Which races do you allow for player characters and why?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

51 to 100 of 104 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade

In my current campaign I am allowing all the core races except gnomes, cat-folk, and the plane touched races. Gnomes are not allowed because they are not found on the continent where my campaign takes place. Instead, in the campaign world we are in, they are analogous to pygmies in the Amazon jungle and are on a different continent from ours. Cat-folk replace the race of cattaurs that are written into the setting and saves me some time in doing conversions. The plane touched races are allowed because one of the ancient empires in the campaign world built their prosperity on the back of enslaved genies and the gods and their servants, both good and evil, are very active in the world, which makes aasamirs, teiflings, and the faux genasi just seem like logical races that would exist.

Scarab Sages

The campaign I've been running for the last couple of years is very human-centric. Even elves get raised eyebrows and "Oh I've never met an elf before" in some places.

However, I do allow any core race, which is why the party is over 1/2 composed of elves right now. :P

I just can't get into the kind of campaign where every trip to the tavern looks like an explosion in Jim Henson's creature shop. I've never been able to build a world that makes narrative sense with a bajillion sentient races all rubbing elbows relatively peacefully.


Wolfsnap wrote:

The campaign I've been running for the last couple of years is very human-centric. Even elves get raised eyebrows and "Oh I've never met an elf before" in some places.

However, I do allow any core race, which is why the party is over 1/2 composed of elves right now. :P

I just can't get into the kind of campaign where every trip to the tavern looks like an explosion in Jim Henson's creature shop. I've never been able to build a world that makes narrative sense with a bajillion sentient races all rubbing elbows relatively peacefully.

Yeah, the fraggle rock effect is a bit troublesome. Most of my campaigns are human centric, with a couple holdout cultures.

However, I will absolutely let a player play a race not in the core. I personally am very fond of Aasimar/tieflings, and the genasi equivalents in PF. But they are very much uncommon, and often the characters birth and origin will have some of my input for the character to fit into the world.

Different races are fine, but I don't want every town to be the cantina in mos eisley unless I'm playign star wars, and even then...


Wolfsnap wrote:

The campaign I've been running for the last couple of years is very human-centric. Even elves get raised eyebrows and "Oh I've never met an elf before" in some places.

However, I do allow any core race, which is why the party is over 1/2 composed of elves right now. :P

I just can't get into the kind of campaign where every trip to the tavern looks like an explosion in Jim Henson's creature shop. I've never been able to build a world that makes narrative sense with a bajillion sentient races all rubbing elbows relatively peacefully.

Getting it to make sense can be a matter of taste. Most of the races, as presented in the rules, are very human like. Dwarves are humans of a different build who live in the hollow earth and exalt craftsmanship. Halflings are humans that usually live as subsistence farmers with a primitive and have a relatively primitive material culture. Elves are humans with an advanced material culture who use magic to need relatively little farmland to live on, so they don't cut down trees.

You can extend that to basically any race, saying the gods made them with the same kinds of minds and languages as humans and the only real differences is how they look. Tengu aren't much more different than Golarion humans than Japanese are from Brits. Heck, half the races in Golarion can breed, making them basically the same race with different features (those features are just a foot or two in height and feathers).

Personally, I try to make the different races as different as possible. For example, elves in my game world are very different from humans. Their median height is 7'6" tall. They have huge mouths full of sharp teeth. They sleep at least 12 hours a night an transfer to the spirit world when they do. They spend hours on the same tasks without ever taking breaks, consider humans and other races to be no more important or sentient even than deer or wolves. They have no compassion or conscience at all when it comes to mortal life, seeing everything in terms of eternities. Most of all, you will never, ever, find one of them sitting in a human bar.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

And those just aren't elves to me, CW.


TOZ wrote:
And those just aren't elves to me, CW.

Humans with pointy ears who use magic to limit the amount of agricultural space they need don't qualify as elves to me.

Like I said, it is all a matter of taste. Some people like different races to be truely alien. My elves are from another universe.

Other people like different races to just be humans with different cultures and exaggerated features, like feathers or green skin. Think Star Trek.

There isn't anything wrong with either. I think writing about elves just to write about humans is a waste of ink. If that's what is being played, I'll still play and have fun.


