New Options

Monday, July 14, 2014

The Year of the Sky Key, Season 6 of the Pathfinder Society Organized Play campaign, is approaching, and that means the new Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play is on its way. It's still a few weeks before we preview the new guide, but we can share a few new options available at the start of Season 6. In fact, there's something for players and something for GMs and organizers.

I imagine you've already spotted the art and guessed that expanded race access is one announcement—spot on. Just as non-standard race access is a hot topic on the messageboards, it's a common talking point during our meetings. It's tough to balance the lure of race boons for conventions against letting as many people as possible play the types of characters they want. Add to that the heated discussions about whether or not some non-standard races are overpowered and the concerns about the so-called "cantina effect." That's a lot to juggle when making a decision, but we decided that introducing a few new options would be best for the campaign. Beginning August 14th 2014 at Gen Con, three new races will be available for play without requiring a special Chronicle sheet: kitsune, nagaji, and wayang. These races have been in circulation through extra Chronicle sheets for nearly three years now, and even though some players have had an opportunity to create these characters, we want newer players to have new options to enjoy. Like other race options, it is still necessary that a player have a book or watermarked pdf reference for the race, such as from Pathfinder Campaign Setting: Dragon Empires Gazetteer, Pathfinder Player Companion: Dragon Empires Primer, Pathfinder RPG: Advanced Race Guide, or Pathfinder RPG Bestiary: Bestiary 4.


Illustration by Eva Widermann

So let's see... seven core races plus three Bestiary races plus three Dragon Empires races. That equals 13, right? Well, there's one piece missing from that equation. We're also removing two races.

For several years, aasimar and tieflings have enjoyed a prominent role in the Pathfinder Society, but as the organization concludes its work in Mendev—where numerous pit-born fight for recognition and heaven-blooded warriors wage holy war—it's time for them to step back. Beginning on August 14th, creating an aasimar or tiefling character will require a special Chronicle sheet, as was the case years ago. The exception is any aasimar or tielfing character with at least 1 XP; these characters are grandfathered into the campaign.

Does this mean you can create several new characters, play a scenario with each, and have several native outsiders waiting for when you need them? Well, we debated long and hard whether to require 4 XP per character, as at that point one is past the free rebuilding stage. However, we also recognized this as unnecessarily punitive to casual players who may only be able to play once or twice in the next month. To answer your question, yes, you can make 10 aasimars and play The Confirmation an equal number of times, but we're trusting you'll exercise some good taste and respect a decision made with the larger community in mind.

Now that we've covered the more controversial news, let's wrap things up with something outright awesome.

We (both Mike and John) both have experience as venture-officers and event coordinators, and we understand that sometimes it's tough to convince a new player to commit to a full 4-5 hour experience. Some events just are not conducive to running a full game, whether that's because it's a weeknight with lots of folks who need to get to bed early or because the location is only open for a few hours. What do you do when a scenario just isn't short enough?

For years the answer has been quests, one-hour mini-adventures intended to last an hour or less. They're great little adventures, but they're a little difficult to schedule for a few reasons. First, there's no easy way to tell a bigger story by connecting a few quests together. Second, the quests—though replayable—offer no gold, XP, or Prestige Points, giving them a reputation of risk for little reward. The most difficult hurdle is that there are only two of them in print (not counting the Goblin Attack demos or Beginner's Box Bash demos).

This year at Gen Con, we're debuting six new 1st-level Pathfinder Quests that take place in and around the River Kingdoms. Each one is a standalone adventure, but they are all loosely tied into a common plot thread, allowing a GM to combine anywhere from two to all six to make a larger adventure as suits the needs of the group and event location. Play them in any order—one can even play the finale quest early—and earn a Chronicle sheet with rewards that scale based on the number of adventures you played.

John Compton and Mike Brock
Developer and Global Organized Play Coordinator

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Eva Widermann Pathfinder Society
751 to 800 of 853 << first < prev | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge 4/5 Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area South & West

Disclaimer: I do have a dog (or, at least, a Tiefling) in this race. While my Aasimar Warpriest was locked in several months ago, I did instantiate my Tiefling for the first time at Paizocon (1XP GM credit, plus 1XP from the "Legacy of the Stonelords" playtest); I was glad to see that I didn't have to chase around to get extra XP on that character.

