|
With Goblins being Core having a reaction on these wonderful discussion forums, I want to go over some things about the races and see if the core races are everything we expect. To begin, know that "Races" are now called "Ancestries" now, and that should mean that the Human will have some, if not all, of the different reginal Ancestries represented in the Core rulebook.
So, Humans may have a starting entry then have individual entries for their Ancestries following. So we have entries for
- Chelaxians
- Garundi
- Keleshites
- Kellids
- Mwangi
- Shoanti
- Taldans
- Tians
- Ulfen
- Varisians
- Vu drani
On top of that, we have the core races from the PF1 book.
- Dwarves
- Elves
- Gnomes
- Halflings
- Half-Elves
- Half-Orcs
and the Goblin is added in, as noted.
My question is if there was any consideration to include any of the other races, either before the Goblin stepped into the spotlight, or after, maybe even considered taking out one of the other races (like the Hobbit... err, sorry, Halfling) to make room.
Here is a list of candidates I think would have worked as a comliment to the core races and the Goblin.
- Tengu. The Tengu has been a staple allowed race in PFS, and in a lot of home campaigns as a result, and likely just as popular as the Goblin, mainly because of the Sword Training racial trait. PFS will likely have this bird continue to be a core playable race as soon as it is able. (in my mind)
- Dragonkin. Called something else in the other two editions with Wizards, the Dragonkin can be a nice addition to the Golarion lore, and have an identity that is made specifically with the new book. It is unlikely Paizo would do this, but the idea is still valid and doable if done right.
- Kobold. The dragon worshipers and fanatics could be a very nice player addition, using their mining acumen to become a valued member of society, and the tentative packs with the Dwarven clans would be rife with story ideas.
- Ratfolk. As a core race in the Starfinder book, it would make sense to make it core in the new version of Pathfinder as well. (I don't think we need to rename them Ysoki in this case) As a small race, they would likely need to replace one of the others (Halfling, maybe?)
- Aasimar/Tiefling. The Tiefling being a core race in the PHB, this would naturally be something that can be included to compete with them. If you include one, the other would likely need to be included also. I can't see this happening without replacing one of the other races, and likely we won't get this entry until a later book.
- Kitsune. Having the Tien race would be representitive of the variety that exists in Golarion. Likely, a lot of the populace have seen or met a Kitsune without knowing it.
- Catfolk. This ancestry could be fun, as there can be different breeds of Catfolk that have different Ancestry entries much like the Humans. I had Siamese, Calcro and such when I homebrewed them in 3.5.
- Gripplis. With it being another small race with a Climb speed, I feel this would replace another small race, likely the Halfling. I believe this race could have been the addition instead of the Goblin.
- Elemental races (main four, not the Suli, Ganzi or such). Though they are in PFS at the moment, I believe these races are best left out of the core rulebook. Neat as they are, they are even less common than the other races mentioned thus far, save for the non-existent (for now) Dragonkin.
- Wayangs. To be honest, I don't have a lot of interest in these guys, though they are worth a mention because of PFS inclusion.
- Nagaji. The Naga inspired humanoid is almost forgotten in the otherwise available races in PFS, and really, there are better choice on the list.
- Orcs. Now, say what you will about the Half-Orc, the Orcs still could be a core race, perhaps replacing the Half-Orc totally. The main problem is that the Orc is territorial and self interested. Some play Half-Orcs in the same way, but they are tempered with the human half and how they perceive their own being. My own feeling is that Orcs have their own story that does not involve the player character.
So, what are your thoughts and how likely is it that all the human Ancestries will make it in? (Azlanti excluded)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly i would have added Aasimar and Tiefling much before Goblin ever even came to the table.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, we know what the most popular races are (see results from Question #3,) so those would be the logical places to start.
Most popular non-core races:
- 1) Tiefling (5.3%)
- 2) Aasimar (4.7%)
- 3) Kitsune (1.9%)
- 4) Drow (1.5%)
- 5) Goblin (1.4%)
- 6) Ratfolk (1.4%)
- 7) Dhampir (1.3%)
- 8) Catfolk (1.1%)
- 9) Kobold (1.1%)
- 10) Tengu (1.0%)
Mechanics play some role in that - if Tieflings and Aasimar lose their special status as "flexible stat" races, and for example if kobolds were given less punishing stats, the list might shake out a little differently. But, it's a good starting place.