Here's our non-core list, though teiflings require the infernal bastard trait thingie:

Aasimar
Catfolk
Changeling
Dhampir
Drow
Duergar
Fetchling
Gillman
Goblin
Grippli
Hobgoblin
Ifrit
Kobold
Merfolk
Orc
Oread
Ratfolk
Strix
Suli
Svirfneblin
Sylph
Tengu
Tiefling
Undine
Vanara
Vishkanya

Currently playing with a vanara monk (myself), a catfolk sorc, something else catfolk, a dhampir cleric, and a few humans. This list was tentative, so it's possible there's something broken on the list here that I haven't noticed yet.


My elves are David Bowie. Nobody has had a problem with that so far. :P

Silver Crusade

Umbral Reaver wrote:
My elves are David Bowie. Nobody has had a problem with that so far. :P

God, after seeing that female Jareth cosplayer at last year's GenCon I've been even more conflicted about Bowie.

SO UNSURE OF HOW TO FEEL

Dark Archive

While it varies somewhat from campaign to campaign, usually DMs in our group are "anything goes" DMs, as long as you have a good backstory, are willing to endure any social "difficulties" your choice may have, and (depending on race) take a level adjustment. Getting rid of level adjustments is one thing about Pathfinder that really bugged us. Some races are stronger than their HD, plain and simple.


What is available varies entirely by campaign, though my group tends to play all humans.


Typically people stick with the core races though we often divulge in experiments. Usually there are lots of downside to balance out some of the more weird choices. We had a sprite once who was a blast. We unrolled the abilities over several levels. It worked out fine. I once played an intelligent squirrel. He was a blast. Though it was work to keep him useful.


I'm fond of the Core races.
In Golarion they are all legal, I too have a "one wookie rule" (I'm stealing that phrase).
In my home brew it's humans and dwarves with a bunch of odd personal races that are slightly analogous to the Core races. I use Stunted Giants in place of Half Orcs and Half elves are almost unheard of since elves are Faeries (a little alien) and cross breeds are sterile. I also limit class selection by race, which kills off some of the tedious min/maxing.

I tend to make all cross breeds sterile. All of the Half/templates creatures in 3.5 got stupid. And players crying about me not giving them choices were falling on deaf ears when half dragon/half illithid Sorceror/Monk hit the table. Non standard races are cool in small doses, the angsty drow is an obvious exception. The coolest character I can recall one of my players whipping up was a Hobgoblin Samaurai, who managed to be more true to Bushido than any Asian Themed Campaign PC in my history.

I have allowed;
A Faerie Dragon Sorcorer
A Grell Ranger
A Pixie Fighter (bad idea executed well)
An Illithid Psion
A whole party of Drow (all evil, they way it should be)
At least 3 Centaurs
A Stone Giant Druid ( high level add on)
A Galeb Duhr Fighter (too powerful)
A cool Gnoll Ranger
A Giant Eagle Paladin
And an Awakened Horse with warrior (NPC CLASS) levels. This one was an infrequent player who tagged along with her husband about once a month, she played his pack horse for about 5 years. The other players begged her to come to every session because she proved really adept at doing something no one else had ever thought of. She rolled up the Giant Eagle later on. She actually RPd both of these very well without ever once speaking beyond a "this is my action" situation. Brilliant.

So I'm down with anything that makes narrative sense, but whacky races require
Serious RP chops at my table. If you can't make your race a believable and distinct facet of your characters personality I will arbitrarily hit you with a baleful polymorph curse and make you a "stunted and incredibly homely human with strange and irregular patches of body hair".

My opinion has always been that non standard races should be allowed provided they add to the game in a positive story sense. If they only benefit is mathematical or "it sounds cool" then I'm a little leery. It helps when you know the player well enough to not worry about some back door rules exploit getting whipped up at the last minute. A Gith fighter is cool, but Plane Shift is a really powerful ability. If you start at clvl 1 it's easy to forget about that ability popping up at level 10.


Personally I usually allow the core races only as I don't feel experienced enough to judge the difference between powerful and broken when dealing with non-core ones.

Although one day I really do want to let them play any race that has rules for PC's to use it with role playing penalties.

Yes you can play a half-dragon but since your an endagered species there are going to be special rules the various empires have put in place for example . . .

