You don't ask your GMs before making a character
Most time there is a list of available options given, most common official pathfinder available online. Any game exclusions are expected to be listed up front. 'can I house rule a class/race' would be something that would HAVE to come before a character, as it isn't an a official pathfinder online resources. Most times, I submit a completed character, the Dm makes comments and corrections if needed and we continue that until a character is finished.
I'm not sure how that would not be something you'd discuss at that time too?
I don't know why an online DM wouldn't put all the info up so as not to field EVERYONE's questions just to get every up to start. Listing the base assumptions just saves everyone time and effort in the long run.
However, it is a fair fix, if it means they can technically be played with those classes they were rather Immune to before.
*shrug* They were fine before, Now they are inconsistent with other plants and remove the function of normal anti-plant abilities.If I went to the trouble of being able to affect plants with mind affecting spells, it's a letdown when I find that I didn't need to go to the trouble as they as as vulnerable as the average goblin...
It also means they'll be most likely be PSF legal as well, with this adjustment, for those that have been wanting it.
I can't tell you how little I care about that. there is no guarantee that these will make the 'race of the season' list and even if they were I #1 would never play PFS and #2 if forced at gunpoint to play PFS, wouldn't pick these races as I didn't have an interest in them when I thought they were immune.
Honestly, I don't find it game breaking.
*nods* That's what I said about their immunities too...
|
Its not game breaking, but it is bit encounter breaking. Plant characters are immune to multiple things, so encounters build around those status effects would be completely null.
Also, it makes a lot of class feature immunities from different classes redundant(like to be immune to poison from druid) besides that none of morale or polymorph buffs would work.
Basically, considering how much its a pain to think "is this race on same power level as this other race", I do think its easier to just remove the immunities, those two plant races still have their other racial features to set them up from other races right?
Its not game breaking, but it is bit encounter breaking. Plant characters are immune to multiple things, so encounters build around those status effects would be completely null.
For that player. Are all the players that race?
Also, it makes a lot of class feature immunities from different classes redundant(like to be immune to poison from druid) besides that none of morale or polymorph buffs would work.
And? None of that is gamebreaking and it's not like the game doesn't have LOTS of instances of redundant abilities: I multiclass monk and brawler, I have multiple improved unarmed strikes...
And none of that even hits on turning those abilities into resistances which as apparently fine for an android [like NO morale], instead of across the board removal. then we add penalties like delicious and light dependent that are overkill now that they aren't counterbalancing immunities or even resistances.
Basically, considering how much its a pain to think "is this race on same power level as this other race", I do think its easier to just remove the immunities, those two plant races still have their other racial features to set them up from other races right?
You have that "is this race on same power level as this other race" with EVERY race, so there isn't any 'pain' there that isn't built into the game.
racial features: Set them apart? Not really. I never thought about the ghoran BEFORE it lost the immunities. Without them...
Now I haven't looked over the alternate racial traits, so maybe there is something awesome hiding in there, but so far the base stats for the 'plant' aren't exciting me.
|
|
Androids aren't straight up constructs though so they don't have most of the construct's immunities. Plants also have way more immunities. Ghorans also have natural armor bonus, a way to retrain their skills ranks for essentially free and they always get all knowledge skills, those racial traits by themselves are really powerful, on penalties, well with delicious trait you can replace it with disgusting trait if you really want to and light dependency isn't that bad unless you have Darklands campaign, access to sunlight is much easier to deal with than penalties some races get in from being in direct sunlight.
I don't think we can really proceed on this debate since not much to say besides "I think it can be justified" and you responding with "I don't think it can be justified!"
Androids aren't straight up constructs though so they don't have most of the construct's immunities.
And now the plant races don't have ANY... You don't see the different treatment? The not "straight up constructs" get resistances that match the immunity while ACTUAL plants somehow don't...
Plants also have way more immunities.
They do?
Plants: immune to all mind-affecting effects, paralysis, poison, polymorph, sleep effects, and stunning.Construct: immune to all mind-affecting effects, ability damage, ability drain, fatigue, exhaustion, energy drain, nonlethal damage, any effect that requires a Fortitude save, massive damage...
I don't know about your math, but my count leaves plants behind constructs.
Ghorans also have natural armor bonus
Ok... That's not exactly unique...
a way to retrain their skills ranks for essentially free
Well the seed has to be planted for 2d6 days without being disturbed and you get a free negative level while you wait. Then you die when it happens so you need to stick with the seed or risk having your equipment someplace else. It's interesting, but the logistics make it much less thrilling. Add to that the fact that there is rarely a need to retrain skills and it ends up pretty 'meh' IMO.
they always get all knowledge skills
Human's Comprehensive Education blows it out of the water by doing that AND a +1 racial bonus on skill checks for each Knowledge skill that they gain as a class skill from their class levels.
those racial traits by themselves are really powerful
They are? They don't beat out the base core races without the penalties. With them...
with delicious trait you can replace it with disgusting trait if you really want to and light dependency isn't that bad unless you have Darklands campaign, access to sunlight is much easier to deal with than penalties some races get in from being in direct sunlight.