I was disappointed (though not really surprised) to see several example of people declaring their intention of banking multiple characters, especially since campaign management had stated that they were hoping people would not do this. But over the last couple of weeks I've decided it's not really worth getting too bothered by this. As others have pointed out, it doesn't really matter how many plane-touched characters you have on the shelf; there are only so many scenarios in which to play them, after all. And the people who will not only build multiple plane-touched characters, but will also play them in a way that takes away from other player's enjoyment of the table, can quite easily build other kinds of characters and play them in equally unwelcome ways.

Grand Lodge 4/5

DM Beckett wrote:
I'd also be fine with only banning the extra heritages, which honestly seems like the best option.

I think if this had been the path chosen we would suddenly see almost no aasimars or tieflings being rolled up instead of this "rush" people are seeing.

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Or maybe they just felt it was time for a change, that more races should be added. Removing old choices at the same time as new choices are added makes sense: it keeps things from getting overcrowded and helps keep things fresh, and gets people to make different characters.

Silver Crusade 5/5 5/5 **

GM Lamplighter wrote:

Hindsight is twenty-twenty, but it seems it may have been better to just ban the races in the new guide and not worry about the transition period.

You're suggesting that they should have banned even existing characters (ones played at level 2 or higher and so normally not rebuildsble).

Even if they offered those characters a TOTAL rebuild the nerdrage would have been immense. And a lot of it would have been justified.

Silver Crusade 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ross Byers wrote:
Or maybe they just felt it was time for a change, that more races should be added. Removing old choices at the same time as new choices are added makes sense: it keeps things from getting overcrowded and helps keep things fresh, and gets people to make different characters.

Yeah, I'd love to get some sort of clarification from PFS management as to whether this is a one time thing, or if they plan on rotating races in and out every year or two this way going forward. But I suspect they haven't decided for sure yet, and are waiting to see player reaction to this year's transition first.

Personally, I think the rotating races thing would work out great. Since elemental races are the current boons, I'd say keep giving those out as race boons through season 6, then switch to different race boons in season 7. Then, at the end of season 7/start of season 8 (2 years from now), eliminate the Tien races (tengu, kitsune, nagaji, and wayang) as always available, and replace them with the four elemental races as the new non-Core races that are always available.

Shadow Lodge **

Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Superscriber
Fromper wrote:
Personally, I think the rotating races thing would work out great. Since elemental races are the current boons, I'd say keep giving those out as race boons through season 6, then switch to different race boons in season 7. Then, at the end of season 7/start of season 8 (2 years from now), eliminate the Tien races (tengu, kitsune, nagaji, and wayang) as always available, and replace them with the four elemental races as the new non-Core races that are always available.

This is my hope also. I think this would be awesome.

3/5 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Personally, I would have suggested that Paizo did the "final-grand-fathering-before-new-season" thing as a free boon that needed to be signed by a GM before the new season started and was limited to one per account. There have been several of such types of boons before and this would have saved alot of debate.

4/5 **

1 person marked this as a favorite.
pauljathome wrote:
You're suggesting that they should have banned even existing characters (ones played at level 2 or higher and so normally not rebuildsble).

No, that's not what I meant. The issue is only with the "grandfathering" period, because it makes it technically legal to do something that even John said was so against the spirit of the game that he hopes it doesn't happen.

In case folks think this is all hypothetical, we have reports here of people playing Fallen Fortress several times in a row in one day just to make these characters "legally". One person bragged that they got through it in 26 minutes the last time. Technically legal.

One might say, "they're not cheating anyone but themselves", but in my view they are. They're rewarded for this behaviour by being allowed to play a race that is (soon to be) boon-only, with large mechanical benefits. If we're going to give out Chronicles for a coffee-break's worth of rolling a couple of dice, why bother?

Sovereign Court

GM Lamplighter wrote:
pauljathome wrote:
You're suggesting that they should have banned even existing characters (ones played at level 2 or higher and so normally not rebuildsble).

No, that's not what I meant. The issue is only with the "grandfathering" period, because it makes it technically legal to do something that even John said was so against the spirit of the game that he hopes it doesn't happen.

