Fuzzy Feet and Voles to Meet

So, uh, yeah... Big old chunks of character definition on those backgrounds. Not only flavor chunks, but fairly important structural chunks.
That part's not really growing on me yet.

Edit: To be fair, it hasn't really grown on me since the First Look blog, but I also haven't seen the rules in action. I prefer granularity if not outright freedom (within the confines of the setting and table) in defining who my characters are. That said, I'm really trying to keep an open mind here. Deciding that you aren't going to like something before you encounter it is often a self fulfilling prophecy. You know your own preferences better than anyone, but perception happens as much within as without.

I hope I like it. I like liking things.

What sort of halfling or gnome characters do you look forward to playing?

I'll be testing out P2e by seeing if I can make a recognizable version of Douena Trestleben, whom I first created in Beta rules lo these many years ago. That's going to take multiclassing rules, though, and none of those ancestry feats sound anything like her....

I hope that if Backgrounds and Classes add stat adjustments that none of them are negative. One shouldn't be less intelligent if they are a farmer or physically weaker because they were a scholar. Likewise some barbarians should be intelligent and some clerics should be dextrous.

I'd definitely worry about people just stacking stat flaws to end up with like a 4 in something, if they are applied at every stage of chargen.

Not sure we're getting universal removal of small/medium damage dice differences. It'd be nice, but…

Additionally, the sling is now a more formidable weapon than in Pathfinder First Edition—we've both increased its damage and done away with the difference in damage die size between Small and Medium creatures.

… I can read that either way. If we don't get universal removal, that's a pretty clever way to make the sling a good fit for small ancestries, and goes well with the David/Goliath vibe! If we do get universal removal, hooray!

Anyway, ratfolk/ysoki are the only small race/ancestry I'm particularly interested in, but it's nice to see Prestidigitation is still around and there's a Tanglefoot cantrip.

Yup this pretty much confirmed my worst fears regarding the goblin/halfling balance.

Ugh. Any concept that I would want to play as a halfling is just basically going to be a crappy version of the same character as a stupid goblin.

All of my hate.

So it looks like the ability score modifiers are unchanged from the previous edition. That bodes well for unofficial conversions of non-core races.

Now we just need to figure out the formula for calculating racial hit points. Since gnomes have the same number of hit points as halflings, it clearly isn't the Con modifier that moves dwarves and elves away from the apparent default of 8 hit points for race.

very much digging how races are being handled so far. Im betting on 10 in everything, apply ancestry, apply some sort of background theme and them spend 10. Very excited to see how this all plays out.

So this gives us confirmation then: Race gives you starting HP, 2 static ability score boosts, 1 static ability score penalty and a floating ability score boost (humans will likely be exceptions to this), speed, special vision (if any), languages and a single feat.

Looks like backgrounds will do the heavy lifting for all of the various bonuses races use to give (like +4 dodge bonus against certain foes, +1 attack rolls against certain foes, +2 to spot things in stonework) I would be really happy with that setup. It would completely divorce the biological and the physical. We'll have to wait and see if that's something we actually get or if those parts are just going to be locked into ancestry feats that means you can't actually gain them at level 1 and also gain the biological feat for your race.

Also seems kind of weird that both halflings and Gnomes get the exact same hp since gnomes have always been presented as more...sturdy I guess?

AD&D 2e halflingws were also presented as being sturdy as well. But gnomes do get a +2 constitution bonus which halflings don't automatically get.

Also!, this is interesting.

Blog wrote:

Most ancestries get three ability boosts

2 floating bonuses for humans (no penalties)? Makes up for them not getting special vision to a degree.

Advantage and Disadvantage Fortune and Misfortune, eh? I'm okay with that, it was a good idea in 5E and it will be a good idea here. At least, as long as you don't make 5E's mistake of relying on it in place of actual numerical bonuses

I think it's more tidying up an element from Pathfinder 1e. A lot of abilities have been introduced over the years that give rerolls. I believe there's been conflicting board posts on how to handle it with nothing ever written in any of the books. This is just codifying one of the board posts.

