Born of Two Worlds

willuwontu wrote:

If they statted them up like the other ancestries, and the only had access to the half-elf feats, would you be okay with that?

Honestly... yes.

I thought about this last night. Of all the things I consider "special" about half-elves, access to parent ancestries' feats wasn't very high on the list. I'd rather see half-elf as its own ancestry, with an option that lets them access one or both parents' list, than have to pay up front for the privilege of accessing feats I might neither need nor want. Same goes for half-orcs, tieflings, changelings, and everything else... I want to be this thing first and foremost, and have an option to expand into my other heritages.

Yeah, I have to agree with this entirely. Getting both lists (well, all three technically) is a very good thing mechanically, but it isn't one I actually care much about.

The more I think about it, the more my favored solution for the issue* of hollow ancestries becomes clear.

Three ancestry feats at first level.

This grants each ancestry a semblance of the depth it once enjoyed, and lets long-lived peoples actually start with the stuff they learned over their pre-adventuring lives in addition to their biological traits, while solving the "what if I don't want a specific feature" question that the ancestry feat system was designed to solve. So your dwarven fighter can be biologically hardy, proficient with his grandmother's axe, and even skilled with stonework. Or not.

Then, further ancestry feats can go into making you even more awesome at whatever aspect of your people you exemplify. ^_^

*It's an issue for me - you may not consider it one, and that's certainly valid.

I will say, this does seem like it would work pretty well for stuff like PC werewolves.

I definitely agree here. ^_^

While I don't like the idea of Half-Orc and Half-Elf being ancetry aeats, I will say that the concept of humans with non-human ancestry feats as a whole has some potential. Humans do have a habit of breeding with almost anything that is mechanically compatible, so it would make sense to give humans feats that represent non-human ancestry without making them a full member of a half-human race. Like an Ifrit ancestry feat that reduces fire damage, which could be explained in game as something like "my great grandmother was an Ifrit, that's why I can pick up hot objects and not get burned." I like the idea so much I might just homebrew up a few feats like that for my PF1 home game.

I like this option a lot, and would totally be on board for including it, but I'd want the half-ancestries available as well. *insert that Road to El Dorado gif here*

Hey there all,

So we went back and forth a number of times on how the half-elf and half-orc were going to work in the Playtest. This version gave us the flexibility we wanted at the right cost.

The heritage feats to be a half-elf or half-orc make you better than human, in small but meaningful ways. Opening up both Ancestry lists really does allow you to make a character that is the best of both worlds, which is a pretty big benefit. We played around with only giving partial lists, but it was too restrictive and made the future of ancestry feats complicated and fraught with pitfalls.

We have heard folks call for an additional ancestry feat at 1st and it is something we will consider, but until you have had a chance to play with the whole ruleset and get a sense of how it flows, I am not going to spend much time on it right now.

Anyway.. thanks for having some patience with us on this one. This is a tricky topic and one that we are going to be sure to take the time to get it right.

I'm sorry, but this seems like it does a massive disservice to the legacy and identity of half-elves and half-orcs alike. I don't play a half-elf or a half-orc to be a "slightly better human"; I play them to be half-elves and half-orcs. It turns standard racial/ancestry options into feat taxes. Not cool.

This kinda ruins how I tend to run half-elves and half-orcs in my campaigns.

I'm woefully disappointed in this. I'd like the half-folk to actually have their own identity, like they used to. Mix it up somehow, but still let them be their own thing.

I guess I understand the whole "if every ancestry is nothing but feats, getting the best of two lists for free is too good". (To me, that seems like an issue caused by stripping ancestries down to just ability score modifiers, a speed stat, and an HP base... something else that worried me.)

So, yeah. This is one of the bigger disappointments of the new system. And given how many people are okay with it, I guess it's what we're going to get.

I dunno. I guess half-elves and tieflings will still exist in other games.

Same. This is what I like about half-elves in Eberron. They were turned into their own pure-breeding ancestry and given their own cultural identity.

MidsouthGuy wrote:

While I don't like the idea of Half-Orc and Half-Elf being ancetry aeats, I will say that the concept of humans with non-human ancestry feats as a whole has some potential. Humans do have a habit of breeding with almost anything that is mechanically compatible, so it would make sense to give humans feats that represent non-human ancestry without making them a full member of a half-human race. Like an Ifrit ancestry feat that reduces fire damage, which could be explained in game as something like "my great grandmother was an Ifrit, that's why I can pick up hot objects and not get burned." I like the idea so much I might just homebrew up a few feats like that for my PF1 home game.