City A
Don't care your just a weird race so there's a little discrimination against you but nothing that's there for any non-human, non-evil race.

City B
Your placed in the Kings private preserve where your duties are to eat, breed and generally be an exhibit in his exotic zoo. Or at least you will be if his personal guards catch you. Also serves as a plot hook for your friends to "rescue" you.

City C
Generally lets endgangered species do what they want as long as they're not in a high risk profession such as adventuring and have at least two certified children of their race in their lifetime.

City D
Feel the greatest sport is in hunting rare and unusual species especially those that can fight back.

"Sir we have confirmation there's a half-dragon adventurer in Ravensport."
"Ohooo Yes send a message to our club members we have a hunt to organize."


Wolfsnap wrote:
I just can't get into the kind of campaign where every trip to the tavern looks like an explosion in Jim Henson's creature shop. I've never been able to build a world that makes narrative sense with a bajillion sentient races all rubbing elbows relatively peacefully.

I'm lucky: I can't get my worlds to make narrative sense at all. So I can freely drop in whatever muppet I want and know there's no way for it to feel out of place.

cranewings wrote:
There isn't anything wrong with either. I think writing about elves just to write about humans is a waste of ink. If that's what is being played, I'll still play and have fun.

I think coming up with alien psychology is a waste of brainpower, but I respect all humans' right to do their brainpower wasting however they want. I just can't take anything that seriously.

-------

For my answer it depends on how I'm feeling when I create the setting. Also on how the race looks: I'm shallow, revoke my species membership card.

These are how my considerations go with respect to D&D-type standard choices:
Humans: Human are not an automatic choice: their racist supremacy has gone on for too long. If we're talking an anime-looking game then they can stay, otherwise they will probably get tossed.
Dwarves: For some reason I like Dwarves. Something I find the stereotype at the same time amusing and respectable. Blame Discworld maybe.
Elves: Elves have a similar deal to humans: they can stay if they're good-looking. So D&D 3E elves are okay, Pathfinder elves get nasty things done to them.
Halflings: Same deal as elves.
Catfolk: Anime or Pathfinder Bestiary 3.
Centaurs: They're cool.
Minotaurs: Interestingly this came about because I played a minotaur character as an NPC in a freeform game who I eventually made into a god who was head keeper/bartender of what amounted to the Bar At The Center Of Everything. So I've come to associate minotaurs with being the wise-people of anywhere. Whether they're a character race depends on whether I want them to be some kind of far-off mystics instead.
Furries: I'm not going to mince words: humans in fursuits. This includes all sorts of weird hybrids.

Dark Archive

Base 7 (sometimes I cut out Half-Elves and Half-Orcs)
+
Goblins
Orcs
and Kobolds

Used to allow anything when I played 3.5

We had some really weird groups.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

For those people who have trouble keeping non-CRB races in their world and keeping them making sense, I offer a bit of advice...

Map out your world (I use Fractal Mapper 8 myself), put in the major 'areas', countries, wastes, etc. Then type up a paragraph about each area. Then think about which races make sense living there, and put it at the end of the paragraph.

This goes a LONG way toward fitting in all the races your players might want. For example, let's say the game is taking place in Humandia, which is 95% human. The other 5% is made up of CRB 7.

However, one of the players wants to play a catfolk. You look over your world notes, and you see that Savannaville, which is on the south part of your continent has catfolk listed as 30% of the population. Now you can fit it in your head. He's a wanderer who's in the human lands, probably for some significant reason to get him this far north. He was a slave that was recently freed by the Humandia navy for example, and he's trying to find work to make enough money to get back home. Or he is seeking a lost relic that was stolen from his tribe, and his search has brought him to Humandia, as the thief was a human who used the coin of Humandia while fleeing.

It makes everything make a lot more sense when you know where in your world races would be from, and the environment, and why they might be somewhere else.


cranewings wrote:
Wolfsnap wrote:

The campaign I've been running for the last couple of years is very human-centric. Even elves get raised eyebrows and "Oh I've never met an elf before" in some places.

However, I do allow any core race, which is why the party is over 1/2 composed of elves right now. :P

I just can't get into the kind of campaign where every trip to the tavern looks like an explosion in Jim Henson's creature shop. I've never been able to build a world that makes narrative sense with a bajillion sentient races all rubbing elbows relatively peacefully.