In case folks think this is all hypothetical, we have reports here of people playing Fallen Fortress several times in a row in one day just to make these characters "legally". One person bragged that they got through it in 26 minutes the last time. Technically legal.

One might say, "they're not cheating anyone but themselves", but in my view they are. They're rewarded for this behaviour by being allowed to play a race that is (soon to be) boon-only, with large mechanical benefits. If we're going to give out Chronicles for a coffee-break's worth of rolling a couple of dice, why bother?

I was one of those people who was at the table of Master of the Fallen Fortress when we got through it in 26 minutes. I found it a bit amusing that we got through it that fast, but would have liked it if we had played it properly (although I suspect that the GM was tired of running so many in one day).

Hopefully you'll be happy to hear that I only made 2 Aasimars for grandfathering, just so I could have a couple in play (was hoping for at least 1, but went one extra). I don't plan on making any more Aasimars/Tieflings, as I currently have 2 of each and that's more than enough for me. :)

The Exchange 4/5 5/5

FiddlersGreen wrote:
Personally, I would have suggested that Paizo did the "final-grand-fathering-before-new-season" thing as a free boon that needed to be signed by a GM before the new season started and was limited to one per account. There have been several of such types of boons before and this would have saved alot of debate.

I like this idea. Last year there was a free downloadable "end-of-season" boon that gave you a reward if you had enough prestige earned for a given faction in that season. This year could have been "If you earned at least 10 prestige across all your characters between August 14th 2013 and August 13th 2014, you may create a single Aasimar or Tiefling" (with all the normal limiting language).

Obviously too late this year, but maybe something to keep in the hopper for next time races (or other things) are removed.

Shadow Lodge

I really like the idea of rotating different races in and out of PFS. The only fallout from this is that if folks know they have to make a character in the next year or the race will no longer be legal you will continue to see a lot of non standard races at tables...but I mean it is fantasy right...so what's the big deal.

4/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
GM Lamplighter wrote:


...

One might say, "they're not cheating anyone but themselves", but in my view they are. They're rewarded for this behaviour by being allowed to play a race that is (soon to be) boon-only, with large mechanical benefits. If we're going to give out Chronicles for a coffee-break's worth of rolling a couple of dice, why bother?

Conversely, one might say that the fact that they're willing to go through such an apparently bad experience says a LOT about how much they value those races and how much is being taken away from them. Why begrudge others something they obviously consider important when it costs you nothing?

And if they are just power gamers trying to get their last shot at the most powerful option, so what? Do you think they'll suddenly start building "Lamplighter" type characters just because two racial options were removed? Or will they continue building rules constructs focused on their trick of the day without any back story or justification?

So what do we gain, aside from added frustration on both sides of the fence, by even caring about how other players are reacting to these races going away?

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 **

3 people marked this as a favorite.
GM Lamplighter wrote:
pauljathome wrote:
You're suggesting that they should have banned even existing characters (ones played at level 2 or higher and so normally not rebuildsble).

No, that's not what I meant. The issue is only with the "grandfathering" period, because it makes it technically legal to do something that even John said was so against the spirit of the game that he hopes it doesn't happen.

In case folks think this is all hypothetical, we have reports here of people playing Fallen Fortress several times in a row in one day just to make these characters "legally". One person bragged that they got through it in 26 minutes the last time. Technically legal.

One might say, "they're not cheating anyone but themselves", but in my view they are. They're rewarded for this behaviour by being allowed to play a race that is (soon to be) boon-only, with large mechanical benefits. If we're going to give out Chronicles for a coffee-break's worth of rolling a couple of dice, why bother?

I have heard of people doing a 'get your tiefling/aasimar' in under the wire games so that people can have a tiefling/aasimar available in their stable for future play. This was even mentioned as an idea in my area, and I appear to have done just that by scheduling a session of Master of the Fallen Fortress for tomorrow's game day. Ironically, we have recently gotten an influx of newbs and our VL is running Bonekeep for the experienced players so I was just looking for something a little different for the newbs. I wasn't specifically planning this to be a 'Grandfather' day, though it may turn out that way and I will probably use the GM cert for grandfathering the Tiefling Holy Tactician I just haven't gotten around to playing yet. And from what I can tell from the powers that be, there is nothing wrong with this level of deliberate grandfathering. Nor should it be BECAUSE IF IT IS WRONG TO PLAY AN ADVENTURE JUST SO THAT YOU CAN GRANDFATHER IN A RACIAL BOON THEN IT IS WRONG TO GM AT A CONVENSION JUST SO YOU CAN GET A RACIAL BOON.