I like this option a lot, and would totally be on board for including it, but I'd want the half-ancestries available as well. *insert that Road to El Dorado gif here*

The problem here is that now you have to deal with being called "Human*," which is technically wrong if you take one of those halfbreed feats. I think the idea that making Humans a gateway race for every other race from PF1 is a bad idea that only breeds confusion for GMs and players alike. (Yes, pun intended.) Not to mention, it shoehorns players into the Human race if they don't want to be. Maybe they like the Elven ancestral benefits instead, but still want to be called a Half-Elf? Or if a player likes the Orcish ancestral benefits, but want to still be a Half-Orc? That's a problematic design that requires pseudo-backwards compatibility (such as allowing feats from both ancestries involved to count as the other ancestry for options and such).

**EDIT** On top of that, considering the characters still get their base ancestry benefits, and then getting a benefit for the sole purpose of heritage ancestral feats will make them objectively superior to other ancestries of that label. Compare a character with Elf Ancestral benefits taking a Human Heritage feat to a character with Human Ancestral benefits taking an Elf Heritage feat, and if they aren't perfectly balanced, you now have one that goes by the same name, but is objectively worse than one who goes another route.

Compared to the rules like with PF1's Racial Heritage, which gave you a subtype to qualify for certain feats and abilities, but didn't actually change your race (meaning racial traits of other races were off-limits), it's much more complicated and a much more tricky situation.

Granted, if there were rules that clarified something along the lines of "If you take a halfbreed heritage feat, it would change the name of your ancestry respectively, and you would count as both a human ancestry and the ancestry of your choice for the purposes of qualify for ancestral feats," I'd be okay with it then. As it stands though, I'd hate to be at a table with a bunch of "Humans*" and be the GM that says "No, I won't allow your special snowflake because it's too confusing."

Removed some posts. When you start going back and forth arguing with other posters its probably time to take a break and/or move on.

My only gripe about this is that Half-elves, half-orcs, and any other- halves are missing out on other potentially interesting level-1 only feats that could fit the character just as well. I see a lot of people proposing a second ancestry feat and that was my first thought as well.

However, adding in another feat at level 1, and a potentially very powerful one at that seems like it could unbalance a lot of the game.

A compromise I would be happy to see is these heritage feats allowing characters to take one of the level 1 only feats in place of their level general feat. If it is still too strong, the option to do so could be a new option in the heritage feat. Sure it delays the general feat that they will eventually get, but it seems like a good way to open up the option without being so strong that one has to take it.

I'm sort of wondering how we represent "Half-Elves are good at multiclassing" when the half-elf is down on feats *and* multiclassing is now feats.

One specific way you could make half-elves good at multi-casting would be to reduce the number of feats they must take to complete a multi-class type of dedication by one. For some builds that could be significant.

My only gripe about this is that Half-elves, half-orcs, and any other- halves are missing out on other potentially interesting level-1 only feats that could fit the character just as well. I see a lot of people proposing a second ancestry feat and that was my first thought as well.

However, adding in another feat at level 1, and a potentially very powerful one at that seems like it could unbalance a lot of the game.

A compromise I would be happy to see is these heritage feats allowing characters to take one of the level 1 only feats in place of their level general feat. If it is still too strong, the option to do so could be a new option in the heritage feat. Sure it delays the general feat that they will eventually get, but it seems like a good way to open up the option without being so strong that one has to take it.

I agree that the idea of having half-heritages be a feat/option in the core nature of much of PF2. However, as someone else pointed out, if you made a Half-human feat for elves, you likely would end up coming up short on the choices for it to grant. You'd probably include an option for a heritage language, the diplomacy skill, and what else would there be?

But compare the two now? The elf (half-human) would have fewer hp, but would have all the basic elf traits, and would have spent its ancestry feat. It may have an extra language and a skill to speak for the spending the feat, or even just one of those two, if someone values the human list more than the elf list, since they are also getting the two new racial lists. The comparison however, unless I'm mistaken will show the elf-based hybrid having far more total racial options, and just as many options for the future. I think when people will compare the half-elf to the elf, they will see them as being half of what the elf is, as the human seems to be a baseline, almost like a zero. The anticipation that the human's feat somehow makes up for lacking racial abilities.