Getting it to make sense can be a matter of taste. Most of the races, as presented in the rules, are very human like. Dwarves are humans of a different build who live in the hollow earth and exalt craftsmanship. Halflings are humans that usually live as subsistence farmers with a primitive and have a relatively primitive material culture. Elves are humans with an advanced material culture who use magic to need relatively little farmland to live on, so they don't cut down trees.

You can extend that to basically any race, saying the gods made them with the same kinds of minds and languages as humans and the only real differences is how they look. Tengu aren't much more different than Golarion humans than Japanese are from Brits. Heck, half the races in Golarion can breed, making them basically the same race with different features (those features are just a foot or two in height and feathers).

Personally, I try to make the different races as different as possible. For example, elves in my game world are very different from humans. Their median height is 7'6" tall. They have huge mouths full of sharp teeth. They sleep at least 12 hours a night an transfer to the spirit world when they do. They spend hours on the same tasks without ever taking breaks, consider humans and other races to be no more important or sentient even than deer or wolves. They have no compassion or conscience at all when it comes to mortal life, seeing everything in terms of...

I like that.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
mdt wrote:

For those people who have trouble keeping non-CRB races in their world and keeping them making sense, I offer a bit of advice...

Heed this, y'all.

Personally I've always been bugged by the notion that including exotic non-core races absolutely must result in a nonsensical setting. It honestly sells the imagination and creativity of their fellow gamers quite short.


Adamantine Dragon wrote:

I generally not only don't have racial restrictions, I am more than willing to discuss custom races.

It just has to work from a story perspective. Cyborg vampires in a stone age setting would be pretty hard to justify...

Sent to the past to assassinate a dragon before she hatched a half-dragon half dwarf that became the leader of the anti-vampire war and ensured the vampire's defeat?

P.S. I would LOVE to play a game like this XD


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DeathMetal4tw wrote:

Which races do you allow for player characters and why?

Discuss!!!

Who boy...

  • All core races (dwarfs, elves, halflings, half-elves, half-orcs, humans, and gnomes).
  • Planetouched (aasimar, tieflings)
  • Elemental Planetouched (ifrit, undine, oread, sylph)
  • Orcs
  • Goblins
  • Hobgoblins
  • Bugbear
  • Half-giants (see psionics)
  • Elans (see psionics)
  • Drow Elves
  • Drider (yes, drider)
  • Changelings that can self-evolve into Doppelgangers
  • Lizardfolk
  • Troglodytes
  • Kobolds
  • Pseudo-dragons
  • Various Undead creatures
  • A homebrew race of space-traveling aberrations
  • Some subspecies or subgroups (core elves are known as gray elves, and there are wild and wood elves, as well as a nomadic desert dwelling elf species called "Sand Saints"; orcs while mostly mechanically similar have 3 major tribes, which result in different language options and traditions; two factions of drow elves and drider (imperials and rebels); and so forth).

    My campaign setting is pretty cosmopolitan. There are no innately evil creatures that don't have aligned subtypes (though there are evil factions of races, such as a tribe of orcs who venerate demons). Most of the races have had to band together with one another during two apocolypses in the campaign's history. Planetouched are common due to a huge influx of outsiders during a rough period of the world's history.

    So you can always end up with a party that looks relatively mundane, or it might be a party consisting of a dwarf paladin, his best friend a drider psion, a troglodyte ranger, a pseudo-dragon summoner, and a ghast cleric (often with the Civilized Ghoulishness feat).


  • Mikaze wrote:
    mdt wrote:

    For those people who have trouble keeping non-CRB races in their world and keeping them making sense, I offer a bit of advice...

    Heed this, y'all.

    Personally I've always been bugged by the notion that including exotic non-core races absolutely must result in a nonsensical setting. It honestly sells the imagination and creativity of their fellow gamers quite short.

    Oh for sure it does.

    I just have a marked preference for less "cosmopolitan" settings when I make them myself. You can build a setting that logically includes any race choice you want it to.

    I just don't want to.


    My current campaign takes place in Moonsea region of Faerun and so the available races would be all core classes, planetouched races, drow, dhampir, maybe some eastern races (that could come with Shou immigrants from Kara Tur). As of yet no one asked about playing anything beyond core.


