Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

Why not make every new race Monstrous?


Advanced Race Guide Playtest

1 to 50 of 75 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Okay, so I'm reading through and trying to break apart the playtest (like we are supposed to do) and I found something that I thought was interesting: There is no reason for a new race to not be "monstrous".

So, we know that there are three tiers of abilities: standard, advanced and monstrous. Something that is labeled as "standard" has a budget limit of 10 RP, can only take 3 abilities from a given category and can only select standard level abilities. Advanced races get 20 points to spend, can select 4 abilities per category and can choose standard or advanced abilities. Monstrous races get 30+ RP, 5 abilities per category and can select any abilities they qualify for.

The problem is, there is no inherent limitation on being advanced or monstrous, only on the number of RP you actually spend. According to the guide, I only start taking penalties when I spend more than 10 RP on a race. However, since the wording in the document never forces me to spend my maximum budget, I can underspend if I want to, meaning my "monstrous" race can be built with only 10 RP. This means I have no effect on the APL of the group due to my racial choice. It's the same as if I had chosen a standard race.

Essentially, I can choose whatever abilities I want, calling my race "monstrous" and only spend as many RP as I want to. Want claws on your 10 RP race? You've got it. You want DR or Elemental Immunity? Go for it. Claws? Elemental Weapons? As long as you keep your total under 10 RP there is nothing stopping you.

So, basically, the ability tiers are meaningless. And I'm not complaining. I like that. I think it should just be clear that they are meaningless by removing the tiers and just pricing all abilities for "standard" races.

This means some things might need to be made more expensive to keep them out of the hands of 10 RP races. That's good too. It might require making the equivalent of "advanced" be 25 or 30 points, with "monstrous" being closer to 40 or 50. Just set thresholds (you spend X RP without an APL adjustment, Y for a +1 APL adjustment and Z for a +2 adjustment) and let abilities fall where they may.

I apologize if someone else already noticed this. I've tried to keep up with most of the threads but I can't keep up with all of them. Also, if I missed something important that makes my point invalid, please let me know.

Andoran

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Because not every race in the world is monstrous?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

"Before you buy traits and abilities, you must determine
the race’s power level, decided by the GM based on the
needs of her campaign
."

Dm sets the power lvl so this dosnt really work

By power level im referring to the chart at the begining

Power Level | RP |max abilities per Category
Standard | 10 | 3
Advanced | 20 | 4
Monstrous | 30+ | 5


Why does there need to be an inherent limitation, the GM should know how much power he or she wants in their game. People are thinking that this is a way for players to make better characters when it is actually a DM tool to add to their own home grown rules the guidelines are made so that the GM has an Idea on how powerful a race build might be.


Actually, I'm primarily a GM and was looking at the race building guide as a method of bringing some of the homebrew races that are only usable as NPCs right now (since there are no codified stats for them) to the table for the players to use.

My point still stands though, why, as a GM, would I ever bother with not giving something the metagame status as "monstrous"? Being "monstrous" has no effect on its appearance. It has no effect on how well the race can fit into a society. It doesn't determine a type or subtypes. It doesn't affect which skills, feats, classes, etc. that the race can choose. It has zero game-play impact, except which racial abilities can be taken when I choose to build it.

Basically, as a GM, if I want full freedom to build whatever I want, I have it. By RAW. What I'm saying is that this needs to be made clear. Either the tiers do nothing (since they have no real mechanical drawback and zero roleplay interaction by itself) and they should be removed, or the tiers do nothing and this should be fixed.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

They do do something... they give you a guideline to what kind of powers and what levels are appropriate for that kind of race. They don't need to have a minimum or anything, they are guidelines for the creator to know that X ability is not really appropriate for Y kind of race. Of course, a GM can ignore such things, and make his standard race as monstrous as he wants.

Osirion

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I know this goes against the general thought that subtype pre-reqs are bad, but I feel that restrictions can enhance creativity. The counterpoint is that such restrictions have to be implemented sensibly.


I'm just not sure why we have two systems for overall power: RP and tier. I could understand having both if the latter had some sort of advantage/drawback for being in the respective tiers, but it doesn't.

Is there something in the document that I'm missing? Is there any reason to build a standard or advanced race (with their more limited options) when you can build a monstrous race of the exact same RP and not limit your options?