I still am not happy with 20/25/30 being the speed spread instead of 25/30/35

Why?

I'm willin to bet all my silver smerduks that there'll be a "Slave" background of some kind. It makes sense not just for Halflings but also for lots of Half-Orcs and Goblins.

It would probably be called Escaped Slave. My halfling bard who full power attacks and hits like a tank would definitely take a such a background.

I have to say I agree with the others who say all Small races getting Charisma is... not exactly one we're into. Of course, I'm not sure that Goblins should get a +2 to Charisma in any event, but if they ARE going to, then yeah. We know that Halflings have greater strength of will seeing how they can persevere when others falter and have an increased tendency to prevail against fear... so having their Wisdom increased instead of Charisma seems a far better option.

Likewise... while I personally think that Goblins should get an Intelligence bonus instead of Charisma, why not go this route for the Gnome instead? Gnomes are inquisitive and curious, so show this through a bonus to Intelligence. Heck, they're known for illusions and the like, and Illusionist is a Wizard specialization... so it seems fairly intuitive to boost their Intelligence rather than Charisma.

It also makes sense since Gnomes are not exactly the calm quiet ones seeing they are constantly striving to find new sensations and interests to avoid the Bleaching. I don't think "zany" when I think "charismatic" so... definitely drop the Charisma for Intelligence.

Mostly in agreement here. For goblins, I'd actually give them +Dex +Con over +Dex +Int because of how dim they are portrayed in Paizo published material. For gnomes, +Con +Int is definitely the way to go; "zany" is something that exists off at a tangent to Charisma, not something that boosts Charisma. For halflings, I'd actually like to see +Wis +Cha.

Small note, it seems quite clear now that traits that were given to all races initially will now be split up into Ancestry Feats. I have to wonder about that, but perhaps it's also to make other races less attractive and start on a more even playing field compared to humans.

Hm, I hope not on that latter point. I wanted to finally see humans get an identity besides just being uber-generalists. As for racial abilities being split into ancestry feats though, that's fine. As long as they let us start with 3 of them.

Given the lack of details on magic or resonance, I'm thinking we're probably going to see classes other than Wizard next... and probably not Cleric either, seeing they have magic of a sort as well. So... probably Monk then....

I also think they won't show us spellcasters until later; the impression I've gotten from some of the dev comments is that some or maybe all of the spellcasters are actually in much more flux right now than the martials, and their playtest shape hasn't actually been settled yet.

While I'm keenly interested in the Monk, I think we may potentially get Barbarian or Ranger first. Especially so they can finally settle the matter of what other front line combatants who aren't the Fighter get instead of AoO.

First off, LOVE the gnome art... and I hate the halfling art. Looks like a cross between a farmer and a weasel.

*sigh* Okay, overall, not completely impressed the PF2e small PC races. Really? They ALL get Charisma bonuses? You don't think maybe Halflings could get Charisma, Gnomes Intelligence, and Goblins Wisdom or something? Right now, they all seem so similar, there isn't enough differences. If you're small you get less Strength, more Charisma and probably Dexterity, and you're as slow as a fully armored dwarf. Unless you're a goblin. For some reason, if you're a goblin you are as fast as a human, despite having legs half the size... whaaaat?

It looks like we have 3 kinds of halflings now... the kind that don't wear shoes, the kind whose hair changes colors, and the kind that used to eat babies but now they don't because now they're nice for some reason. Ugh... If all scores start the same except for these bonuses, I'd like to see those bonuses differentiate a lot more than it currently appears.

So far, I'm just not impressed with any of the small races (despite a deep love for gnomes in the past).

This could of course lead to a bardic trio of a goblin, gnome, and halfling, all with their CHA bonuses...

;)

Not sure we're getting universal removal of small/medium damage dice differences. It'd be nice, but…

Quote:

Additionally, the sling is now a more formidable weapon than in Pathfinder First Edition—we've both increased its damage and done away with the difference in damage die size between Small and Medium creatures.

