level chunks are all used up.
|
|
Pretty much echo a lot of what has been said already. Except for one thing. No and No to level asjustment. I hated and despised it in 3.5. Sometimes certain races deserved it. More often than not most races were not that strong to warrant a level asjudtment. I'm glad Paizo ditched that annoying "were going to screw you over for taking a non-standard race" rule. Almost everyone I know who ran D&D tossed that out the window. The only person who benefits from level adjustments are the DMs imo who feel the need to control every aspect of the game with an iron fist. I have never ever meet a player happy with that. Why would any player be happy to have to take longer to level up than anyone else. If Paizo had level adjustments from the start that would be another story. To implement them now would be a step backwards. Perhaps as an optional rule and only then.
Seconded!
Level Adjustment is a pain in the butt to deal with, and LA races are broken. I'm glad its gone. Just make a balanced playable option.
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
An earlier post mentioned something about half-dwarves, half-gnomes, etc. While I don't expect those (and think it's good that not every race can cross breed with anything), it would be great to see a page (or at least a sidebar) that address crossbreeding in general. what can and can't, and general guidelines on why (either in game, or design philosophy.) Also, it should probably have some special mention about humans seeming ability to breed with just about anything.
What I don't want to see is races that are excellent matches for particular classes. I don't want to see people kicking themselves over not choosing the one true race for wizard, for example.
What I don't want to see is races that are excellent matches for particular classes. I don't want to see people kicking themselves over not choosing the one true race for wizard, for example.
You mean perfect matches, I presume.
I not only second that, but say it should be manditory along with no racial abilities (like " " affinity) that are only useful for one or two classes and nick pickingly boost only a specific configuration of that class.
I would just like something equivalent to the Warforged, or at least similar. A race of playable Clockworks would be fantastic.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What I don't want to see is races that are excellent matches for particular classes. I don't want to see people kicking themselves over not choosing the one true race for wizard, for example.
I would like to see options and flavor more than overt mechanical benefit.
You mean perfect matches, I presume.
I not only second that, but say it should be manditory along with no racial abilities (like " " affinity) that are only useful for one or two classes and nick pickingly boost only a specific configuration of that class.
I thought about that and perfect matches might fit better. It still applies if there are three races out of twenty that make much superior wizards over all the others that in comparison it's not worth the trouble to be a wizard that's not of that race.
That's what I don't want to see. Similarly, I don't want to see racial traits that do the same, as I fear it's already getting like that. Only orcs make decent fire mages, or only gnomes are great illusionists, etc.
Playable fey race based on the Tunche.
Humbly,
Yawar
Honestly, I'll be happy if Hobgoblins don't end up being the Master Race, as they were in 3.X when made playable.
I mean, seriously:
+2 Dexterity, +2 Constitution.
A hobgoblin’s base land speed is 30 feet.
Darkvision out to 60 feet.
+4 racial bonus on Move Silently checks.
Automatic Languages: Common, Goblin. Bonus Languages: Draconic, Dwarven, Infernal, Giant, Orc.
Favored Class: Fighter.
And, thankfully, later put in to give some semblance of balance:
Level adjustment +1.
Makes one wonder why they aren't running rampant all over the surface of every game world, going out "Adventuring" and fighting against those "monsters," the Humans...
I thought about that and perfect matches might fit better. It still applies if there are three races out of twenty that make much superior wizards over all the others that in comparison it's not worth the trouble to be a wizard that's not of that race.
That's what I don't want to see. Similarly, I don't want to see racial traits that do the same, as I fear it's already getting like that. Only orcs make decent fire mages, or only gnomes are great illusionists, etc.
One part of it is that racial stats slightly tilt races towards certain classes and away from others, but hey what can you do beside racial abilities to make races unique. But the racial abilities are the bigger definer of the race.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As much as I'd love some new reptilian humanoids, I don't want to see new races.
There are quite a few options out there that cover 80~ish percent of what people would want to do character concept wise.
We have, Angels, Devils (and with Bastards of Erebust material, any evil outsider), Elemental kin, more classical fantasy races, Vampires, Amphibian Folk, Goblinoids, Bird People in the Tengu, and others that don't immediatly come to mind.
Things that are missing: Chaotic or Lawful outsider based races. Lizardfolk (or dragon based race), and a whole slew of other anthopomorphic animals. (I would like to add though: Tieflings can be built in such a way to potentially fill in part of that gap through Rakshasa heritage.)
I would rather leave new races to Bestiary books, and have Ultimate Races, or whatever it ends up getting called be more options and fluff on the races that currently exist
I'd also like options for core races as well. And new stuff too, not just a compiling of the X of Golarion series.
One part of it is that racial stats slightly tilt races towards certain classes and away from others, but hey what can you do beside racial abilities to make races unique. But the racial abilities are the bigger definer of the race.
Some tilting is fine. Everyone on the board can keep their balance if it's just slightly askew. What I fear is already happening is that the board isn't just being tilted. It's being flipped sideways and everyone on one side of it is being dumped off the edge.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
At least I'm not the only one who would like to see "furry" races...
Personally, I'd like to see the Oriental Adventure's Nezumi again.
The Hengeyokai, also from OA, fill the cat-girl/semi-lycanthropic/awakened animal role nicely...
-Kurocyn
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Playable fey race based on the Tunche.
Humbly,
Yawar
Also known as Tunchi; they are often described as evil ghosts and dwarves. They are associated with fireflies and owls and come from the Amazon headlands of Peru. Getting English language info on these guys is kind of a puzzle.
Compare the Vazimba of Madagascar and the Ebu Gogo of Indonesia (the latter may actually be Homo floriensis).
Some tilting is fine. Everyone on the board can keep their balance if it's just slightly askew. What I fear is already happening is that the board isn't just being tilted. It's being flipped sideways and everyone on one side of it is being dumped off the edge.
But for the number crunching player types, those racial stat bonuses can be the first starting point for deciding what race they will play with their choosen class.
|
|
I somewhat suspect that there won't be any new races in the book other than the PC-approved races from the Bestiary's and Inner Sea World Guide. Those sources will provide around 30 different races and assuming that each race gets as much writeup and support as the core seven, that will fill a good portion of the book (assuming that each of those races gets at least 2 pages...the amount of coverage the core races got in APG and really the minimum to cover alternate favored classes and background, that is a quarter of the book right there).
Any additional races will likely come from using the new "race-building" rules that they will be running the open playtest for in the fall. Rather than trying to come up with new races themselves, they'll give GMs the tools to create the ones they want for their campaigns.
My biggest "wish" for the book is a robust selection of racial alternate class abilities, hopefully at least some of which won't be class specific.
Any additional races will likely come from using the new "race-building" rules that they will be running the open playtest for in the fall. Rather than trying to come up with new races themselves, they'll give GMs the tools to create the ones they want for their campaigns.My biggest "wish" for the book is a robust selection of racial alternate class abilities, hopefully at least some of which won't be class specific.
I'm hoping that they have at least one new race built using the new rules, using it as the example in the creation section, step by step.