I was trying to build an oni version of the tiefling, and did so in a 10 RP build, but I needed to put in two advanced-level drawbacks for it to be thematically appropriate. I had another race that has always had claw attacks, but pretty much has nothing else. It totaled like 6 points or so, but had to take an advanced-level ability. Neither is really an "advanced" race, in terms of power compared to the standard races, but they are advanced tier because of some abilities they have.


Mauril wrote:

I'm just not sure why we have two systems for overall power: RP and tier. I could understand having both if the latter had some sort of advantage/drawback for being in the respective tiers, but it doesn't.

Is there something in the document that I'm missing? Is there any reason to build a standard or advanced race (with their more limited options) when you can build a monstrous race of the exact same RP and not limit your options?

I was trying to build an oni version of the tiefling, and did so in a 10 RP build, but I needed to put in two advanced-level drawbacks for it to be thematically appropriate. I had another race that has always had claw attacks, but pretty much has nothing else. It totaled like 6 points or so, but had to take an advanced-level ability. Neither is really an "advanced" race, in terms of power compared to the standard races, but they are advanced tier because of some abilities they have.

Again you seem to be missing the point...The overall say in the race is the GM willing to use it in their game. In YOUR game world if a race has claws then give it claws. The Standard, Advanced, and Monstrous tiers were put into place so you as a GM would have an idea as to how powerful it can be.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I thought RP were supposed to determine overall power. Why have two systems trying to do the same thing? Especially when one doesn't really work.


Mauril wrote:
I thought RP were supposed to determine overall power. Why have two systems trying to do the same thing? Especially when one doesn't really work.

RP is affected by Standard, Advanced, and Monstrous tiers both by how many RP that can be used 10/20/30+ and by what traits you can choose.

a 10 point Advanced race can be made much more powerful than a 10 standard race by getting access to advanced choices, the tier is as important as the RP. My goal for Standard Races is to try and build them no more than 2 lower or 2 higher than 10 RP and try to keep it as close to using only standard options as possible. I might fudge on things Like claws, natural weapons, and speed if appropriate but not very often.

The system does work, it is not perfect but does a good job at giving you the guidelines to build compatible homebrew races.

Osirion

3 people marked this as a favorite.

An RP limit is all you need. The arbitrary "standard, advanced, monster" category should go.


seekerofshadowlight wrote:
An RP limit is all you need. The arbitrary "standard, advanced, monster" category should go.

I disagree, The tier system better controls where you can spend RP making it much more difficult to get Hulks and Sparkle Elf 10 point builds.

RP helps give you choices but tiers (Standard, Advanced, and Monstrous) allow you a better control as to how the RP is spent and allows you to better control the power set you want for your races.

Andoran

I don't believe "Well, I can just ignore them if I want to and do it my own way so they should just be removed" is a good reason to remove anything, after all, anything can be ignored.

Osirion

Realmwalker wrote:


I disagree, The tier system better controls where you can spend RP making it much more difficult to get Hulks and Sparkle Elf 10 point builds.

RP helps give you choices but tiers (Standard, Advanced, and Monstrous) allow you a better control as to how the RP is spent and allows you to better control the power set you want for your races.

And I disagree, some things are underpriced, way under and the " advanced ability" need to go. The are there to make those uber races, no other reason. It hurts and is very abusable and adds nothing.

"10" points is a false number anyhow, but a set limit on the RP and correct, balanced numbers are the only limit you really need.


seekerofshadowlight wrote:
Realmwalker wrote:


I disagree, The tier system better controls where you can spend RP making it much more difficult to get Hulks and Sparkle Elf 10 point builds.

RP helps give you choices but tiers (Standard, Advanced, and Monstrous) allow you a better control as to how the RP is spent and allows you to better control the power set you want for your races.

And I disagree, some things are underpriced, way under and the " advanced ability" need to go. The are there to make those uber races, no other reason. It hurts and is very abusable and adds nothing.

"10" points is a false number anyhow, but a set limit on the RP and correct, balanced numbers are the only limit you really need.

Some of these are under or even over priced but this is a "PLAYTEST" isn't the whole idea of a play test find areas that need fixing? You seem to think that a first draft is going to be perfect.

So since the point system is most likely going to change (as the Devs have already said) I look at the system itself as a whole and it works.