    Robespierre wrote:


    I like that.

    Thanks!


    cranewings wrote:
    Robespierre wrote:


    I like that.
    Thanks!

    It's far more interesting than the normal pretty boy elves. (I'm aware this is stereotypical and I don't care.)


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Ashiel wrote:
    My campaign setting is pretty cosmopolitan. There are no innately evil creatures that don't have aligned subtypes (though there are evil factions of races, such as a tribe of orcs who venerate demons).

    Sounds like my setting. I have 8 main races (two of which are amalgamations, one of Planetouched/Elemental races, the other of crossbreeds), and of them only the dwarves form their own nations. The other seven live in multiracial nations, as do some dwarves. I don't use alignment, but if I did all races would lean towards true neutral. I don't have any evil versions of races like drow or deuregar. If I need an evil elf or dwarf, I use a regular one who does evil things. If I need a good one, I do the same.


    Robespierre wrote:
    It's far more interesting than the normal pretty boy elves. (I'm aware this is stereotypical and I don't care.)

    That's okay: at least in my case I like pretty-boy elves because I encounter so many more of the other kind that they have become the stereotype for me.

    Liberty's Edge

    I normally stick to "only PFS-legal" for any character option.

    That being said, if the player can give a good reason why he wants to play some other race, or use any sort of 3PP material, I'm willing to consider it on a case-by-case basis. So far most such requests have been reasonable.


    I keep it tight. Core races. By core I mean Tom Moldvay Basic/Expert D&D core; Human, Elf, Dwarf and Hafling. I have been super open in the past but in my experience it did not really add to the game.

    As I have matured as a DM I have found that it is my job to be the monster(s), the players to be heroes(or anti-heroes).

    Your mileage may vary.


    Just the races that fit my setting. All core races, plus changlings, shifters, humanoid trolls of obvious plagiarism, mongrelfolk, walkers (elf damphir cross breads), and alternate orcs and goblins.


    Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

    I only allow catfolk, grippli, merfolk, ratfolk, tengu, vanara, and vishkanya in my games. It's a jungle out there. ;)

    Sczarni

    I'm seeing a lot of folks in this thread with no love for gnomes. :(

    My group will allow almost anything with 0HD. If it's native to the Underdark, you're probably out of luck, but other than that is probably fine.

    That said, I will not allow any more Goblins in any campaign I GM for. A total of +10 to Stealth and a contractual obligation to act like a lunatic? Allowing that was a mistake I won't repeat. Hobgoblins, maybe.

    I'm also getting a little tired of the sheer number of races in the Bestiary that are a variation on "humans can and will breed with absolutely anything, and you're living proof". In my campaigns I would pick and choose which of those I'd allow.

    Lantern Lodge

    Silent Saturn wrote:


    I'm also getting a little tired of the sheer number of races in the Bestiary that are a variation on "humans can and will breed with absolutely anything, and you're living proof". In my campaigns I would pick and choose which of those I'd allow.

    i like those races. there are other ways you can flavor them.

    the default being, my mommy is an angel (or insert other fitting extra planar being here)

    it could also be

    my great grandfather made a pact with a devil (or insert other outsider here)

    or it could be

    i am merely the result of a human evolving to adapt to the climate of the plane of shadow (or insert other plane here)

    or it could even be

    i had issues at birth, so my parents prayed to a powerful being to save me. i bear a portion of that beings essence as a result

    even

    my parents concieved me in one of the strangest of circumstances, atop a mirror, beneath a ladder, on a cold friday the 13th in the midst of winter, with a black cat watching and a rare planetary alignment that occurs once every 5,000 years. the moon was full, and twas midnight. (or insert other similar conception time tied to the intended planetouched specimen)


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Silent Saturn wrote:
    I'm seeing a lot of folks in this thread with no love for gnomes. :(

    Before Pathfinder they didn't really have a unique identity. After Pathfinder their unique identity is rather alien.

    Shadow Lodge

    I don't know, I'd always used gnomes as my worlds' steampunk vector. Back in 2e I had gnomes that used guns and the like. Ravenloft gnomes were hella awesome.