Also, I think Paizo has been indicating that "Heritage" or sub-ancestries are not likely to make it into the CRB. I think they will come out in a later book.
Besides the Goblin I will like to see another four more ancestries included in order to have 12 ancestries and 12 classes. In such case I would like to add Orc, Kobold, Tiefling, and Aasimar.
Removing core races ancestries to put in other non cores from PF1 would be a big mistake. Id be surprised if Advanced Ancestry Guide doesnt follow the CRB.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think Goblin is a good choice for a general audience/potential new players. They are more likely to know about Goblins than Aasimar, Tiefling, or Tengu. Goblins are common in both Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter which many folks are familiar with. Goblins are even non-evil in the latter.
Personally I would replace half-orc with orc though, and make half-elf/half-orc a human racial feat that you can take at first level, gives low light vision and ability to take elf racial feats later on or something like that.
Yeah, this will be a productive and helpful thread.
We get it, some people don't like Goblins as PCs. Some people do. There's already a thousand post thread about it, we don't need another whine thread.
That could probably be said about the entire Playtest section of the forum. We are all just killing time until they release. I doubt our feedback at this point counts for anything.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That could probably be said about the entire Playtest section of the forum. We are all just killing time until they release. I doubt our feedback at this point counts for anything.Yeah, this will be a productive and helpful thread.
We get it, some people don't like Goblins as PCs. Some people do. There's already a thousand post thread about it, we don't need another whine thread.
Not true - they've already added coffee and tea to the CRB!
Not true - they've already added coffee and tea to the CRB!That could probably be said about the entire Playtest section of the forum. We are all just killing time until they release. I doubt our feedback at this point counts for anything.Yeah, this will be a productive and helpful thread.
We get it, some people don't like Goblins as PCs. Some people do. There's already a thousand post thread about it, we don't need another whine thread.
I stand corrected. Also that is a great addition!
Honestly, they should just remove the "core rule book" rule or variations of that, and let anyone play any Pathfinder race they want. Obviously might take a book or two more after this, but it would certainly remove some of the complaining from people who would prefer X-ancestry over that.
When you say dragonkin, are you referring to Dragonborn in terms of design?
Pathfinder already has Dragonkin. They're aliens from the planet Triaxus and they're basically the closest thing you can get to tabletop equivalent to a dragon from Dragonriders of Pern. They're playable in Starfinder.
Dragonborn, in terms of physical design, also already exist in Pathfinder in the form of the Wyvaran.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For me Ratfolk is best option...
I think there is room for another Small race. The assumption it is marginal minority is based on status quo.
It has INT bonus unlike Gnomes or Halflings, the similarity amongst being a complaint, so that helps.
In a way I think Ratfolk are more like Tinker Dwarves, but that is beside the point.
There are plenty of almost Human looking races. The only 'monstrous' core race is half human / half orc.
A truly monstrous looking one, that doesn't have melee STR thug role of half orcs seems obvious next niche to fill.
In fact that is obviously the niche of Goblins, so filling same niche would help if we are looking for better solution to Paizo's situation.
It's present acros Golarion (and beyond), not just focused on specific Inner Sea countries.
It's present in Starfinder, and is reknowned for alchemy affinity, AKA the new class of the book.
I'm open to other suggestions but nobody seems to make that kind of comprehenive case. Outsiders and such seem awkward to add without their counterparts. Other Tian races seem more local-specific than Ratfolk which as tinker-merchants are present across Golarion AND other planet (albeit different flavor there). Having new race paired with class is obvious, and Ratfolk do it well.
Honestly, they should just remove the "core rule book" rule or variations of that, and let anyone play any Pathfinder race they want.
What does this mean? In regards to PFS? Core Rules will include certain races which establish norm for PCs, and includes explanatory text to connect racial fluff with how that applies to PCs. B1 will likely include playable races just as it did in P1E, and you need that to play the game, but there is serious distinction in implications Core races set for tone of game as a whole, without even considering 'rules on (dis)allowing races people want to play'.
Tieflings is the most obvious choice. Cheliax and Asmodeus are important in Golarion, a lot of players like « dark/mysterious » characters, they have many apparences possible, and they are the most popular outside of the core races.
On the other hand my personal favorite is Tengu. They have a spot in Tian Xia and the Shackles, they are exotic without being « too much » and I just love the bird men with Katanas. And the would end up with a Racial feat for flying. But it is just personal.