Osirion

No, I do not think it needs to be perfect in the first draft. I post things I think need adjusted, be Cause I feel they need addressed.

That is the point, you tear apart the first draft and see whats needs changed, adjusted, or outright removed and reworked. I feel the three unneeded categories do nothing to help the system and so needs removed. Adjusting prices far better handles "really good abilities" then pl;aces them at a low cost in a second category.


seekerofshadowlight wrote:

No, I do not think it needs to be perfect in the first draft. I post things I think need adjusted, be Cause I feel they need addressed.

That is the point, you tear apart the first draft and see whats needs changed, adjusted, or outright removed and reworked. I feel the three unneeded categories do nothing to help the system and so needs removed. Adjusting prices far better handles "really good abilities" then pl;aces them at a low cost in a second category.

Yes but you should acknowledge where the system is good as well as tearing up what does not.

In my opinion and yours the point costs need to be fixed I understand that. I also believe that using the Tier System along with Build Points is a good idea.

I do agree that allowing advanced or Monstrous options at double cost is a good idea.

Give me an Idea on how you would do it right.


Realmwalker, I've seen you post in several threads with the "This isn't a player tool!" comments. I think most of us know this, but as a GM, I still want to make sure that the rules I'm using are relevant and useful.

As it stands, there is nothing particularly "monstrous" about being a 10 RP "monstrous" race. In fact, if I wanted, it could be completely identical to a 10 RP "standard" race. But, with the "standard" race, my options were limited. With the "monstrous" race, they were not.

If certain things are supposed to be too powerful for "standard" races, then price them that way. That's what RP are supposed to determine. Now, if the prices stayed exactly as presented in the Round 1 playtest, then the tier system is probably needed in some manner. However, if lots of things are getting re-priced, then why not adjust the scale?

I can see "standard", "advanced" and "monstrous" being descriptive levels. Basically, a "standard" race would be anything under 15 points, "advanced" would be 16-30, and "monstrous" would be 31+. But they are simply descriptive terms. All abilities are available, but some abilities are just too expensive for "standard" races to afford, and an "advanced" race might only be able to afford one of them.

This removes the problems of things like "hooves" being only for monstrous races, but being weaker than many of the standard and advanced abilities. Or thing like claws being out of the reach of standard races while not really being any better than the bite attack (which a standard race can select).

How to do it right? A simple, slightly kludgy solution would be to simply double the cost of all "advanced" abilities and triple the cost of all "monstrous" abilities. Some spot fixes would be necessary to make it properly balanced, but that's where I would start. Certain abilities that are too weak for their tier would keep their current prices (or some new price as determined by the ability).

You then make the race you want (as determined by Step 1 of the document) and select the abilities that are thematic for it. You then compare the final total to see if it sits about where you want and then adjust. I don't like having to determine which abilities I can pick before I start picking abilities, which is what the intent of the current system seems to do.

This allows for me (as a worldbuilder and GM) to make exactly the race that I want and then know its power level afterward, rather than starting with the power level it's supposed to have and then hoping I can get the abilities I want. The former fosters creativity; the latter fosters too much meta-thought.

Osirion

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't mean the tier should go. I think it should be solely on total points used.
Tier one 7-15
Tier 2 : 16-25
or the like. What I think needs to be gone is having the abilities in different groups and then having the tiers.

Right now we have the tiers ( I think the numbers need adjusted), which is fine, however we also have a second "tier" system within the first, of "normal, advanced and monster" abilities. What I am saying is youi do not need the second tier, it takes away more then it helps. "I used 7 points, but need to run with the Monster point range as I have hooves"

The tier should be power level and based solely upon points. If you must have a second grouping then it should be abilities by point. ! RP abilities, 2 RP abilities, 3,4,5,6, and & RP abilities. Not "advanced or standard" If a ability is worth 1 point, it is worth 1 point. Not 1 standard point or 1 monster point.

what I am saying is the cost tell us how strong they are, then the total point cost will tell us which power tier the race belongs in.


seekerofshadowlight wrote:

I don't mean the tier should go. I think it should be solely on total points used.

Tier one 7-15
Tier 2 : 16-25
or the like. What I think needs to be gone is having the abilities in different groups and then having the tiers.

