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

Could we see support for other body types like merfolk, half-snake people, and THIS?


Advanced Race Guide Playtest

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber

One of my homebrew's primary original races has a body type like this so currently I can't even build it with these rules. (also can't build the other two because there's no support for four arms)

I know the reason of giving up item slots and equipment issues have been given to explain why unusual body types have been passed over, but we've already got something along those lines going on with Hoofed. And honestly, many of us would be okay to give up some slots entirely just to have these body types as options.

Heck, a simple suggestion for cost modifiers for equipment for unusually shaped races could fit into a tiny sidebar.

Andoran

Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Yeah! And I want to make flumphs into a player race(not kidding)!


Also why no dragon type? kinda hard to make a useable dragonman race without it.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Talonhawke wrote:
Also why no dragon type? kinda hard to make a useable dragonman race without it.

Or aberration types!


Mikaze wrote:

One of my homebrew's primary original races has a body type like this so currently I can't even build it with these rules. (also can't build the other two because there's no support for four arms)

I know the reason of giving up item slots and equipment issues have been given to explain why unusual body types have been passed over, but we've already got something along those lines going on with Hoofed. And honestly, many of us would be okay to give up some slots entirely just to have these body types as options.

Heck, a simple suggestion for cost modifiers for equipment for unusually shaped races could fit into a tiny sidebar.

Purple Duck Games in their Medusa Book had a Snake Body Template. That you might want to look at.

Andoran

Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Mikaze wrote:
Talonhawke wrote:
Also why no dragon type? kinda hard to make a useable dragonman race without it.
Or aberration types!

Yup. I think the other explanations they give are to cover that they don't want people making PC Flumphs. With no unusual body types, and no aberrations, it is impossible. (Okay, that almost sounded like a rant, I'm gonna let up a little.)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Or swarm type!

I want a Mgalekgolo, damnit.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I could argue that weird body types open up a much too large can of worms, with abilities like grab and constrict almost required additions. I could ask how one would possibly balance things like multiple limbs or tentacles, and deal with all the weird interactions that would come from using them as PCs. I could point out that Paizo has been consistently progressive on Flumph-rights issues, and must have a good reason for excluding them.

But this is a happy place. And I've always wanted to play a Grindylow.

Viva rules for weird body shapes!

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Y'know, the Grindylow approach to representing their tentacles could work as one of many options for that body type...

Realmwalker wrote:

Purple Duck Games in their Medusa Book had a Snake Body Template. That you might want to look at.

Thanks, I just checked it out! It could be useful in a pinch for one of the minor homrebrew races that I'm not able to finish with the current rules. It really ought to take something away for all it gives though, considering it's a +0 template. Not sure how I'd price it as an RP ability, but I'd definitely take Tremorsense off and take off the AC bonus(keeping Scales as a separate ability to do that).


Mikaze wrote:

Y'know, the Grindylow approach to representing their tentacles could work as one of many options for that body type...

Realmwalker wrote:

Purple Duck Games in their Medusa Book had a Snake Body Template. That you might want to look at.

Thanks, I just checked it out! It could be useful in a pinch for one of the minor homrebrew races that I'm not able to finish with the current rules. It really ought to take something away for all it gives though, considering it's a +0 template. Not sure how I'd price it as an RP ability, but I'd definitely take Tremorsense off and take off the AC bonus(keeping Scales as a separate ability to do that).

That is what I was thinking. I would keep the movement bonuses have that be the cost of the body type.


Mort the Cleverly Named wrote:
I could argue that weird body types open up a much too large can of worms, with abilities like grab and constrict almost required additions. I could ask how one would possibly balance things like multiple limbs or tentacles, and deal with all the weird interactions that would come from using them as PCs.

Balance is an illusion. The game moves the fulcrum constantly. Racially, a dragon is superior to a human. If you took both with 0 class levels and set them at comparable age categories, the dragon would win.

I think in the case of races, balance should be a secondary issue to usability of the system for creating them. A race is either going to be better, worse, or about the same as another - never will there be perfect balance among races.

The point system is what needs to be balanced. Not the races.

President, Jon Brazer Enterprises

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mikaze wrote:
Half-Snake People

*cough*InTheWorksOverHere*cough*

Sorry I had a little cough in my throat.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Dale McCoy Jr wrote:
Mikaze wrote:
Half-Snake People

*cough*InTheWorksOverHere*cough*

Sorry I had a little cough in my throat.

Which half?