… I can read that either way. If we don't get universal removal, that's a pretty clever way to make the sling a good fit for small ancestries, and goes well with the David/Goliath vibe! If we do get universal removal, hooray!

I could see there being an item property for "this item relies on its heft to deal damage" so that a large one would deal more damage than a medium one would deal more damage than a small one. But this should apply to like axes and hammers, not slings and rapiers.

Aside from needing to remove the bleaching nonsense and changing one of the small races to having an int bonus and another to a wisdom bonus, it all looks pretty okay.

To go back to my earlier post, I'm not too concerned what race gets what bonus so long as they are all different somehow.

Out of everything that has been revealed so far, all the small people getting CHA boosts is the only thing that has edged out shield use being so unwieldy for rubbing me the wrong way.

I am fine with goblins having CHA as their bonus due to their animal magnetism (the old school pseudosciencey force of will meaning not the usual seductive definition). I'd also be okay with them having INT for their bonus as mentioned above because they are consummate salvagers. It is also better synergy with the new iconic Alchemist.

I am fine with Gnomes having CHA as their thing due to their driving need to be outgoing extroverts or they suffer the bleaching. I am less okay with them having INT as their bonus because INT boosted gnomes are a flavor I'm tired of. Tinker gnomes from Krynn or Faerun or wherever have spoiled that for me.

Halflings with a CHA bonus also makes sense, but if they are going to go for Golarion infused lore for their CRB, then halflings with WIS is even better. Very aware, tenacious, unbreakable spirits makes great sense for the setting and sets halflings in Pathfinder apart from the normal variety. Plus a lot of their ancestry abilities are geared towards willpower, so that works out too!

TLDR?

Gimme Goblins (+INT), Gnomes (+CHA), and Halflings (+WIS).

"Additionally, the sling is now a more formidable weapon than in Pathfinder First Edition—we've both increased its damage and done away with the difference in damage die size between Small and Medium creatures."

The way this reads is a bit misleading. Is it that slings (and only slings) will have the same damage small vs medium? Or will all weapons not have the same damage. I read it as only slings are getting this treatment, but others are reading all weapons are. Can we get designer commentary please?

Gimme Goblins (+INT), Gnomes (+CHA), and Halflings (+WIS).

So goblins are more intelligent then both gnomes and halflings? The race who for recorded history hasn't been able to work out that setting your neighbours on fire is probably a bad idea until just recently?

The problem is that goblins don't make sense as being more wise (they're not) or more intelligent (wait, goblins are now better wizards than gnomes!?). Halflings having a bonus to charisma is historical. Gnomes could probably benefit by going back to +INT rather than +CHA. Although if they're trying go the route of "having innate spellcasting just means you have a touch of sorcerer" than it makes sense for gnomes to have a bonus to CHA.

This could all be fixed by giving goblins less bonuses to ability scores or giving them +2 CON, +2 DEX, -2 WIS. Unfortunately Paizo are married to the idea that core races can't have +2 to the same category of attributes (I'm not sure why though).

I do hope that Pathfinder 2nd Edition gives us an opportunity to play a bleachling earlier in the life cycle of the product than PF1 did.

I'm a little scared that some of those feats sound too fiddly. I'm afraid we're going to start seeing a ranking of feats, and that I'll once again be forced to pick between a cool sounding feat and an optimized feat required to make a viable PC.

While I'm really liking how the halfling and gnome sound, I'm kind of worried about how the feats sound. I'd like them all to be roughly the same power level, so if I pick a flavor based feat, I'm not sacrificing too much power (a little is ok).

(Just a little)

I'm with the folks who are wondering why being small makes you charismatic.

I mean, glad everybody wants to be halflings now, but it doesn't make much sense. My vote goes to the Gnomes +INT, Halflings +WIS, and Goblins +CHA

"Additionally, the sling is now a more formidable weapon than in Pathfinder First Edition—we've both increased its damage and done away with the difference in damage die size between Small and Medium creatures."