Right now we have the tiers ( I think the numbers need adjusted), which is fine, however we also have a second "tier" system within the first, of "normal, advanced and monster" abilities. What I am saying is youi do not need the second tier, it takes away more then it helps. "I used 7 points, but need to run with the Monster point range as I have hooves"

The tier should be power level and based solely upon points. If you must have a second grouping then it should be abilities by point. ! RP abilities, 2 RP abilities, 3,4,5,6, and & RP abilities. Not "advanced or standard" If a ability is worth 1 point, it is worth 1 point. Not 1 standard point or 1 monster point.

what I am saying is the cost tell us how strong they are, then the total point cost will tell us which power tier the race belongs in.

I think we agree (though it's often hard to tell online). I guess that's another flaw in the system. "Advanced" can refer to a race that spends 20 RP or a race that takes an "advanced" ability. The two are not really even related.

I'm suggesting that we get rid of the latter designation, which I think you are suggesting too. But just removing the latter designation can't happen without editing the RP values on some abilities. Some abilities are just too powerful for a standard race, so repricing them out of the "standard" budget makes sense.

Osirion

That is indeed what I am saying, there should be one set of abilities, broken by cost. If something is too good for 2 RP then it should cost the same as abilities of roughly the same power level.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

There's actually value in "You must be this tall to take this ability" tiers; they make it harder to minmax.

Minus the tier restrictions right now, you get builds like the Hulk as a standard race. So, to counteract that, you just increase the costs of the elements that go into the Hulk, right?

Except then you have to increase the effective point budget for an Advanced race, and somebody then builds an Advanced race entirely out of standard-race abilities and the synergies overpower an Advanced race made normally.

You can fix that with even better point-balancing? Perhaps, but the combinatorics make it much, much more difficult if things aren't segmented by prerequisites. "You can only have ability X if your race has a total cost of Y" is a useful restriction.

The problem as I see it is actually that the rules don't actually explicitly say "you must in the end total [say] 16 points to have any Advanced abilities and 26 points to have any Monstrous abilities". That would make the tiers have bite and function.


see wrote:
The problem as I see it is actually that the rules don't actually explicitly say "you must in the end total [say] 16 points to have any Advanced abilities and 26 points to have any Monstrous abilities". That would make the tiers have bite and function.

You said here in two sentences what I was trying to express from the beginning. Thank you.

Right now, the levels have no bite. They don't do anything because there is nothing stopping me from getting the abilities that are supposedly too powerful for a standard race while not spending more points than a standard race and not having an ECL adjustment for taking an ability that is too powerful.

Something needs to be done to rectify that. Either a "minimum of X points spent" needs to become a pre-requisite or some specific rule on "advanced" and "monstrous" race needing to have spent at least X points.


see wrote:

There's actually value in "You must be this tall to take this ability" tiers; they make it harder to minmax.

Minus the tier restrictions right now, you get builds like the Hulk as a standard race. So, to counteract that, you just increase the costs of the elements that go into the Hulk, right?

Except then you have to increase the effective point budget for an Advanced race, and somebody then builds an Advanced race entirely out of standard-race abilities and the synergies overpower an Advanced race made normally.

You can fix that with even better point-balancing? Perhaps, but the combinatorics make it much, much more difficult if things aren't segmented by prerequisites. "You can only have ability X if your race has a total cost of Y" is a useful restriction.

The problem as I see it is actually that the rules don't actually explicitly say "you must in the end total [say] 16 points to have any Advanced abilities and 26 points to have any Monstrous abilities". That would make the tiers have bite and function.

I liked the tiers also because it controlled stacking as well as points. but I am happy with being able to pick up advanced+ stuff at higher cost as well. I just want this to be effective and useful.

Osirion

1 person marked this as a favorite.
see wrote:

There's actually value in "You must be this tall to take this ability" tiers; they make it harder to minmax.

people will always min/max. we need to keep in mind a GM not the player will be the core user of this. If something is simply to easy to get, then it is far, far to cheap.

If we set the range at 7-15 or so to play in a standard game, then that is the point cap we have. You should not be able to buy the "hulk" build with the point total you have to work with. The hulk is allowed because of two things Advanced abilities ( which as far as I can tell are made to make uber races and little else) and poor costing structure.