Dale McCoy Jr wrote:
Mikaze wrote:
Half-Snake People

*cough*InTheWorksOverHere*cough*

Sorry I had a little cough in my throat.

lol

Care to expand on that? And as a 3pp what do you think on the potential for adding to what rules they already have. I could see a 200 page book on Race building and still not have every single option covered.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Dale McCoy Jr wrote:
Mikaze wrote:
Half-Snake People

*cough*InTheWorksOverHere*cough*

Sorry I had a little cough in my throat.

am curious and very likely want :)


Mikaze wrote:
Dale McCoy Jr wrote:
Mikaze wrote:
Half-Snake People

*cough*InTheWorksOverHere*cough*

Sorry I had a little cough in my throat.

am curious and very likely want :)

+1ing the interest. Are these ophidians, lamias, medusas, something else, or all of the above?

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Legless Slitherer: 0 RP: Members of this race lack legs. They slither along on a long tail. They do not have a boots magic item slot.

How does this look?

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber
SmiloDan wrote:

Legless Slitherer: 0 RP: Members of this race lack legs. They slither along on a long tail. They do not have a boots magic item slot.

How does this look?

It lacks any racial/type pre-reqs and doesn't have a tier classification, which is a huge bonus. :)

It's better than Hoofed as written, for those reasons above and because it doesn't charge for what's pretty much a nerf. It should probably have a bonus like "can't be tripped", but that strikes me as being worth more than a +1 to balance out the unseen -1 from losing the boot slot. Maybe some of the Climb/Swim bonuses from the Serpent Tailed template from Purple Duck Game's Medusa PDF mentioned upthread? Or rolling the benefit of Prehensile Tail into it?

How much should "can't be tripped" be worth?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I would love some options for fish/snake lower body type.

Also I would sooner allow a person to make a Aberration, Dragon, or Magical Beast character then a Construct or Undead.


Your first creature up there can be done with «Quadruped» and taking it again for extra legs, since it's got a humanoid upper body. I do agree however that prerequisites and RP costs are a bit out of proportion. :P

Humanoid (giant?!?)
Large size +7
Quadruped +4 for 8 legs


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Realmwalker wrote:

Purple Duck Games in their Medusa Book had a Snake Body Template. That you might want to look at.

Ah, the Medusa! A wonderful villain/foil!


+1 for this thread overall.

Good idea to add this into a race-creator system.

:-D

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber
SinTheMoon wrote:

Your first creature up there can be done with «Quadruped» and taking it again for extra legs, since it's got a humanoid upper body. I do agree however that prerequisites and RP costs are a bit out of proportion. :P

Humanoid (giant?!?)
Large size +7
Quadruped +4 for 8 legs

That route really runs counter to a lot of the flavor of the race though. The actual race is medium-sized, counts as humanoid(definitely no giant in them), and are painfully slow and clumsy on land unless they use their (very) limited shapechanging ability to swtich out their tentacles a pair of legs, on which they still don't move quite as well as landdwelling humanoids.

Right now adding legs would just make them zoom around faster. A spider-bodied race I could see it working out for, some varieties at least. But not so much these guys.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

How about....

Aquatic Tentacles (4 RP): You have 8 tentacles in place of your legs. They grant you a swim speed of 40 feet. You also gain a +8 racial bonus on Swim checks, and can always choose to take 10 on Swim checks. Your land speed in reduced by 10 feet (to a minimum of 5 feet).

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber
SmiloDan wrote:

How about....

Aquatic Tentacles (4 RP): You have 8 tentacles in place of your legs. They grant you a swim speed of 40 feet. You also gain a +8 racial bonus on Swim checks, and can always choose to take 10 on Swim checks. Your land speed in reduced by 10 feet (to a minimum of 5 feet).

That's a lot closer to the mark regarding mobility. :)

I wonder how much rolling the Grindylow's trip ability into it OR adding multiple prehensile tail instances could up the cost. Or perhaps it would be best to have those as their own abilities and leave them for builders to pick to add whatever flavor and tentacle capability they're looking for.

Jet is another of those abilities that could be used that way.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Mikaze wrote:
SmiloDan wrote:

How about....

Aquatic Tentacles (4 RP): You have 8 tentacles in place of your legs. They grant you a swim speed of 40 feet. You also gain a +8 racial bonus on Swim checks, and can always choose to take 10 on Swim checks. Your land speed in reduced by 10 feet (to a minimum of 5 feet).

That's a lot closer to the mark regarding mobility. :)

I wonder how much rolling the Grindylow's trip ability into it OR adding multiple prehensile tail instances could up the cost. Or perhaps it would be best to have those as their own abilities and leave them for builders to pick to add whatever flavor and tentacle capability they're looking for.