Now seeing humans as lacking any abilities, and the impression that what makes up for this lack is their 'feat' one can perhaps then understand when they see their feat, which only gave them 2/3 of what other races get as a baseline, is what they are forced to spend that precious feat on.

Personally, I think the half-heritage feat itself is pretty powerful, I'm not quite as worried about that. However, being locked out of other Heritage feats does seem of concern.

Perhaps, if choosing a half-race, one might be allowed to Pre-slot there next Ancestry feat, and as it is pre-slotted for this purpose, they can select a complementary, valid other heritage feat. I don't know if there would be any way of getting a partial ability from this being pre-slotted. but it's primary function, would be to allow you to qualify for taking more than one valid heritage if you know it ahead of time.

Honestly, I understand the nice simplicity of alternating general and ancestry feats, but I can't help but wonder, could you simply frontload the ancestry feats more? Even if adding more than just one extra choice from it? I'm actually contemplating offering 2 ancestry feats at first level as many have suggested, and perhaps an extra at second. (then the general from 3rd could potentially be converted to a ancestry feat if desired for instance)

You might be able to only do 1 ancestry feat at 1st level, but offer people the option of pre-slotting a heritage feat into their second level slot to help them fill out their character if it would require more than one.

It seems like the only option that would satisfy most people (posting here) is to do it "the old way". Make completely separate half-ancestry writeups, with their own, separate, list of ancestry feats, and dump the system that could have been applied to all half-ancestries.
That does require more work from the development crew, as all future half-ancestries (Aasimar, Tiefling etc.) would then also need to be written up the same way.

My only gripe about this is that Half-elves, half-orcs, and any other- halves are missing out on other potentially interesting level-1 only feats that could fit the character just as well. I see a lot of people proposing a second ancestry feat and that was my first thought as well.

However, adding in another feat at level 1, and a potentially very powerful one at that seems like it could unbalance a lot of the game.

A compromise I would be happy to see is these heritage feats allowing characters to take one of the level 1 only feats in place of their level general feat. If it is still too strong, the option to do so could be a new option in the heritage feat. Sure it delays the general feat that they will eventually get, but it seems like a good way to open up the option without being so strong that one has to take it.

You can already use your general feat to take an ancestry feat. The problem is that you don't get your first general feat until level 3.

I think you agree on this point so I don't want to imply that I'm arguing with you, but let me take this opportunity to reiterate: any solution that does not allow a half-orc to take orc weapon proficiency at level 1 is completely unacceptable. The current paradigm attempts to block mechanically strong options but is mostly catching character defining options like "what weapon I'm going to use" in the crossfire.

It seems like the only option that would satisfy most people (posting here) is to do it "the old way". Make completely separate half-ancestry writeups, with their own, separate, list of ancestry feats, and dump the system that could have been applied to all half-ancestries.

That does require more work from the development crew, as all future half-ancestries (Aasimar, Tiefling etc.) would then also need to be written up the same way.

This is pretty much where I'm coming from, yeah.

Though it would require barely any work at all. It seems odd that none of the planetouched persons of nonmortal heritage would have unique ability score modifiers, so that probably would still have to be done (and could, in nearly all cases, be pulled directly from PF1). Speed and special vision are as much as two lines of text, probably barely changed from PF1. The rest of a PF2 ancestry is feats... which they'd have to do anyway. So, I don't really see a substantial burden of time or effort. ^_^

Agreed. I don't see seperate ancestries (or indeed, going back to race mattering at level 1) taking a significant amount of time. After 40+ years, we all have a relatively clear idea what these races should look like, even with some tweaking for a new edition.

I'd argue there's less work involved, since there wouldn't need to be the analysis of how the parent race feats interact and break the system.

It seems odd that none of the planetouched persons of nonmortal heritage would have unique ability score modifiers, so that probably would still have to be done (and could, in nearly all cases, be pulled directly from PF1).

A while back, Mr. Seifter posited they might do something like dictate what flavor of Aasimar you are by which attribute bonuses you pick. I don't know if they want to do 15 different kinds of Aasimr though. For Changelings and Tieflings I think "having an attribute flaw" is kind of important.

Well, the extra time/more work I mentioned was in relation to all the other combinations that some people got excited about. By doing it just like the other ancestries, these more "exotic" combinations (half-dwarf/half-orc etc.) couldn't be done by a unifying system, but would have to all be written up separately or, more likely, wouldn't be covered by Paizo (but might fall into 3rd party territory).