The way this reads is a bit misleading. Is it that slings (and only slings) will have the same damage small vs medium? Or will all weapons not have the same damage. I read it as only slings are getting this treatment, but others are reading all weapons are. Can we get designer commentary please?

All weapons!

This could of course lead to a bardic trio of a goblin, gnome, and halfling, all with their CHA bonuses...

;)

My gnome/goblin/halfling bardic trio shall put ranks into Perform (Dance).

Prepare for the Cha-Cha-Cha.

All weapons!

I am happy to hear that Pathfinder 2nd Edition is going to be the friendliest game in this family of games for "Greataxe Wielding Gnome Barbarians."

"Additionally, the sling is now a more formidable weapon than in Pathfinder First Edition—we've both increased its damage and done away with the difference in damage die size between Small and Medium creatures."

The way this reads is a bit misleading. Is it that slings (and only slings) will have the same damage small vs medium? Or will all weapons not have the same damage. I read it as only slings are getting this treatment, but others are reading all weapons are. Can we get designer commentary please?

They could go a similar route that D&D 4th ed did: Light weapons are used normally by small creatures, normal weapons need to be two-handed by small creatures unless they have a special property that says otherwise, two-handed weapons can't be used by small creatures unless they have a special property that says otherwise.

Slings could then count as light weapons, shortbows have a special property that allows small creatures to use them normally and longbows simply can't be used by small creatures while crossbows require two hands for small creatures.

My vote also goes Gnomes +INT, Halflings +WIS, and Goblins +CHA. I fondly remember the gnome illusionists and halfling druids from ancient AD&D days.

I'm really diggin how slings sound. I've always wanted slings to he a bit better, and I'm really hoping that halflings will be the best slingers in the game.

TwilightKnight wrote:

"Additionally, the sling is now a more formidable weapon than in Pathfinder First Edition—we've both increased its damage and done away with the difference in damage die size between Small and Medium creatures."

The way this reads is a bit misleading. Is it that slings (and only slings) will have the same damage small vs medium? Or will all weapons not have the same damage. I read it as only slings are getting this treatment, but others are reading all weapons are. Can we get designer commentary please?

All weapons!

Thank you. :)

TheFinish wrote:

bookrat wrote:

These are looking great!

Since being a slave is a part of the history (and current events!) of halflings, will we see a slave or escaped slave background?

I'm willin to bet all my silver smerduks that there'll be a "Slave" background of some kind. It makes sense not just for Halflings but also for lots of Half-Orcs and Goblins.

Modern RPG's have been trending away from touching on subjects like that in their core materials lately, though.

Have they? I might very well be out of touch, of course, but the only two Fantasy RPGs I've gotten lately are Conan and Zweihander, both of which feature Slaves/Slavery as a background element in the Core rules.

TwilightKnight wrote:

"Additionally, the sling is now a more formidable weapon than in Pathfinder First Edition—we've both increased its damage and done away with the difference in damage die size between Small and Medium creatures."

The way this reads is a bit misleading. Is it that slings (and only slings) will have the same damage small vs medium? Or will all weapons not have the same damage. I read it as only slings are getting this treatment, but others are reading all weapons are. Can we get designer commentary please?

All weapons!

On the one hand, I'm sad since I sort of liked that difference. On the other hand, it's much simpler this way so eh.

Charisma bonus lorewise makes a grim kind of sense for Halflings considering the entire reason whey they're the favorite slave-race is because "they're the least likely to complain about it" and the most pleasant to have around with their usual optimism.

I'd reaaaally like to know more about how ability scores are generated. If it's true that backgrounds play a part I'm worried that we're going to get into a situation where all Barbarians take the same 3 backgrounds because they grant a STR boost, for example.

I'm a little scared that some of those feats sound too fiddly. I'm afraid we're going to start seeing a ranking of feats, and that I'll once again be forced to pick between a cool sounding feat and an optimized feat required to make a viable PC.