Also, bear in mind that some people may be doing this last minute grandfathering just so they have the option available in the future and may actually never take advantage of that option.

The only real problem comes when people abuse this by playing adventures to create a large stable of tieflings/aasimars so that they effectively have no limit. In this case I do agree this is against the spirit of the grandfather rule, but how much of a problem is this really? Firstly, while there are indeed reports of people running marathon intro adventure days so that everyone can grandfather in a tielfling/aasimar, that is not the same thing as people creating a large stable of them. And even at 26 minutes an adventure, creating a large stable of grandfathered characters would still require a lot of work. I just don't see a lot of people going to this level of effort to abuse the system. So the amount that these people will impact the campaign should be statistically negligible. And if there are a large number of people willing to do this, then this should be a clear indication to the powers that be that this was a bad idea in the first place.

Dark Archive

They could have avoided all this headache if they had just kept those race options open. I hate that PFS is requiring a boon to play something that was previously legal to use. They need to open up more options for players, not take options away.

Horizon Hunters 4/5 5/5 ****

Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber

They are removing two races as options and adding three. That sounds like more, not fewer, options to me. Yes, the specific options are different.

3/5

DragoDorn wrote:
They could have avoided all this headache if they had just kept those race options open. I hate that PFS is requiring a boon to play something that was previously legal to use. They need to open up more options for players, not take options away.

More options are opened up whenever they release new material; granted not everything in every book becomes PFS legal…but I find that more than enough material makes it way into the campaign to keep things interesting.

As for the races? I would have been happy if they kept it so that only the core races were legal without boons; and this is coming from someone who never goes to conventions and would rarely, if ever, have access to said boons. Even now by rotating races in/out they've generated more headaches and complaints than they would have if they hadn't allowed non-core races at all.

Silver Crusade 4/5

I don't get all the people acting like this whole thing is some sort of fiasco. I think the grandfathering is working out fine, and I doubt enough people are abusing it to consider it a problem, especially since most of those extra a/t characters won't ever get much play.

I think this whole thing has worked out fine, and if they do remove races again in the future, I hope they use the exact same method of grandfathering. And as I mentioned earlier (don't remember if it was this thread or another), I'm actually hoping they start cycling the races this way every couple of years. It's a nice way to keep things fresh and different.

5/5 5/55/55/5

DragoDorn wrote:
They could have avoided all this headache if they had just kept those race options open. I hate that PFS is requiring a boon to play something that was previously legal to use. They need to open up more options for players, not take options away.

And then would have had the continued headache of all outsider parties.

Better to rip the bandaid off and have it hurt badly for just a little while than to continue the dull ache for years.

4/5 **

There's no need to be rude or yell. I personally play with power gamers all the time, despite the fact that I prefer the "Lamplighter" style of character for myself. The GM in question is one of the guys I love at my table (as GM or player). I not here to ask for punishment or call badwrongfun, I am sharing our Lodge's experience under this new case of removing legal races. It seems to me that the rules as they are has encouraged people to do some pretty ridiculous things to get what they want within the rules. I would prefer that these guys didn't have to beat their heads against a wall all day so they could legally get the characters they want to build. After all, they could have just cheated or adjusting thigns after the furor has died down and made aasmimars illegaly, but they didn't.

I am assuming, though, that playing a scenario in 26 minutes is NOT part of the intended design-space for PFS. Many players drive longer than that to get to games. When changes make people voluntarily ruin their game to get the point they need to preserve a character concept, I think we can all agree that isn't the intended outcome. So, instead of jumping to conclusions and questioning motives, let's focus on fixing it for next time, shall we?

4/5 **

trollbill wrote:
And from what I can tell from the powers that be, there is nothing wrong with this level of deliberate grandfathering. Nor should it be BECAUSE IF IT IS WRONG TO PLAY AN ADVENTURE JUST SO THAT YOU CAN GRANDFATHER IN A RACIAL BOON THEN IT IS WRONG TO GM AT A CONVENSION JUST SO YOU CAN GET A RACIAL BOON.