Well, the extra time/more work I mentioned was in relation to all the other combinations that some people got excited about. By doing it just like the other ancestries, these more "exotic" combinations (half-dwarf/half-orc etc.) couldn't be done by a unifying system, but would have to all be written up separately or, more likely, wouldn't be covered by Paizo (but might fall into 3rd party territory).

Or, and go with me on this, develop a universally applicable template that basically does what the Heritage Feat does (granting cross-ancestral features), and let people play whatever the Fak they want?

If Paizo could take the time to develop those alternate Races (tiefling, aasimar, dhampir, etc), and drop them into an optional add-on book for 1st edition, they can do the same for 2nd edition, without much more effort. I see this is pure laziness. That, or they just hate half-breeds and want to make it difficult for me to play 80% of my favorite characters.

I want to reiterate that it is only the execution of Half-It ancestry feats I don't like. I actually love the gross mechanical concept. Which allows characters of any base ancestry to be born a Dhampir or Shifter. As those qualities had to do with inheriting part of their parent's curse, and many species can become vampires or lycanthropes. Naturally this applies to the various aasimar, tiefling, and other extraplanar ancestries; who should be able to crop up amongst all the common peoples.

I am almost glad they're playtesting the worst possible version of Hybrid Ancestries first. It is easy to improve from here, even during the playtest period using Official Blog Posts and Hot-Fix Errata. Conversely, I think players would have rioted if the Half-Its came out obviously overpowered and they had to be scaled back instead.

Otherwise it's not too hard to just houserule over. A True-Breeding Hybrid Ancestry would take at most 5 pages to document (feats included).

GentleGiant wrote:

Well, the extra time/more work I mentioned was in relation to all the other combinations that some people got excited about. By doing it just like the other ancestries, these more "exotic" combinations (half-dwarf/half-orc etc.) couldn't be done by a unifying system, but would have to all be written up separately or, more likely, wouldn't be covered by Paizo (but might fall into 3rd party territory).

Or, and go with me on this, develop a universally applicable template that basically does what the Heritage Feat does (granting cross-ancestral features), and let people play whatever the Fak they want?

If Paizo could take the time to develop those alternate Races (tiefling, aasimar, dhampir, etc), and drop them into an optional add-on book for 1st edition, they can do the same for 2nd edition, without much more effort. I see this is pure laziness. That, or they just hate half-breeds and want to make it difficult for me to play 80% of my favorite characters.

A template like this one?

Well, the extra time/more work I mentioned was in relation to all the other combinations that some people got excited about. By doing it just like the other ancestries, these more "exotic" combinations (half-dwarf/half-orc etc.) couldn't be done by a unifying system, but would have to all be written up separately or, more likely, wouldn't be covered by Paizo (but might fall into 3rd party territory).

The thing is, I don't see anything that benefits from a unifying system. An ancestry is a pile of stats and a few quirky signature abilities (that you don't get starting out now)- the differences between abilities is really quite high. It still requires double checking that it isn't too strong either way... which was something they struggled with in PF1 (bonus on stonework checks vs +2 to caster level checks) and looks like they're still struggling with in PF2 (human feat that becomes a class feat can become a dedication feat that's effectively 3-5 feats).

A template like this one?

I was thinking something closer to the Heritage Feat, as it stands, where you acquire Low-Light vision, and other Elf-like abilities tacked onto the Human. Or Dwarf abilities (like Darkvision, etc) tacked onto Halflings, etc.

The template you show here seems a bit restricting. Humans crossing into Elf still wouldn't acquire Low-Light vision, and the like. There'd be virtually no reason to apply your version to a Human.

Glad to see that, at least, somebody is trying to repair the damage done. I honestly don't think that the "two ancestry feats" solution would actually fix the problem; sure, you could get your Half-Race and pick another Ancestry Feat, but everybody else at the table now has two Ancestry Feats while you only have one. Though, if Half-Races were the only ones to receive the bonus Ancestry Feat (as part of the Heritage Feat benefits) at 1st level, then it'd mitigate the negatives.

Glad to see that, at least, somebody is trying to repair the damage done. I honestly don't think that the "two ancestry feats" solution would actually fix the problem; sure, you could get your Half-Race and pick another Ancestry Feat, but everybody else at the table now has two Ancestry Feats while you only have one. Though, if Half-Races were the only ones to receive the bonus Ancestry Feat (as part of the Heritage Feat benefits) at 1st level, then it'd mitigate the negatives.