While I'm really liking how the halfling and gnome sound, I'm kind of worried about how the feats sound. I'd like them all to be roughly the same power level, so if I pick a flavor based feat, I'm not sacrificing too much power (a little is ok).

(Just a little)

I really, really want all the feats to be as close to parity with each other as possible. It's okay if some feats are more situational, but then those feats need to be better when they do proc than the always-useful ones like Power Attack which can come up every round in every combat.

Looking into this is going to be a huge focus for me when I get the book and they start the surveys.

First off, LOVE the gnome art... and I hate the halfling art. Looks like a cross between a farmer and a weasel.

Ahem.

*sigh* Okay, overall, not completely impressed the PF2e small PC races. Really? They ALL get Charisma bonuses? You don't think maybe Halflings could get Charisma, Gnomes Intelligence, and Goblins Wisdom or something? Right now, they all seem so similar, there isn't enough differences. If you're small you get less Strength, more Charisma and probably Dexterity, and you're as slow as a fully armored dwarf. Unless you're a goblin. For some reason, if you're a goblin you are as fast as a human, despite having legs half the size... whaaaat?

It looks like we have 3 kinds of halflings now... the kind that don't wear shoes, the kind whose hair changes colors, and the kind that used to eat babies but now they don't because now they're nice for some reason. Ugh... If all scores start the same except for these bonuses, I'd like to see those bonuses differentiate a lot more than it currently appears.

So far, I'm just not impressed with any of the small races (despite a deep love for gnomes in the past).

Yeah I've got to agree about the similarity of stats, especially goblins and halflings having the same ones. I can understand not changing the stat modifiers of the core races, they've been established to work this way for a while, and just suddenly saying "Oh yeah, gnomes are now smarter instead of charismatic." Is a bit strange (although if it must be done, that's probably the best choice). Goblins really should be the ones to change. The CHA bonus just doesn't make sense to them. The only reason I can see they did it was to maintain the tradition of one physical and one mental bonus, and INT doesn't make much sense as a bonus because they're portrayed as dumb (and it doesn't make sense to have gobs be among the best wizards). I agree that CON really is a better fit even if it breaks the pattern.

The fact that ancestry stat mods now seem to be applied at the beginning instead of the end is something I'm not thrilled about. I like the PF1 way of applying them at the end so for example an elf can be allocated 18 base in INT and then come out as 20. Putting it at the beginning makes it sound like the ceiling is the same for everyone, which makes the exceptional abilities for a given ancestry less significant.

My vote also goes Gnomes +INT, Halflings +WIS, and Goblins +CHA. I fondly remember the gnome illusionists and halfling druids from ancient AD&D days.

I whole heartedly agree. Gnome illusionists also seem to fit the PF2 gnome culture.

Yeah the small races are all SO similar that its going to be hard justifying play as like Halfling or Gnome Melee character period and all 3 are REALLY going to crowd each other on the cha and dex based scene.

It seems like this could have been handled in such a way that made the three feel more unique from one another, especially if you were going to strip down ancestry the way you have.

Stone Dog wrote:

Gimme Goblins (+INT), Gnomes (+CHA), and Halflings (+WIS).

So goblins are more intelligent then both gnomes and halflings? The race who for recorded history hasn't been able to work out that setting your neighbours on fire is probably a bad idea until just recently?

I can see them as irrational and generally detached from empathy and perspective, but with a cunning and ingenuity that leads them to having an INT bonus even though they don't normally have much sense. Just as I can see them being driven and intense enough to have a +CHA without them being nice or sociable. And very possibly if you can get them past their cultural taboos, then they might make surprisingly adept wizards, but they normally go for alchemy in that direction.

Nobody expects that of them though, since the normal encounter with goblins leads people to think their apparent insanity is also stupidity.

This could all be fixed by giving goblins less bonuses to ability scores or giving them +2 CON, +2 DEX, -2 WIS. Unfortunately Paizo are married to the idea that core races can't have +2 to the same category of attributes (I'm not sure why though).

These ideas also have merit though.