You kill the unneeded advance scores and restructure the point cost of SLA's and you ended the "hulk" build. The biggest offender is always the advance scores and wonky costs.


i think we need to reprice the base arrays as well. i am all for removing Advanced (Attribute) and would gladly remove Tiny/Large from the list.

How I would do it:

Greater Paragon Modifiers (2 RP): Members of this
race gain a +4 in a single ability score, and –2 to one
physical ability score and –2 to one mental ability score.

Paragon Modifiers (1 RP): Members of this race gain
+4 in a single ability score, and –2 to all ability scores
in either all physical or all mental ability scores. If the
bonus is in a single physical ability score, the penalties
apply to all mental ability scores, and vice versa.

Flexible Modifiers (1 RP): Members of this race gain a
+2 bonus to any two ability scores.

as far as i am concerned, choosing 1 physical and 1 mental penalty is a lot stronger than penalizing an entire category. and the +4 to one stat is a lot stronger in benefit than +2 to 2 stats with no penalty. even when the +4 to one has penalties attached. and i beleive charging more for both the paragon and the greater paragon arrays also nerfs both the Sparkle Elf and the arcane elf. removing Tiny and Large nerfs a few crazy shenanigans as well.


seekerofshadowlight wrote:
people will always min/max. we need to keep in mind a GM not the player will be the core user of this. If something is simply to easy to get, then it is far, far to cheap.

If eighteen years of playing GURPS has taught me anything, it's that abilities can change in value depending on your overall point budget. A single ability can, in fact, be worth 20 points of utility in the context of a 10 point build race, 10 points of utility in the context of a 20 point build, and 5 points of utility in the context of a 30 point build race. If your only balance tool is the point cost, such abilities will automatically be misbalanced in two-thirds of the cases. If you have explicit tiers, you can, however, balance things better.

For example, if an ability is worth 20/10/5, without tiers, you would have to cost it at 20 (or maybe 15) to keep it from overpowering a standard race build . . . and then it's obviously an overpriced waste of lots of points for advanced and monstrous races. If you have tiers, you can price it as 10 and have a prereq of being an advanced race. Then the standard race can't have it (any more than it could if it was 20 points), the advanced race can buy it at the right price, and the monstrous races don't have to overpay as grossly for something that fits the concept.


You know this is actually a horrific loop hole in the game. You can just chose to be monstrous and just not use all the points so your CR isn't above standard. If this isn't changed I think I will like this.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Another question is "why are some of these abilities tagged as Monstrous to begin with?"

Osirion

Mikaze wrote:
Another question is "why are some of these abilities tagged as Monstrous to begin with?"

The same reason some have " dwarf, human or elf" as requirements I guess.

Paizo Employee Designer

Mauril wrote:
see wrote:
The problem as I see it is actually that the rules don't actually explicitly say "you must in the end total [say] 16 points to have any Advanced abilities and 26 points to have any Monstrous abilities". That would make the tiers have bite and function.

You said here in two sentences what I was trying to express from the beginning. Thank you.

Right now, the levels have no bite. They don't do anything because there is nothing stopping me from getting the abilities that are supposedly too powerful for a standard race while not spending more points than a standard race and not having an ECL adjustment for taking an ability that is too powerful.

Something needs to be done to rectify that. Either a "minimum of X points spent" needs to become a pre-requisite or some specific rule on "advanced" and "monstrous" race needing to have spent at least X points.

So let me get this straight. The argument is that you GM can set the power level to monstrous, but the player only spends 10 RP, so the player can pick any category they want, and the GM need not increase the CR because that table is based on points?

Sure. If the GM is good with that, so am I. You're less likely to get races that are relatively balanced with the core, but if you’re GM is not worried about that, neither am I.

Here is another way you could do it: The GM could just say "hey guys, you have 10 RP, and don't worry about the distinctions between racial abilities in the advanced or monstrous power level."

I'm fine with both. The power level racial ability distinctions are there as a tool, a measure of how much the ability deviates from the norm of core races. Standard have similar abilities to the current core races. Advanced has some greater power similar to 0-Hit Dice monster races that everyone knows are already more powerful than the core races, and monstrous one are, well, just gonzo.

While we have gotten a good amount of playtest data from folks trying to min/max this, you guys do realize that this is an optional tool for GMs, right? Any loopholes you think you have found have to past the sniff test of the GM using this system. They ultimately decide if they want to use this optional system and how much they want to deviate from it. In short, these rules have as much teeth and the GM decides. This is not changing how most games deal with character creation and these rules will not be used in PFS.