It's not the fact that it "isn't that bad", but the fact that still have them AT ALL. The very least they could do is remove them along with the immunities. Not doing that just seems mean. :P
There's a lot of I've heard about that makes me excited for the book, but the Shifter seems disappointing from what I know. It doesn't sound like it should be named the Shifter, being worse at the shapeshifting gimmick than anything else that can shapeshift (except maybe Kitsune or Skinwalker Commoners) or cast polymorph spells (which is almost anything with spellcasting), or even be its own class. It sounds like it should be an archetype for Unchained Monk that gives it some of the more underwhelming Hunter features (does anyone actually care about Wild Empathy, Track, Trackless Step, or Woodland Stride?). That said, we did need another full BAB class and another non-Charisma martial class.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's a lot of I've heard about that makes me excited for the book, but the Shifter seems disappointing from what I know. It doesn't sound like it should be named the Shifter, being worse at the shapeshifting gimmick than anything else that can shapeshift (except maybe Kitsune or Skinwalker Commoners) or cast polymorph spells (which is almost anything with spellcasting), or even be its own class. It sounds like it should be an archetype for Unchained Monk that gives it some of the more underwhelming Hunter features (does anyone actually care about Wild Empathy, Track, Trackless Step, or Woodland Stride?). That said, we did need another full BAB class and another non-Charisma martial class.
No, it is more the Totem, channeling the totem animals since it barely shifts (and limited in number of shifts).
Except that Beorn was referred to as a shape-shifter, yet had only 2 forms, IIRC. So, no need to rename as literature has set a precedent for this class. No better authors than Tolkien, IMO. Perhaps this was part of their inspiration when the class was created.
I kind of just assumed Beorn was a natural lycantrhope. It's not like Tolkien cared about balance between main characters.
No mention of "Were-" or "Lycanthrope". Just the term 'shape-shifter'. Seemed very intentional to me. Also, he had absolute control over his forms. No outside influences to compel Beorn's change (i.e. phases of the moon).
This is exactly what I expected from the Shifter, so I have no issue with this class. It's Beorn and therefore very cool.
I kind of just assumed Beorn was a natural lycantrhope. It's not like Tolkien cared about balance between main characters.No mention of "Were-" or "Lycanthrope". Just the term 'shape-shifter'. Seemed very intentional to me. Also, he had absolute control over his forms. No outside influences to compel Beorn's change (i.e. phases of the moon).
This is exactly what I expected from the Shifter, so I have no issue with this class. It's Beorn and therefore very cool.
It was also very clearly genetic, though, so I think Beorn is more like a Skinwalker who took the feats to actually assume animal shape. Besides, if he were a Shifter, he would be very limited in the time he could be in Bear shape for.
Besides, I doubt Tolkien (or rather, Bilbo, as the book is written from his perspective) cared much about getting the exact terminology correct, especially when he wasn’t even going by RPG rules.
It is BECAUSE of such authors we have RPGs. He was the grandfather of fantasy literature, so of course he wasn't going by RPG rules (insert eye roll here). There weren't any yet!
Whatever the intent, he used the word 'shape-shifter'. The character of Beorn does fit this class rather nicely in addition to the word choice. And the word was quoted from Gandalf, so Bilbo's perspective is irrelevant.
EDIT: Oops, the term used was actually 'Beorn the Skin-changer'.
Still, I see this class as being the closest equivalent to creating a Beorn-like character.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is BECAUSE of such authors we have RPGs. He was the grandfather of fantasy literature, so of course he wasn't going by RPG rules (insert eye roll here). There weren't any yet!
Whatever the intent, he used the word 'shape-shifter'. The character of Beorn does fit this class rather nicely in addition to the word choice. And the word was quoted from Gandalf, so Bilbo's perspective is irrelevant.EDIT: Oops, the term used was actually 'Beorn the Skin-changer'.
Still, I see this class as being the closest equivalent to creating a Beorn-like character.
I'm not saying the Shifter can't shapeshift. It absolutely can. The problem is that druids, hunters, bloodragers, rangers, warpriests, clerics, and more can shapeshift better. Not to mention the race that really, really shouldn't allow any class to be a better shapeshifter than the shapeshifting class.
If I were to make Beorn, I would pick literally any full-BAB class, play as a Coldborn Skinwalker, and ask the GM to houserule a feat that does for the werebear-kin what Bat Shape does for werebat-kin.
Or, you know, just play a druid.