My vote also goes Gnomes +INT, Halflings +WIS, and Goblins +CHA. I fondly remember the gnome illusionists and halfling druids from ancient AD&D days.

I concur. I get that each ancestry is going to have a physical and mental bonus. I think this break down does fit the three races much better.

I'm fine with both Gnomes and Goblins having Charisma because they have nothing else in common stat-wise. That's also only two of the core Ancestries having a Cha bump, which is fine.

But Halflings...Halflings are now almost identical to Goblins in stats and that's an issue. Changing Halflings to Wisdom actually seems like a really good solution to this to me, and I'd definitely be on board for it.

I prefer that to swapping things on the Goblin as that leaves Gnomes and Halflings too similar. Ditto changing Gnomes leaving Goblins and Halflings too similar.

JRutterbush wrote:

TheFinish wrote:

bookrat wrote:

These are looking great!

Since being a slave is a part of the history (and current events!) of halflings, will we see a slave or escaped slave background?

I'm willin to bet all my silver smerduks that there'll be a "Slave" background of some kind. It makes sense not just for Halflings but also for lots of Half-Orcs and Goblins.

Modern RPG's have been trending away from touching on subjects like that in their core materials lately, though.

Have they? I might very well be out of touch, of course, but the only two Fantasy RPGs I've gotten lately are Conan and Zweihander, both of which feature Slaves/Slavery as a background element in the Core rules.

Mark Seifter wrote:

TwilightKnight wrote:

"Additionally, the sling is now a more formidable weapon than in Pathfinder First Edition—we've both increased its damage and done away with the difference in damage die size between Small and Medium creatures."

The way this reads is a bit misleading. Is it that slings (and only slings) will have the same damage small vs medium? Or will all weapons not have the same damage. I read it as only slings are getting this treatment, but others are reading all weapons are. Can we get designer commentary please?

All weapons!

On the one hand, I'm sad since I sort of liked that difference. On the other hand, it's much simpler this way so eh.

Both of those games are specifically focused on a grim, gritty, setting with a darker tone than your average fantasy. They're definitely outliers in that regard, and not especially representative of the norm.

I can see them as irrational and generally detached from empathy and perspective, but with a cunning and ingenuity that leads them to having an INT bonus even though they don't normally have much sense.

+2 INT makes them better wizards than gnomes. That's a problem IMO.

I'm fine with both Gnomes and Goblins having Charisma because they have nothing else in common stat-wise. That's also only two of the core Ancestries having a Cha bump, which is fine.

But Halflings...Halflings are now almost identical to Goblins in stats and that's an issue. Changing Halflings to Wisdom actually seems like a really good solution to this to me, and I'd definitely be on board for it.

I prefer that to swapping things on the Goblin as that leaves Gnomes and Halflings too similar.

Or just cut the goblins entirely since theyre the ones forcing the issue!

I would prefer gnomes +Int, Halflings +Cha, and goblins out of the core, but I'm fairly convinced the later is not going to happen. As such, it certainly makes no sense to give the goblin +Wis, so I guess the next best option is the one above with gnome +Int, halfling +Wis, goblin +Cha. Of those three, I am least opposed to the goblin +Cha. In no universe should they get +Wis and I think the only reason to give them +Int would be because they are the iconic alchemist. Plus, as was said about, giving goblins +Int is essentially saying the average goblin is smarter than the average gnome or halfling and that is a rough pill to swallow. At least with +Cha you could argue that's based on intimidating which is more reasonably than the other two, IMO.

Fuzzypaws wrote:

Advantage and Disadvantage Fortune and Misfortune, eh? I'm okay with that, it was a good idea in 5E and it will be a good idea here. At least, as long as you don't make 5E's mistake of relying on it in place of actual numerical bonuses

I think it's more tidying up an element from Pathfinder 1e. A lot of abilities have been introduced over the years that give rerolls. I believe there's been conflicting board posts on how to handle it with nothing ever written in any of the books. This is just codifying one of the board posts.