    LazarX wrote:
    Icyshadow wrote:


    As for why, it's because almost all DMs have disallowed my own homebrew races despite the months of work I've put into making their backstories and getting them to fit all the various campaign settings such as Golarion and Eberron. Hell, I even spoke with one of those DMs on this, but he still banned them a bit later without warning. Those who have allowed them haven't regretted it, but that doesn't change the attitude of the other DMs, sadly enough.

    Most DM's Icy have their worlds all set up and created, and maybe the resistance you're running into is that of resistance to adhoc revisionism that the insertion of a new unplanned race would necessitate.

    Actually, I discussed things with one DM and he was at first okay with allowing one of my homebrew races in one of his settings. He suddenly changed his mind and that started our first feud ages ago. Then, we've been mostly playing Pathfinder, to which I HAVE made the separate backstories for my races that do not really clash with canon. Then he finally admits he just personally dislikes all of my homebrews regardless of the stats and/or stories EXCEPT my elf sub-race.


    InVinoVeritas wrote:
    I don't know, I'd always used gnomes as my worlds' steampunk vector. Back in 2e I had gnomes that used guns and the like.

    How do you make them seem different from if they were dwarves doing the same thing? I'm not saying I can't fully see it (or saying you shouldn't do it that way), but it's an issue of whether that's "unique to" gnomes or whether it feels like something they're taking from the tropes of dwarves.

    Grand Lodge

    Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

    Dwarves work in stone and steel, unmoving fortifications and weapons.

    Gnomes work in wooden frames and metal gears, tiny artifices and clockwork constructs.

    You won't see a gnome building a stone fortress, any more than you'd see a dwarf building a flying machine with automatic pilot.


    My setting doesn't have gnomes. Dwarves are the best builders, and build cities anywhere it poses a challenge. Underground, carved out of a mountain face, in the canopies of hundreds of trees, on giant ships, hanging from a cave wall, it's all dwarven.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Silent Saturn wrote:
    I'm also getting a little tired of the sheer number of races in the Bestiary that are a variation on "humans can and will breed with absolutely anything, and you're living proof". In my campaigns I would pick and choose which of those I'd allow.

    Do what I do: let these races be elves or dwarves or what have you, not just human.

    Shadow Lodge

    SilvercatMoonpaw wrote:
    InVinoVeritas wrote:
    I don't know, I'd always used gnomes as my worlds' steampunk vector. Back in 2e I had gnomes that used guns and the like.
    How do you make them seem different from if they were dwarves doing the same thing? I'm not saying I can't fully see it (or saying you shouldn't do it that way), but it's an issue of whether that's "unique to" gnomes or whether it feels like something they're taking from the tropes of dwarves.

    Dwarves never made guns, or clockwork. They were solid, underground, and relied on melee and impenetrability.

    Gnomes relied on ingenuity, experimentation, and possibility. I once said (on another board) "When the gnome makes a chair that collapses, we are reminded of the possibilities of the chair. There is nothing more valuable to the gnome than possibility." Gnomish pranks were mainly a way to show how items could be repurposed and help us to overcome the boundaries we place on the world.

    Dwarves, on the other hand, are all about boundaries. From long sagas to time-worn methods of production, to staid cultures, dwarves are all about preserving what is, and maintaining it forever.

    Faceting a gem, for example, is gnomish. By cutting the stone, you change the way light flows through it, and change the appearance of that light. Gems fascinate gnomes (for me) because of how they bend and reflect light to lead to different ways of viewing the same world beyond itself.

    Shadow Lodge

    Another example of the difference: let's make a sword.

    When a dwarf makes a sword, it is perfect. The balance is right, the blade is keen and strong, and you have to come back three times to make sure that the grip works correctly with your hand. It will be the best sword you have ever held.

    When a gnome makes a sword, the balance might not be perfect, but that's because the hilt conceals an inner chamber for small items you might need. The scabbard has a spring-loading mechanism to quicken the draw, and the blade is forged with an extra layer of iron so that it remains dull and less reflective for when you need to be sneaky. It won't be the perfect sword of the dwarves, but it will have capabilities and tricks all its own.


    @InVinoVeritas: I'm not talking about the differences in your setting alone. I talking about how the traits you mention for gnomes are or are not traits that dwarves first pioneered in the metaspace of RPGs and fiction.

    One can make any race any way they want to, my original point was that I didn't feel like gnomes were anything more than a stand-in for something some other race was generally known for before they came along.