That said, this thread (and those like it) will be the subject of one of the advice sidebars that will be in the final version of the race builder. So thank you for that.


Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:
So let me get this straight. The argument is that you GM can set the power level to monstrous, but the player only spends 10 RP, so the player can pick any category they want, and the GM need not increase the CR because that table is based on points?

No, that's not my argument. Mine is that an inexperienced GM may very well not understand why there's the "Standard/Advanced/Monstrous" distinctions, pick "Monstrous" because it gives him the most design flexibility, and then make a 10 point race with lots of Advanced and Monstrous abilities, in the naive belief that it will be balanced with standard races because the points are the same.

Explicit rules bite to the tiers would help avoid that, but a sidebar pointing out the perils works, too. GMs can do anything they like, but the inexperienced GM needs a warning of where the pitfalls are. Whether that warning is expressed as a rule (that a GM of course can chose to waive like any other) or as a sidebar of advice matters less than that the inexperienced GM is warned.

Editor, Jon Brazer Enterprises

Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:
That said, this thread (and those like it) will be the subject of one of the advice sidebars that will be in the final version of the race builder.

Does this mean that the designers have indeed decided that advanced and monstrous abilities are *not* going to be priced according to the same balance metrics as standard ones? Take two Movement Abilities as an example: Climb (1 RP, standard) and Fast (1 RP, Advanced). Should Fast be 2 RP if I'm building an otherwise standard race meant to play in a game with otherwise entirely standard races, or is it still 1 RP? If it's still truly worth 1 RP and it's fine for a standard race...why is it Advanced in the first place?


see wrote:
Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:
So let me get this straight. The argument is that you GM can set the power level to monstrous, but the player only spends 10 RP, so the player can pick any category they want, and the GM need not increase the CR because that table is based on points?

No, that's not my argument. Mine is that an inexperienced GM may very well not understand why there's the "Standard/Advanced/Monstrous" distinctions, pick "Monstrous" because it gives him the most design flexibility, and then make a 10 point race with lots of Advanced and Monstrous abilities, in the naive belief that it will be balanced with standard races because the points are the same.

Explicit rules bite to the tiers would help avoid that, but a sidebar pointing out the perils works, too. GMs can do anything they like, but the inexperienced GM needs a warning of where the pitfalls are. Whether that warning is expressed as a rule (that a GM of course can chose to waive like any other) or as a sidebar of advice matters less than that the inexperienced GM is warned.

Why are you so much better at explaining my point than I am? :P

The thing is that me and the other world-building GM in my group both assumed that things were supposed to be balanced based on RP. Why make the suggestion that an equal number of RP produces a roughly equivalently powerful race if that's not true?

I wasn't trying to min-max the system, but rather trying to create the creatures that already exist in my world. To do so, I had to pick advanced and monstrous level abilities, but I (apparently wrongly) believed that keeping the RP low created a "balanced" race, since there was no ECL adjustment. If equal RP doesn't create roughly equal races, then something needs to change or that needs to be explicitly mentioned.


the Tiers consist of the following two main factors

how much trouble can the ability cause to an inexpierienced DM?

how much do these abilities deviate from those of the standard races?

the trouble need not be because of an overpowered option, it can be because of an underpowered option, or even, the effort in designing new magic items to accomodate this race of "Fish People"


Just a question, by this loop hole would this be rules legal?

Draconian

Type: Monstrous (+2)
Size: Medium (+0)
Speed: Normal (+0)
Abilities: Human (Excluding Dex) (+0)
Languages: Draconic, Common, and Elven (Standard Array +1)
Racial Abilities:
Darkvision: 60ft (free)
Claws: Members of this race receive 2 claw attacks dealing 1D6 damage. These are primary natural attacks. (+2)
Flight: Members of this race have a fly speed of 30 ft. with clumsy maneuverability. (+4)
Elemental Resistance: Pick one of the following energy types that corresponds to the dragon type the race is descended from: acid, cold, electricity, or fire. Members of this race have resistance 5 to the corresponding energy type. (+1)
Natural Armor: +1 Natural Armor (+1)

(11 RP points total)


Mauril wrote:
Why are you so much better at explaining my point than I am? :P

In all seriousness, experience. I've seen similar issues discussed over and over since the mid-90s in regards to GURPS, in regards to AD&D 2nd's Skills and Powers system, and even in a discussion with Skip Williams back on the old AOL TSR boards about how to approach setting XP values for monsters in the next edition of AD&D. After you've learned all the important points and seen them expressed well over and over again, it becomes pretty easy to bring them up and express them well yourself.