Worth addressing separately - John did say it was technically legal, but that he hoped it wouldn't happen. But overall I agree with you, trollbill. It *is* wrong for someone to GM just to get a boon. (By "wrong" in this context I mean, "not conducive to the enjoyment of the group as a whole".) I've had a few GMs at cons that were so obviously under-prepared and disengaged that I suspect that's the only reason why they were there.

I try to weed those folks out when I organize a con, but volunteer management is a tricky thing and you can't just question a volunteer's motivations like you could a paid staff person (for example). I don't know many people who like playing with an under-prepared GM, and I don't know anyone how wants to slam through scenarios in 26 minutes just so they can stay within the rules.

5/5 *****

BigNorseWolf wrote:
And then would have had the continued headache of all outsider parties.

Why is this a headache given that being an aasimar or tiefling is a relatively marginal benefit and an actively poor choice for a number of different character types.

Silver Crusade 2/5 *

andreww wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
And then would have had the continued headache of all outsider parties.
Why is this a headache given that being an aasimar or tiefling is a relatively marginal benefit and an actively poor choice for a number of different character types.

I'd say its better than a marginal benefit. That being said, I have no PCs of either race. I guess I'm a bad player :)

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 **

GM Lamplighter wrote:
trollbill wrote:
And from what I can tell from the powers that be, there is nothing wrong with this level of deliberate grandfathering. Nor should it be BECAUSE IF IT IS WRONG TO PLAY AN ADVENTURE JUST SO THAT YOU CAN GRANDFATHER IN A RACIAL BOON THEN IT IS WRONG TO GM AT A CONVENSION JUST SO YOU CAN GET A RACIAL BOON.
Worth addressing separately - John did say it was technically legal, but that he hoped it wouldn't happen.

I was under the impression that he was referring to people marathoning to get a stable of grandfathered in races, not someone who deliberately played an intro mod to grandfather in one or two characters, as there would be no purpose in the grandfathering rule as written if people were not expected to do the latter.

Quote:
But overall I agree with you, trollbill. It *is* wrong for someone to GM just to get a boon. (By "wrong" in this context I mean, "not conducive to the enjoyment of the group as a whole".) I've had a few GMs at cons that were so obviously under-prepared and disengaged that I suspect that's the only reason why they were there.

I understand what you are saying here and I don't disagree. But in both the case of excessive grandfathering and GMing just for a boon, these are negative side effects of a generally positive rule. While I am sure Paizo is aware that giving race boons to GMs at Cons can lead to occasional bad GMing experiences, I am pretty sure they feel the benefits of doing this far outweigh the negative side effects. And the grandfathering issue is even less of a problem because it is only a temporary problem at best. I am not against finding a solution to this side effect. I am against solutions that are more painful than the problem they are fixing is. In 16 pages of posts we still don't seem to have found one, which means it is unlikely we will.

4/5 5/55/55/5 ****

andreww wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
And then would have had the continued headache of all outsider parties.
Why is this a headache given that being an aasimar or tiefling is a relatively marginal benefit and an actively poor choice for a number of different character types.

I believe that they are dramatically aided by the Blood of Angels/Fiends books which allow a lot more variation with ability score bonuses that granted a solid benefit for most if not all character types.

Silver Crusade 2/5 *

They are non-dwarf, non-half orc with darkvision. That's a pretty slick benefit right there.

5/5 5/55/55/5

andreww wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
And then would have had the continued headache of all outsider parties.
Why is this a headache given that being an aasimar or tiefling is a relatively marginal benefit and an actively poor choice for a number of different character types.

Please tell me what character type they're a poor choice for, given the blood of angels/fiends books?

Grand Lodge 4/5

Blazej wrote:
I believe that they are dramatically aided by the Blood of Angels/Fiends books which allow a lot more variation with ability score bonuses that granted a solid benefit for most if not all character types.

Which is why I feel the alternate heritages should have been removed from the Additional Resources list rather than plane touched going back to boon-only, with the grandfather clause being for any current characters as of the announcement.

Then there would have been no rush to save a plane touched character for later.