    Shadow Lodge

    I don't think dwarves were known for technology and innovation (or any other race) back in the 80s-90s, with the unique exception of Shadowrun. At the time, between Dragonlance's tinker gnomes, and supplements like Earthshaker!, the gnome took the role of the inventor.

    By the time of 2e, this was the reason behind gnomes commonly receiving attribute adjustments of +1 Int, -1 Wis. They were seen as the creators and manipulators of the world, known for pranks and ingenuity. Only gnomes (and humans) could become illusionists, and it was mainly because of a lack of invention or item creation rules in D&D, 1e, and 2e that gnomes never had a chance to truly dabble in their specialty.


    InVinoVeritas wrote:
    I don't think dwarves were known for technology and innovation (or any other race) back in the 80s-90s, with the unique exception of Shadowrun. At the time, between Dragonlance's tinker gnomes, and supplements like Earthshaker!, the gnome took the role of the inventor.

    It could be "gnomes" just didn't get highly picked-up by other stuff, so I won't argue the point.

    Personally I guess it's just that when you have dwarves and halflings gnomes seem kind of superfluous just because they look too much like one or the other. I could see using gnomes if you got rid of either or made gnomes look much more different (the Pathfinder highly colored gnomes isn't enough for me).

    Anyway sorry for the threadjack.


    Gnomes are pushed out of some GM's world because they can be very silly. They are often comic relief. Also as have been kind of discussed there is a notion that gnomes are kinda like 3 other races. They are small and tricksie like halflings, woodland nature lovers like silvan elves, they are inventers and gem cutters like dwarves. They share niches with too many other races for some GMs to comfortably get them in without feeling like things are getting watered down.

    Also because of their different facets there have been a number incarnations of gnomes over the decades. Gnomes that look like garden gnomes, old skinny men, christmas elves, evil fey child snatchers and so on. This again makes it difficult for some. I don't see the difficulty I think that any fantasy race will have at least as much diversity as we do so I don't find it hard to deal with the diversity.

    All that said I love gnomes. I think Pathfinder did a great job fleshing them out and grounding them again.

    Liberty's Edge

    Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

    Currently, Core Races +

    Goblin
    Hobgoblin
    Aasimar

    and anything the players are reincarnated as.

    I use "unlockables" in my campaigns. If the party meets requirement "X," they recieve bonus "Z." New playable races, traits, and equipment are all things the players can add to the campaign based on their actions. Goblins, Hobgoblins and Aasimar were not initial choices for race, but I added them after the party achieved certain tasks.

    I don't tell my players beforehand what the results will be from their actions so it doesn't turn into trophy-hunting, and I also stick to the One Wookie Rule where new races are concerned.

    Silver Crusade

    Before all the Dragonlance silliness and other such mayhem...

    Dwarves: originally (more or less) drawn from Norse/Germanic mythology, and a race/type of creature all their own.

    Gnomes: originally drawn from a broad swath of Western andEastern European mythology, usually seen as part of the Fey (for those who acknowledge "Fey" type myths beyond Britain and Ireland).

    Seems to me to have been the original difference-- and why being tricksters and such has been part of gnomes from their beginning in the game (it's part of the myths and fairy tales they're drawn from). Also, it's the justification (IMO, a good one) for why gnomes could be illusionists in AD&D 1E.


    Gnomezrule wrote:

    Gnomes are pushed out of some GM's world because they can be very silly. They are often comic relief. Also as have been kind of discussed there is a notion that gnomes are kinda like 3 other races. They are small and tricksie like halflings, woodland nature lovers like silvan elves, they are inventers and gem cutters like dwarves. They share niches with too many other races for some GMs to comfortably get them in without feeling like things are getting watered down.

    Hmmmmm maybe the real origin of Gnomes is that their result of Dwarfe and Halfling inbreeding like a half-elf is the result of human and elf inbreeding. However they hated the discrimination of being called Dwarlings and began claiming that they were really a unique race called "Gnomes."


    I'm starting to think that I might kill that sacred cow of 'core races' and have an even smaller number of normal races in my home setting. I like cultural and political complexity that stems from just about everything except race.

    51 to 100 of 104 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
    Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Which races do you allow for player characters and why? All Messageboards

    Want to post a reply? Sign in.