xorial |
I for one am glad to see more options meant for members of a particular race. I like the idea that some races have some "talents" that set them apart. I have proposed the idea that there be racial spells that required casters be a certain race as a material component. Evil casters would use blood magic to cast such spells. Maybe even make certain spells work better if the caster is of a certain race. Example: Half-orc arcanists being better at castin the Rage spell.
Icyshadow |
I for one am glad to see more options meant for members of a particular race. I like the idea that some races have some "talents" that set them apart. I have proposed the idea that there be racial spells that required casters be a certain race as a material component. Evil casters would use blood magic to cast such spells. Maybe even make certain spells work better if the caster is of a certain race. Example: Half-orc arcanists being better at castin the Rage spell.
Problem is, mechanics-wise some will be better, and others will be inferior. Also, it still smells racist to me. Exceptions in that to me are Tiefling, Aasimar and Changeling magic. Then again, those with the blood of powerful celestials, fiends of hags SHOULD have something unique to them.
J-Spee Lovecraft |
Personally, I really enjoy race-specific spells, feats, and traits. I feel like it allows more customization and it helps to make characters more unique. I'm really excited to see what all new options are going to be available.
P.S. Could someone post a link for me to show where the polls are to vote what race we want to see next, if they're still open?
Epic Meepo RPG Superstar 2009 Top 16, 2012 Top 32 |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Personally, I really enjoy race-specific spells, feats, and traits. I feel like it allows more customization and it helps to make characters more unique.
I, too, enjoy race-specific spells, feats, and traits... when they make sense. Compare:
My character's a dwarf, so he can take a feat that expands upon the stonecunning racial ability. Awesome.
My character looks like a cat, so no one else can be as highly trained with the Appraise skill. Wait, what?
Racial options that don't build upon unique racial abilities decrease customization, because they add artificial limitations on game mechanics based purely upon optional flavor text.
P.S. Could someone post a link for me to show where the polls are to vote what race we want to see next, if they're still open?
There's no separate poll. Just state your preference in this thread.
Foghammer |
I, too, enjoy race-specific spells, feats, and traits... when they make sense. Compare:
My character's a dwarf, so he can take a feat that expands upon the stonecunning racial ability. Awesome.
My character looks like a cat, so no one else can be as highly trained with the Appraise skill. Wait, what?
Racial options that don't build upon unique racial abilities decrease customization, because they add artificial limitations on game mechanics based purely upon optional flavor text.
+1
Lord Fyre RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32 |
That said, I DO like catfolk. I dont think of anime catgirls, though, but the Kilrathi from my old school Wing Commander days.
I go even further back, to Traveller's Aslani. Their art was always a bit ambiguous on their foot structure. Pretty much depended on the artist - just like Paizo's Catfolk.
James Jacobs Creative Director |
5 people marked this as a favorite. |
But seriously, I can't think of a reason you'd need to appraise while in danger or distracted. Unless you're one of those roguish types who uses the chaos of combat to pinch valuables while everyone else fights..
The one that comes immediately to mind as a great example is Bilbo Baggins using the skill in Smaug's lair to pick out a nice bit of treasure.
hogarth |
Varthanna wrote:Well, the ability says you can always take 10, meaning even while in combat/distracted/etc.Ugh.
You can already take 10 on Appraise. Hate.
As I noted earlier, it's just downright confusing to include the boilerplate about being distracted (etc.) 50% of the time and leaving it out the other 50% of the time.
Cheapy |
Why do people think that just because the catfolk can take 10 on appraise checks that no one else can? The rogue talent is highly thematic for cat folk.
Why is there the belief that somehow this excludes other races from having similar things? It didn't stop Half-Orcs from getting the Sacred Tattoo racial trait when halflings already had the same thing.
Cheapy |
Jiggy wrote:As I noted earlier, it's just downright confusing to include the boilerplate about being distracted (etc.) 50% of the time and leaving it out the other 50% of the time.Varthanna wrote:Well, the ability says you can always take 10, meaning even while in combat/distracted/etc.Ugh.
You can already take 10 on Appraise. Hate.
It really isn't.
Benchak the Nightstalker Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8 |
Bob_Loblaw |
Why do people think that just because the catfolk can take 10 on appraise checks that no one else can? The rogue talent is highly thematic for cat folk.
Why is there the belief that somehow this excludes other races from having similar things? It didn't stop Half-Orcs from getting the Sacred Tattoo racial trait when halflings already had the same thing.
To add to this, Skill Mastery already allows any race to do the same thing.
Azten |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A. Hamon wrote:J-Spee Lovecraft wrote:I want to make a ratfolk alchemist and I'm hoping there'll be some pretty awesome options for them.RATFOLK. ALCHEMIST. Sweet idea!An albino ratfolk?
"What are we going to do tomorrow night, Brain?"
"The same thing we do every night, Pinky... TRY TO TAKE OVER THE WORLD!"
Set |
A. Hamon wrote:An albino ratfolk?J-Spee Lovecraft wrote:I want to make a ratfolk alchemist and I'm hoping there'll be some pretty awesome options for them.RATFOLK. ALCHEMIST. Sweet idea!