Ah, yeah, I can see that. If this is just how they're codifying all the good luck / bad luck effects, and making them use consistent rules, I'm for that.

Fuzzypaws wrote:

I still am not happy with 20/25/30 being the speed spread instead of 25/30/35

Why?

A few reasons. Moving only 4 squares (less in heavy armor) doesn't really feel great and never has, tbh. It's also another mental barrier to switching for players used to PF1, D&D and other systems, where the "baseline" speed is usually 6 squares instead of 5.

I have heard and understand the argument that goes, "Well with the new action economy you can move 3 times per round, so a human moves a total of 75 instead of 60." But that is easily handled; PF1 already does it. Moving twice your speed (so two actions here) is jogging, moving three times your speed (so three actions here) is running and can't be done forever because you get tired.

I can only guess they are doing it this way because for some reason they don't want to impose a penalty on Stealth checks for moving more than once per round.

I would prefer gnomes +Int, Halflings +Cha, and goblins out of the core, but I'm fairly convinced the later is not going to happen. As such, it certainly makes no sense to give the goblin +Wis, so I guess the next best option is the one above with gnome +Int, halfling +Wis, goblin +Cha. Of those three, I am least opposed to the goblin +Cha. In no universe should they get +Wis and I think the only reason to give them +Int would be because they are the iconic alchemist. Plus, as was said about, giving goblins +Int is essentially saying the average goblin is smarter than the average gnome or halfling and that is a rough pill to swallow. At least with +Cha you could argue that's based on intimidating which is more reasonably than the other two, IMO.

They could just make the gobbos +Dex +Con. It really wouldn't be unbalanced, and it would fit trash-scavengers who live in harsh environments.

+2 INT makes them better wizards than gnomes. That's a problem IMO.

I'd rather gnomes in Pathfinder remain sorcerers and gently steer goblins to alchemists rather than wizards, but that is a flavor issue I think we can put aside. I have no serious objection aside from I wanting gnomes to be as far removed from gadgeteer gnomes as I can get them.

I would prefer gnomes +Int, Halflings +Cha, and goblins out of the core, but I'm fairly convinced the later is not going to happen.

Remember, it has been said (I wish I had the post right now) that goblins are 100% in the playtest document, but they are not carved into the CRB in stone. If you don't want core goblins, keep politely making that point!

Or just cut the goblins entirely since theyre the ones forcing the issue!

Actually, Gnomes and Halflings were always too similar, and I'd be tempted to suggest some sort of change even without Goblins highlighting the problem.

Deadmanwalking wrote:

I'm fine with both Gnomes and Goblins having Charisma because they have nothing else in common stat-wise. That's also only two of the core Ancestries having a Cha bump, which is fine.

But Halflings...Halflings are now almost identical to Goblins in stats and that's an issue. Changing Halflings to Wisdom actually seems like a really good solution to this to me, and I'd definitely be on board for it.

I prefer that to swapping things on the Goblin as that leaves Gnomes and Halflings too similar.

Or just cut the goblins entirely since theyre the ones forcing the issue!

This does also highlight the issue that Ancestries themselves don't seem very distinct:

+2 Dex/+2 Cha/-2 Wis; 8 HP; 25 feet; Darkvision
+2 Dex/+2 Cha/-2 Str; 8 HP; 20 feet
+2 Con/+2 Cha/-2 Str; 8 HP; 20 feet (I think? It's not in the Blog); Low-Light Vision

They all get +2 to a Stat.

They don't seem really distinctive, is what I'm saying. Their Ancestry feats obviously are the main source of difference but at 1st level I don't know they'll be enough to mechanically differentiate these guys.

Gnomes!!! Gnomes!!! Gnomes!!!!! Squeeeeeee!!!!!!!

★ --- ★ --- ★ --- ★

Okay, by now, you all know that I am a big gnome fan. It’s my personal favorite PF1 core race. After making my goblin bard, I will likely make a gnomish something. Although a lot of people are concerned about the bonus to charisma in all three small races, I love it.