I am looking forward to seeing the results of this decision actually pan out over the next couple years and see what history says about it.


andreww wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
And then would have had the continued headache of all outsider parties.
Why is this a headache given that being an aasimar or tiefling is a relatively marginal benefit and an actively poor choice for a number of different character types.

I think part of the problem was that they were basically immune to the abilities of the enemies in several senarios because they weren't humanoid. I haven't seen this be an issue in person though.

Silver Crusade 2/5 *

Matrix Dragon wrote:
andreww wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
And then would have had the continued headache of all outsider parties.
Why is this a headache given that being an aasimar or tiefling is a relatively marginal benefit and an actively poor choice for a number of different character types.
I think part of the problem was that they were basically immune to the abilities of the enemies in several senarios because they weren't humanoid. I haven't seen this be an issue in person though.

Most of those abilities have terrible DC, so who cares anyway?

Silver Crusade 4/5

BigNorseWolf wrote:
andreww wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
And then would have had the continued headache of all outsider parties.
Why is this a headache given that being an aasimar or tiefling is a relatively marginal benefit and an actively poor choice for a number of different character types.
Please tell me what character type they're a poor choice for, given the blood of angels/fiends books?

Prankster bard.

But yeah, they're an above average choice for almost any character type. But so are humans, due to the floating +2 stat bonus, extra feat, skill ranks, and awesome favored class bonuses for spontaneous caster classes.

Liberty's Edge 4/5 5/55/5 *** Venture-Lieutenant, Georgia—Atlanta

Is there a place where all the grandfathering rules have been compiled so folks definitively know where they stand and what they have to do to qualify for grandfathering?

5/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Please tell me what character type they're a poor choice for, given the blood of angels/fiends books?

Rogues. But so are every other race.

Horizon Hunters 4/5 5/5 ****

Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber

I don't think humans are anywhere close to being in the same league as Aasimar:

Aasimar: +2 WIS, +2 CON (no penalty to any stat); darkvision; cast daylight 1/day; Resistance to acid, cold, and electricity of 5 each.

Now, I am not familiar with the content of BoA, but if it's true that there are variants so that there are basically different combinations of the ability bonuses? No, humans aren't even close.

Now, I know this is entirely subjective on my part (and really, I think it's subjective generally), *I* don't see that a floating +2 ability bonus and a bonus feat and 1 bonus skill point per level come anywhere close to that. And, honestly, I don't think those things come close to some of the other core races. Yes, the bonus feat DOES allow humans to begin unlocking feat chains early, but if it's a feat chain they are going to get anyway (or likely to get, based on what they would choose for their character), I just don't see that bonus feat as a big advantage. I suppose if one were to try to really optimize a human character (I don't really try to do so), then maybe it has some value greater than what I believe it to have.

My primary character is a human cleric. I took combat casting at first level (not the standard feat tax of Selective Channeling, though I did pick that one up later.) Now, surely, combat casting, as a bonus feat, isn't anywhere in the same league as dark vision, or the various resistance, or bonuses to saving throws (Dwarves) or whatever. Again, just my opinion.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Mark Stratton wrote:
Now, I am not familiar with the content of BoA, but if it's true that there are variants so that there are basically different combinations of the ability bonuses? No, humans aren't even close.

Dual Talent helps that.

Horizon Hunters 4/5 5/5 ****

Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Mark Stratton wrote:
Now, I am not familiar with the content of BoA, but if it's true that there are variants so that there are basically different combinations of the ability bonuses? No, humans aren't even close.
Dual Talent helps that.

Sure, but they give up the other stuff that is supposed to make humans such an amazing race. But, let's say a human takes Dual Talent. 2 stats with bonus, no stats with penalties. That's it. Nothing else.

To me, that's really not in the same ballpark (though, I do like the dual talent option, to be sure - I just think the cost for it is pretty weighty, all things considered.)

Silver Crusade 2/5 *

Darkvision is disproportionately effective because the darkness series of spells are borderline broken. And low-light vision is a joke mechanically.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Mark Stratton wrote:
To me, that's really not in the same ballpark (though, I do like the dual talent option, to be sure - I just think the cost for it is pretty weighty, all things considered.)

That's why I didn't say it completely blew the plane touched out of the water. But by your own admission you don't think the feat and skill point are all that hot anyway.