I had one of those in a game, once. His tongue hung out of the side of his mouth, and was numb (and stained black), because he had 'taste-tasted' too many of the wrong chemical concoctions. It (bizarrely) didn't affect his speech too badly, but he occasionally had to tilt his head to flop his black nerve-deadened tongue back into his mouth while he was talking, which looked pretty strange... And then he'd get excited, and talk too fast and his tongue would flop out again.
How weird is it that albino ratfolk alchemists are a recurring theme?
Foghammer |
The rogue talent is highly thematic for cat folk.
While one could argue that catfolk is a vague blanket term for what would be an invariably wide range of subraces (from housecats to tigers) and doesn't really lend itself to any one 'theme,' I'd rather focus on the choice of the word "thematic."
It comes down to semantics. You are right in that it is [read: could be] thematic for catfolk. However it should not be exclusive. It's too general in its use, and James Jacobs has already cited an iconic fictional character - probably THE iconic fictional character, who happens to be a halfling - as performing an action that this talent would emulate.
But halflings are 'excluded' from taking this talent because they are not catfolk. I put ' marks around 'excluded' because ultimately what matters is what the DM wants to rule on any given text; surely most of us realize this. I also realize that this book is long since finished and sent to print and that complaining will do nothing to change what's in it. I only vocalize my opinion to raise awareness for future products.
EDIT: Fixed a grammatical error and a tag.
Leo_Negri |
I hope the B3 catfolk illustration is still the baseline assumption. I was very happy to see the way catfolk were done in B3.
It can be your baseline assumption for the catfolk. I personally hated that illustration (and there are very few Paizo illustrations I will say that about), it seemed to be a bda mix of anime catgirl and Catwoman from Batman to me. I wasn't even going to have catfolk in my home campaign, but after seeing the illustration from the ARG I've changed my mind.
I am actually quite fond of the notion that Pathfinder has no baseline assumptions as to the appearances of monsters / races / classes. The same can not be said for Golarion, which is not the same as Pathfinder. Since both the ARG and B3 are "setting neutral" it's all good.
Gorbacz |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Really, really hoping for good news on orcs. That's the race I've got the most hopes and worries for in this book.
Can you promise us *not* to start six threads just because there are no options for Lawful Good orcs who shoot Beams of Good from their eyes? ;-)
ShadowFighter88 |
I am going to vote with the crowd that likes the B3 Catfolk artwork as well. This whole thread reminds me of "Cat" from Red Dwarf when he says, "I'm so excited, all six of my nipples are tingling."
Which reminded me of this little exchange from season 8 (mind you, the boob-count discussion back on page 2 might've helped :P ):
Captain Hollister: What is that, does he have the measles?
Doctor: Those are his nipples.
Hollister: *Six* nipples?! Wonder what the female of the species is like.
Cat: Pretty easy to please in bed. Especially if you can play the piano.
Benchak the Nightstalker Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8 |
Bladerock |
My only issue with the artwork is that it doesn't look humanoid enough, it looks like what i would expect a monstrous humanoid to look like. That is, humanoids look more like humans with a couple of distinctive features (strange ears, unexpected skin textures, tails, etc.), where monstrous humanoids look like animals or creatures with slightly humanoid features (such as hands or upright postures)
Or maybe the distinction is something else now? I'm a little confused, since this implies there is no real distinction between monstrous humanoids and humanoids other than "this one takes class levels more often than the other one."
Mighty Squash |
My only issue with the artwork is that it doesn't look humanoid enough, it looks like what i would expect a monstrous humanoid to look like. That is, humanoids look more like humans with a couple of distinctive features (strange ears, unexpected skin textures, tails, etc.), where monstrous humanoids look like animals or creatures with slightly humanoid features (such as hands or upright postures)
Or maybe the distinction is something else now? I'm a little confused, since this implies there is no real distinction between monstrous humanoids and humanoids other than "this one takes class levels more often than the other one."
The distinction between humanoid and monstrous humanoid is vague at best, and can best be defined by a creator call on "should enlarge person work on this?".
Considering Trolls (even the multiple headed ones) are humanoid and not monstrous, retaining the monstrous type at all in Pathfinder is a bit of a farce...Jiggy RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32 |
Bladerock |
The distinction between humanoid and monstrous humanoid is vague at best, and can best be defined by a creator call on "should enlarge person work on this?".
Considering Trolls (even the multiple headed ones) are humanoid and not monstrous, retaining the monstrous type at all in Pathfinder is a bit of a farce...
But Trolls, specifically, are humanoids because giant got folded as a subtype of it and stopped being it's own thing (A move i consider to be odd). Still,if the distinction is not going to be made, may as well fold monstrous humanoids into humanoids as well.
Catprog |
Ok what the heck happend the catfolk seem to have gone from the mostly humanoid look in the Bestiary to Khajit? Also oh god not the multijointed (No way in hell I am ever wearing boots) feet
Technically they are not more multijointed then humans.
1st joint Between the toes and the rest of the feet
2nd joint The ankle.