However, I will admit that I was hoping to see the Starfinder-esque alternate ancestries of Bleachlings vs Feychildren. The stable bleachling gnome sub-species made for some interesting stories, and allowed some players to play the calm and ultra-intelligent gnomes that they wanted.

I do like that the floating stat allows characters of any ancestry to be whatever they want. Being able to remove that stat penalty makes it more possible to be a halfling or gnome warrior, or for goblins to become divine spellcasters (assuming here that clerics still cast off of wisdom.)

★ --- ★ --- ★ --- ★

I am surprised to hear some gnome-hate out there, though. I’ve GMed a lot of PFS, and have yet to see a disruptive gnome PC. There’s a lot of hope, some obsessiveness, and yes a call to adventure and danger because that’s what’s good for you (if you are a gnome!)

The desire to not bleach makes you view the world slightly differently. My PFS bard, Cup, once had this to say about Isger:

Cup smiles brightly, and then returns back to the conversation at hand. “Isger is a fascinating place. It went from being a vassal state of Taldor to a vassal state of Cheliax. It's had all sorts of terrible things happen to it -- strip-mining, goblin wars, demonic sacrifices, plagues, draconic rebels and at least one planar invasion from outer space! So exciting and dangerous!” She's so excited, she's practically bouncing. “Isger used to outlaw Pathfinders, but our recent treaty with Cheliax means that we can get in now without hiring bandits to smuggle us in.” She sighs a bit, slightly disappointed that her party’ll be able to just walk right in to Isger. However, she soon brightens.

"Isger's a great place to live on the edge! No one would ever bleach there, which is probably why it contains one of the only all-gnome settlements - Umok. With so many disasters, can you think of a better place to raise a family?” She sighs with contentment.

Being an adventurer provides all the excitement most gnomes need to thrive. You can want to be part of interesting missions without endangering your team more than they are already endangering themselves.

So here is one of my biggest questions about gnomish ancestries. Can gnomes still be awesome at learning languages? I have loved, loved, loved being a mulitlingual gnome in PF1. I’m hoping that one of PF2’s ancestry options will allow gnomes to continue to be amazingly talented and versatile linguists.

Is that Halfling based on Mark Seifter?

They could just make the gobbos +Dex +Con. It really wouldn't be unbalanced, and it would fit trash-scavengers who live in harsh environments.

If I have to accept goblins, this would be a good alternative, though Paizo seems to be married to the only one physical and one mental stat concept. I would suspect some would argue that goblin would make the best martial since they could then spend their floater on Str and boost all three physical stats.

Okay, this begs the question: how does the Small size work regarding weapons? And more importantly, is the player still the one who ultimately gets to decide what is and isn’t appropriate for his character regardless of race?

3.5 and P1E both let any race weild any weapon they want. Small size races trade damage for accuracy, but you can still have a Halfling with a greatsword or a halbred if that’s what you envision. And with it being a trade, there’s still at least the perception of equality, even if the math ultimately says otherwise.

4E did the great disservice of restricting Small size races from two-handed weapons and limiting how they could use Versatile weapons. 5E, for all its many triumphs, while it allows any race to use any weapon, imposes disadvantage on attack rolls with Heavy weapons for Small size races.

Starfinder did what I consider the best possible solution: it eliminated Small as a distinct size and lumped the former Small size races in with Medium. Any Medium race can use any kind of weapon and its the player’s choice if it does or doesn’t make sense for his Ysoki to be swinging a Doshko around.

While I’m not fussed with whether Halflings count as Small, Medium (Small), or Medium, I do want the option to use a greatsword or a halbred and at least the illusion that I can be as effective with it as anyone else.

While true, as it stands the Goblin is just jumping up and down on the Halflings's throat niche-wise and handing halfling the mantle of "best druid" when thats not a niche they iconically fill at all doesn't do much to fix it.

I'd rather see the halflings with the +2 Dex, -2 int +2 cha before that because at least that allows the halfling to fill the role theyre supposed to fill even if it means halflings don't make great wizards.