Silver Crusade 4/5

Mark, if your primary character is a casting focused cleric, then of course you undervalue a bonus feat. That's just not a character type that needs specific feats to be effective.

There's another thread going on right now talking about different types of archer builds. I commented there that I'd never do an archer bard as any race other than human, because archery requires so many feats, and the build is too far behind at low levels without that human bonus feat. The same goes for paladin archers, unless you take the archetype that gives Precise Shot as a bonus feat early, but most people agree that archetype is weaker than just core, non-archetype paladin.

And again, the human favored class bonuses to pick up extra spells for spontaneous casters are amazing.

There are plenty of builds where human is mechanically the best choice. Not every build, and sometimes it's a balancing act of giving up some features for others, depending on chosen race. But I'd be hard pressed to come up with any non-race specific build where humans aren't at least the 3rd best option, from among the PFS always-legal races (current or after GenCon versions).

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

BigNorseWolf wrote:
andreww wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
And then would have had the continued headache of all outsider parties.
Why is this a headache given that being an aasimar or tiefling is a relatively marginal benefit and an actively poor choice for a number of different character types.
Please tell me what character type they're a poor choice for, given the blood of angels/fiends books?

STR-based magus or Eldritch Knight. (Dual-talent human is the only +STR/INT option.)

Dervish Dancers who want to lighten the feat load. (Go go human bonus feat.)

Sorcerer. (Extra spells known via human FCB is awesome.)

Every non-fighter archer, such as the ridonkulous archer inquisitor. (Human gets Precise Shot at level 1.) Same goes for gunslingers.

Non-ranger TWF builds who need both DEX for TWF feat prereqs and STR for attack/damage. (Dual-talent human is the only +STR/DEX option.)

Non-fighter TWF builds who want TWF and Weapon Finesse at 1st level. (Human bonus feat strikes again.)

The uber-barbarian, using human for the only +STR/CON option in the game.

I could probably name more, but the point is that your all-or-nothing perspective is ridiculous. Yes, BoF/BoA covered lots of character builds, but nowhere near all of them. Even "most" could be contested by humans, and where the planetouched do win out, the human is not far behind.

So quit acting like the outsiders were just flat-out better all around. All they really did was be the first races to really compete with humans.

Horizon Hunters 4/5 5/5 ****

Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber
Fromper wrote:
Mark, if your primary character is a casting focused cleric, then of course you undervalue a bonus feat. That's just not a character type that needs specific feats to be effective.

He is, indeed, casting-focused. I have him play a more traditional cleric role: primarily, he manages the battlefield - buffing and healing the party, hindering enemies, and then serving as a second line melee combatnt if need be. Plus, because I know he'll end up in melee range, I gave him combat casting.

For me, I think the more damage a cleric can mitigate or or prevent on the front end, the easier his or her job becomes as combat drags on.

But your points are well taken. Maybe I just don't see the higher value of humans that others do - I certainly like humans, and they are my favorite race, but that's not for any mechanical benefit.

I know my opinion is in the vast minority on these boards, I can live with that, but I just don't think, mechanically, they stack up quite as well as most of the other races which are playable (and that's why I was glad to see A/T be restricted, because they are just not balanced, really, against anything.)

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Mark Stratton wrote:

Maybe I just don't see the higher value of humans that others do...

...I just don't think, mechanically, they stack up quite as well as most of the other races which are playable (and that's why I was glad to see A/T be restricted, because they are just not balanced, really, against anything.)

See my list, right above your post. Humans are AWESOME. :)

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 **

Jiggy wrote:
Mark Stratton wrote:

Maybe I just don't see the higher value of humans that others do...

...I just don't think, mechanically, they stack up quite as well as most of the other races which are playable (and that's why I was glad to see A/T be restricted, because they are just not balanced, really, against anything.)

See my list, right above your post. Humans are AWESOME. :)

If you think humans are broken in Pathfinder, you should see how much they break the campaign in the real world.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 **

Jiggy wrote:

Every non-fighter archer, such as the ridonkulous archer inquisitor. (Human gets Precise Shot at level 1.) Same goes for gunslingers.

I did so love my elven cleric with the war & elf domains in Legacy of the Green Regent. Three archer feats at first level along with the elven bonus to Dex and archery buff spells...sigh...