Captain Sir Hexen Ineptus wrote:

Just a question, by this loop hole would this be rules legal?

Draconian

Type: Monstrous (+2)
Size: Medium (+0)
Speed: Normal (+0)
Abilities: Human (Excluding Dex) (+0)
Languages: Draconic, Common, and Elven (Standard Array +1)
Racial Abilities:
Darkvision: 60ft (free)
Claws: Members of this race receive 2 claw attacks dealing 1D6 damage. These are primary natural attacks. (+2)
Flight: Members of this race have a fly speed of 30 ft. with clumsy maneuverability. (+4)
Elemental Resistance: Pick one of the following energy types that corresponds to the dragon type the race is descended from: acid, cold, electricity, or fire. Members of this race have resistance 5 to the corresponding energy type. (+1)
Natural Armor: +1 Natural Armor (+1)

(11 RP points total)

Only problem i see is you have to be human to have human stats.


Talonhawke wrote:
Captain Sir Hexen Ineptus wrote:

Just a question, by this loop hole would this be rules legal?

Draconian

Type: Monstrous (+2)
Size: Medium (+0)
Speed: Normal (+0)
Abilities: Human (Excluding Dex) (+0)
Languages: Draconic, Common, and Elven (Standard Array +1)
Racial Abilities:
Darkvision: 60ft (free)
Claws: Members of this race receive 2 claw attacks dealing 1D6 damage. These are primary natural attacks. (+2)
Flight: Members of this race have a fly speed of 30 ft. with clumsy maneuverability. (+4)
Elemental Resistance: Pick one of the following energy types that corresponds to the dragon type the race is descended from: acid, cold, electricity, or fire. Members of this race have resistance 5 to the corresponding energy type. (+1)
Natural Armor: +1 Natural Armor (+1)

(11 RP points total)

Only problem i see is you have to be human to have human stats.

It is a slight modification, as it isn't exactly human. Dragons have all good stats, except dex. If you must, say they are a descendants of humans and dragons if you must.

Cheliax

Natural armor is +2 for 1st point and +1 each additional. I'd make draco isms +Int/Con -Dex, no real reason to keep the human aspect. And probably just eliminate the flight and up the natural armor by 2; if you are looking to make a 10-point version of the creatures from Dragonlance playable.


Thalin wrote:
Natural armor is +2 for 1st point and +1 each additional. I'd make draco isms +Int/Con -Dex, no real reason to keep the human aspect. And probably just eliminate the flight and up the natural armor by 2; if you are looking to make a 10-point version of the creatures from Dragonlance playable.

Keeping them in-line with dragons, I think +2 Str/Cha, -2 Dex would be best, but that is just me. As for the NA, 12 vs 11 for starting race isn't that bad. For my draconic race I KEEP flying, all my Dragon Born (3.5) had wings.


Type: Monstrous (+2)
Size: Medium (+0)
Speed: Normal (+0)
Abilities: +2 Strength, +2 Charisma, -2 Dexterity (+0)
Languages: Draconic, Common, and Elven (Standard Array +1)
Racial Abilities:
Darkvision: 60ft (free)
Claws: Members of this race receive 2 claw attacks dealing 1D6 damage. These are primary natural attacks. (+2)
Flight: Members of this race have a fly speed of 30 ft. with clumsy maneuverability. (+4)
Elemental Resistance: Pick one of the following energy types that corresponds to the dragon type the race is descended from: acid, cold, electricity, or fire. Members of this race have resistance 5 to the corresponding energy type. (+1)
Natural Armor: +1 Natural Armor (+2)

(12 RP points total)

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:

So let me get this straight. The argument is that you GM can set the power level to monstrous, but the player only spends 10 RP, so the player can pick any category they want, and the GM need not increase the CR because that table is based on points?