Jet is another of those abilities that could be used that way.

Yeah, adding prehensile tentacle might be an interesting option, in addition to jet, ink cloud, stability, amphibious, expert swimmer, slow movement, water dependent, etc. etc.

I like the idea of multiple low-powered abilities; that way you can mix and match to make something that fits your concept.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber
SmiloDan wrote:
I like the idea of multiple low-powered abilities; that way you can mix and match to make something that fits your concept.

Kind of thinking this could be applied to Quadruped and other body-type chassis abilities. "Centauric Symmetry" and "Hoofed" for example. I don't have much of a need for it beyond maybe building Elcor(just to say I did), but some folks did want a non-centauruish Quadruped option. I'd leave it to them to say exactly what they wanted out of it.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

Foghammer wrote:
Balance is an illusion. The game moves the fulcrum constantly. Racially, a dragon is superior to a human. If you took both with 0 class levels and set them at comparable age categories, the dragon would win.

This is why some races should not be available as Player Characters.

Foghammer wrote:
I think in the case of races, balance should be a secondary issue to usability of the system for creating them. A race is either going to be better, worse, or about the same as another - never will there be perfect balance among races.

No. There should still be an "approximate" balance. While, trying to force all the PC races to be exactly 10 points, was a mistake; the idea was the correct one.

Each PC option should be valid, with good reasons to select it. If one, or two, options are so much better, then those would be the only choices selected. (Elves for Caster Classes may already have this problem.)

Foghammer wrote:
The point system is what needs to be balanced. Not the races.

On this we mostly agree. The point system needs to be balanced. But the races need to be "fair" to each player.

President, Jon Brazer Enterprises

Lord Fyre wrote:
But the races need to be "fair" to each player.

Unfortunately, no one is going to agree on what "fair" is.

I've known people that say Humans are the most overpowered race, getting an extra feat and getting to choose their own bonus ability. I've known others that say Humans are the most underpowered race, citing 1 free language and 1 extra skill point per level.

I've known people that say elves are the most broken races; I've known others that say elves are the worst race.

I think the only races I haven't heard both arguments for are gnomes, with half orcs being a close 2nd. Both of those tend to get the "underpowered" side more often.


I would like to see support for multiple arms, as some of the literature that I use as inspiration has a number of races with more than one pair of arms. What are your thoughts on how much that should cost and/or how that should be implemented?

With Regards,
Flynn

Cheliax

Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Tales Subscriber
Flynnwd wrote:

I would like to see support for multiple arms, as some of the literature that I use as inspiration has a number of races with more than one pair of arms. What are your thoughts on how much that should cost and/or how that should be implemented?

With Regards,
Flynn

I agree. I'd love to be able to make Tars Tarkas as a playable character.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Larry Lichman wrote:
Flynnwd wrote:

I would like to see support for multiple arms, as some of the literature that I use as inspiration has a number of races with more than one pair of arms. What are your thoughts on how much that should cost and/or how that should be implemented?

With Regards,
Flynn

I agree. I'd love to be able to make Tars Tarkas as a playable character.

Especially noteworthy considering planetary romance inspired by that very series is in the Pathfinder setting.

That and there are any number of ways to mechanically represent four-armed races that don't necessarily have to lead to cheese-abuse.


Mikaze wrote:
One of my homebrew's primary original races has a body type like this

You mean like this?

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Blueluck wrote:
Mikaze wrote:
One of my homebrew's primary original races has a body type like this
You mean like this?

Eh, a lot closer to the Cecaelia pic in terms of build actually.

Silver Crusade

Flynnwd wrote:

I would like to see support for multiple arms, as some of the literature that I use as inspiration has a number of races with more than one pair of arms. What are your thoughts on how much that should cost and/or how that should be implemented?

With Regards,
Flynn

I'm thinking +2 bonus to Perform (Juggling).

So was I the only one who thought of the old Star Frontiers game when I saw this thread title? If you don't know what I'm talking about, these were some of the main races:

http://starfrontiers.wikia.com/wiki/Sathar
http://starfrontiers.wikia.com/wiki/Dralasites
http://starfrontiers.wikia.com/wiki/Vrusk

I'd love to see how y'all would try to deal with dralasites.

Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Older Products / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Advanced Race Guide Playtest / Could we see support for other body types like merfolk, half-snake people, and THIS? All Messageboards
Recent threads in Advanced Race Guide Playtest

©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.