4/5

Mark Stratton wrote:


I know my opinion is in the vast minority on these boards, I can live with that, but I just don't think, mechanically, they stack up quite as well as most of the other races which are playable (and that's why I was glad to see A/T be restricted, because they are just not balanced, really, against anything.)

Of the 46 optimization guides for core and base classes on the Advice forum, only 4 list humans as less than top tier options (Hexcrafter Magus, Summoner, and two Wizard guides.) And those 4 list Humans as second tier options, mainly because the extra feat isn't so useful on those builds. (And those that do list humans as second tier don't cover the ARG option to drop the feat for a second +2 to an ability score.)

Humans are an exceptionally good race and are universally the benchmark against which all other races are judged. Those optimizers who are hoarding Tieflings and Aasimars? Yeah, when the planestouched run out they'll be playing humans for the vast majority of their characters.

Horizon Hunters 4/5 5/5 ****

Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber

So, are humans held in that regard only when optimized, or are they just naturally that good, even if they are not optimized? (And I ask this as a genuine question.)

Grand Lodge 4/5

I find them to just naturally be that good regardless of optimization. No real weaknesses and with the ultimate flexibility to be anything.

5/5 5/55/55/5

Jiggy wrote:
So quit acting like the outsiders were just flat-out better all around. All they really did was be the first races to really compete with humans.

If you can show otherwise I would.

You can't.

Your options are terrible, and the advantages only last a level, if that. If you're going to divide your list down into hundreds of pieces, how many more pieces ARE they the best option for? Hundreds of them compared to your paltry list.

4/5

Mark Stratton wrote:
So, are humans held in that regard only when optimized, or are they just naturally that good, even if they are not optimized? (And I ask this as a genuine question.)

I'm not sure what you're asking. There really aren't tutorial threads on "how to roleplay" or "character backgrounds and you," so there isn't a way to make that kind of comparison.

There certainly are people who believe that humans are the dominant race on Golarion and therefore should naturally make up the majority of PCs. Humans are also more relatable characters: Everyone knows how humans act and feel and how diverse they can be, but it's hard for a lot of people to imagine a non-Tolkienesque Dwarf of Elf. There are also understandable Human ethnicities that make for easy character building and background creation, like Ulfen = Vikings, Osirians = Ancient Egyptians, Taldors = Byzantines, etc. As far as I know, all of the APs and most of the modules and PFS scenarios at least start in primarily Human communities, so Humans fit in easily as well.

So Humans have a lot of non-mechanical advantages in a lot of peoples' eyes.

And it's really, really hard to give up an extra feat, skill point, and +2 to any stat you want even if you aren't trying to maximize a build. Those just flat out give you more options (and the lack of a penalty stat is a plus for people who don't like dump stats.)

Silver Crusade 4/5

TriOmegaZero wrote:
I find them to just naturally be that good regardless of optimization. No real weaknesses and with the ultimate flexibility to be anything.

Agreed.

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Mark Stratton wrote:
So, are humans held in that regard only when optimized, or are they just naturally that good, even if they are not optimized? (And I ask this as a genuine question.)

Maybe this would be the best way to put it:

For any given class/build, human is either the best or second-best race.

See, the non-human races generally have racial abilities geared toward a particular thing. For instance, dwarves have bonuses to saves, CON, and the casting stat for clerics, and also do well in armor. So if you specifically want to play a divine caster who's hard to kill thanks to lots of armor/HP/saves, then dwarf is #1. If you want to play straightforward wizard who's good at punching through SR, elf is solid because of his +INT and bonus vs SR. Basically, for each race, there's one or two very specific types of characters that they suit really, really well; for anything else, they're fighting an uphill battle.

So take the number of non-human Core races, multiply it by about 1.5 or 2, and that's how many specific types of characters humans AREN'T the best for. And even for those, they're still a close second.

There are a bajillion character types out there. Each Core race is the master of one or two, except humans who get ALL OF THE REST.

Then BoF/BoA comes out, and suddenly there's a pair of races who have more than one niche they can fill. Between the two of them, the combined total might actually outnumber the humans' "best in class" options. Maybe.

1 to 50 of 853 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Paizo Blog: New Options All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.