Sure. If the GM is good with that, so am I. You're less likely to get races that are relatively balanced with the core, but if you’re GM is not worried about that, neither am I.

Here is another way you could do it: The GM could just say "hey guys, you have 10 RP, and don't worry about the distinctions between racial abilities in the advanced or monstrous power level."

I'm fine with both. The power level racial ability distinctions are there as a tool, a measure of how much the ability deviates from the norm of core races. Standard have similar abilities to the current core races. Advanced has some greater power similar to 0-Hit Dice monster races that everyone knows are already more powerful than the core races, and monstrous one are, well, just gonzo.

While we have gotten a good amount of playtest data from folks trying to min/max this, you guys...

I think that this may be the disconnect.

Many of us come from the GURPS/Hero/Mutants & Masterminds traditions that "X" points = "X" points. So this idea that "two points" in standard does not equal "two points" in monsterous is strange to us.

Osirion

3 people marked this as a favorite.

That is pretty much it. Two points should be two points.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Yep. It's exacerbated when there are so many abilities locked away in the Advanced and Monstrous tiers that we could easily see fitting the flavor of Standard or Advanced races.


Kevin Morris wrote:
Does this mean that the designers have indeed decided that advanced and monstrous abilities are *not* going to be priced according to the same balance metrics as standard ones?

Yes.

Kevin Morris wrote:
Take two Movement Abilities as an example: Climb (1 RP, standard) and Fast (1 RP, Advanced). Should Fast be 2 RP if I'm building an otherwise standard race meant to play in a game with otherwise entirely standard races, or is it still 1 RP?

The rules don’t cover ‘RP tier exchange rates’. The power levels are there to tell you that 1 RP for a standard power level ability does not equal 1 RP for an advanced ability. If you want to build an ‘otherwise standard race with X advanced ability’ you have to houserule how that works with the understanding that no matter how much you increase Fast’s RP cost, that race is probably not going to be well balanced against the core races or other races that only have standard options.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

GoldenOpal wrote:
Kevin Morris wrote:
Take two Movement Abilities as an example: Climb (1 RP, standard) and Fast (1 RP, Advanced). Should Fast be 2 RP if I'm building an otherwise standard race meant to play in a game with otherwise entirely standard races, or is it still 1 RP?
The rules don’t cover ‘RP tier exchange rates’. The power levels are there to tell you that 1 RP for a standard power level ability does not equal 1 RP for an advanced ability. If you want to build an ‘otherwise standard race with X advanced ability’ you have to houserule how that works with the understanding that no matter how much you increase Fast’s RP cost, that race is probably not going to be well balanced against the core races or other races that only have standard options.

That is going to be a problem.

As I noted, many of us have experience with systems where points = points (as I noted above). This is creating a disconnect.

Mikaze wrote:
Yep. It's exacerbated when there are so many abilities locked away in the Advanced and Monstrous tiers that we could easily see fitting the flavor of Standard or Advanced races.

It also does not help when Paizo themselves creates races like their Changeling (from the Carrion Crown AP), that have "Monstrous" abilities. (... but is otherwise kind of weak.)

Shadow Lodge

Would it be more clear if you broke RP into separate pools? Standard, Advanced, and Monstrous? Maybe breakup the costs of higher abilities and have them require standard abilities?

Example:

You have 10 Standard RPs and 10 Advanced RPs.

An Advanced ability that costs 6 points in the current system could instead be split into a Standard and an Advanced ability, each of which cost 3 points from their respective catagory, and the Advanced ability has the Standard ability as a prereq.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
TOZ wrote:
Would it be more clear if you broke RP into separate pools? Standard, Advanced, and Monstrous? Maybe breakup the costs of higher abilities and have them require standard abilities?

I don't think that would actually solve the problem, and may just make things more confusing. (And, if you think that there are enough complaints about "shoehorning now ...)

seekerofshadowlight wrote:
That is pretty much it. Two points should be two points.

This would be the best solution. It would allow the system to be much less complex and, therefore, easy to use.

Even though it is intended as a Game Master tool, correctly pricing abilities would also actually make abusing the system more difficult. (As it would limit the ability to "game" the system to get a racial type that is far more powerful then may be obvious from its "RP total".)

1 to 50 of 75 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Older Products / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Advanced Race Guide Playtest / Why not make every new race Monstrous? All Messageboards

©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.