What I mean is that many races are gated behind a special boon you need to play, something we don't currently see with any other player options, other than a few things banned for balance reasons.
I imagine the new bestiaries will reintroduce a lot of races, although part of me wonders how useful those will be, since a bestiary might not have room for a bunch of new ancestry feats alongside the basic stats. Without the ancestry feats, would the race be even playable?
What I mean is that many races are gated behind a special boon you need to play, something we don't currently see with any other player options, other than a few things banned for balance reasons.
I imagine the new bestiaries will reintroduce a lot of races, although part of me wonders how useful those will be, since a bestiary might not have room for a bunch of new ancestry feats alongside the basic stats. Without the ancestry feats, would the race be even playable?
I think this will depend a lot on just how many Ancestry feats the Core races get.
But, yeah, unless the Bestiary layout changes quite a bit, it'll be hard to add Ancestry Feats to Bestiary creatures to turn them into PC options.
I think layout for humanoid races or other cases with variant builds could certainly be approached more flexibility, using extra page to detail those options, potentially even more than 2 pages if they want to show multiple class builds and array of feats, although that may step too far into NPC Codex territory.
I could see each Bestiary getting a Player Supplement as a PDF, listing the suitable playable races from that Bestiary complete with ancestry feats and the like. That way, it doesn't take up space in the published book that could go to more monsters?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I could see each Bestiary getting a Player Supplement as a PDF, listing the suitable playable races from that Bestiary complete with ancestry feats and the like. That way, it doesn't take up space in the published book that could go to more monsters?
That's an interesting idea, to be sure, and would help a lot.
Certainly, putting "If you're interested in playing a [insert creature here], please check [Insert Book] for the full Ancestry rules" under a creature statblock is easier than adding pages of ancestry feats to the Bestiary.
Part of me is against that, and the idea Paizo spends more money on layout that they can't sell as dead trees seems dubious (or alternatively, charging people more for book than what book actually contains), but if they would sooner or later republish that info in Ancestry focused book, I guess it wouldn't be so bad in the end. I guess part of what we don't know that impacts this is how NPCs with class levels, especially those "defined by" class levels will be managed in P2E. Hard to imagine a wide array of races having significantly divergent mechanics (beyond stuff like HP or stats) which would need paralle implementation for NPCs/PCs, so I assume they would share such type of Ancestry Feat, but who really knows?
I guess the other angle is Paizo doesn't really need to publish ALL ancestry feats they would include in Ancestry focused book, they only need to include ones the given stat block has (or would have with more class levels). I have to assume there will be monsters without extensive ancestry feat list but which can still theoretically add class levels which would normally enable more ancestry feats... so there will be 'generic' option in lieu of those as well. The full ancestry feat breadth doesn't really need to be released simultaneous with B1, although doing so at least for some key species would obviously be nice.
Not true - they've already added coffee and tea to the CRB!That could probably be said about the entire Playtest section of the forum. We are all just killing time until they release. I doubt our feedback at this point counts for anything.Yeah, this will be a productive and helpful thread.
We get it, some people don't like Goblins as PCs. Some people do. There's already a thousand post thread about it, we don't need another whine thread.
I hope they also have sugar in there. I don't want to end up with no sugar tonight in my coffee, no sugar tonight in my tea.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I hope they also have sugar in there. I don't want to end up with no sugar tonight in my coffee, no sugar tonight in my tea.Not true - they've already added coffee and tea to the CRB!That could probably be said about the entire Playtest section of the forum. We are all just killing time until they release. I doubt our feedback at this point counts for anything.Yeah, this will be a productive and helpful thread.
We get it, some people don't like Goblins as PCs. Some people do. There's already a thousand post thread about it, we don't need another whine thread.
Two words. Waffle Iron.
I was so amused by the listing of waffle iron in the equipment listing in Ultimate Equipment, that I made sure my Ratfolk Gunslinger had one on his sheet. Giving waffles to NPCs became a standard friendly action on his part. Waffle diplomacy.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don’t know for sugar but at least the playtest will not lack of salt!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Two words. Waffle Iron.
I was so amused by the listing of waffle iron in the equipment listing in Ultimate Equipment, that I made sure my Ratfolk Gunslinger had one on his sheet. Giving waffles to NPCs became a standard friendly action on his part. Waffle diplomacy.
I'm pretty sure I'm gonna steal this. It's sound tactics: If you want to win friends and influence NPCs, carrots waffles often beats the stick.