My preference would be if humans had two ancestry feats, and everyone else had one. That would naturally depend on how strong humans are, but allowing them to be blank slates with the most ability to customize their starting ancestry package might be interesting, and allow half-humans to be a bit more interesting.

GentleGiant wrote:

Well, the extra time/more work I mentioned was in relation to all the other combinations that some people got excited about. By doing it just like the other ancestries, these more "exotic" combinations (half-dwarf/half-orc etc.) couldn't be done by a unifying system, but would have to all be written up separately or, more likely, wouldn't be covered by Paizo (but might fall into 3rd party territory).

The thing is, I don't see anything that benefits from a unifying system. An ancestry is a pile of stats and a few quirky signature abilities (that you don't get starting out now)- the differences between abilities is really quite high. It still requires double checking that it isn't too strong either way... which was something they struggled with in PF1 (bonus on stonework checks vs +2 to caster level checks) and looks like they're still struggling with in PF2 (human feat that becomes a class feat can become a dedication feat that's effectively 3-5 feats).

The dedication feat is a 2nd level feat, so you can't take it with your human ancestry feat.

UlrichVonLichtenstein wrote:

Glad to see that, at least, somebody is trying to repair the damage done. I honestly don't think that the "two ancestry feats" solution would actually fix the problem; sure, you could get your Half-Race and pick another Ancestry Feat, but everybody else at the table now has two Ancestry Feats while you only have one. Though, if Half-Races were the only ones to receive the bonus Ancestry Feat (as part of the Heritage Feat benefits) at 1st level, then it'd mitigate the negatives.

My preference would be if humans had two ancestry feats, and everyone else had one. That would naturally depend on how strong humans are, but allowing them to be blank slates with the most ability to customize their starting ancestry package might be interesting, and allow half-humans to be a bit more interesting.

Current indications are that humans get... basically nothing innately, and are balanced with the ancestries that get useful traits like darkvision by getting the most OP ancestry feat. Maybe humans get trained in an extra skill or something.

Voss wrote:

GentleGiant wrote:

Well, the extra time/more work I mentioned was in relation to all the other combinations that some people got excited about. By doing it just like the other ancestries, these more "exotic" combinations (half-dwarf/half-orc etc.) couldn't be done by a unifying system, but would have to all be written up separately or, more likely, wouldn't be covered by Paizo (but might fall into 3rd party territory).

The thing is, I don't see anything that benefits from a unifying system. An ancestry is a pile of stats and a few quirky signature abilities (that you don't get starting out now)- the differences between abilities is really quite high. It still requires double checking that it isn't too strong either way... which was something they struggled with in PF1 (bonus on stonework checks vs +2 to caster level checks) and looks like they're still struggling with in PF2 (human feat that becomes a class feat can become a dedication feat that's effectively 3-5 feats).

The dedication feat is a 2nd level feat, so you can't take it with your human ancestry feat.

Only if all the dedication feats they ever make are all level 2.

Voss wrote:

GentleGiant wrote:

Well, the extra time/more work I mentioned was in relation to all the other combinations that some people got excited about. By doing it just like the other ancestries, these more "exotic" combinations (half-dwarf/half-orc etc.) couldn't be done by a unifying system, but would have to all be written up separately or, more likely, wouldn't be covered by Paizo (but might fall into 3rd party territory).

The thing is, I don't see anything that benefits from a unifying system. An ancestry is a pile of stats and a few quirky signature abilities (that you don't get starting out now)- the differences between abilities is really quite high. It still requires double checking that it isn't too strong either way... which was something they struggled with in PF1 (bonus on stonework checks vs +2 to caster level checks) and looks like they're still struggling with in PF2 (human feat that becomes a class feat can become a dedication feat that's effectively 3-5 feats).

The dedication feat is a 2nd level feat, so you can't take it with your human ancestry feat.

Ah. Yeah, Natural ambition explicitly gives a 1st level class feat.

Still, at 5th level you can retcon one of your other feats into the dedication feat, and still have an extra class feat, meaning humans lose less in multiclassing.

You can also meet the training requirement by using Skilled as your 5th level race feat.

Mark explicitly mentioned using a stat up and retraining at 5th level now that you meet the prereqs was valid.

GentleGiant wrote:

Voss wrote:

GentleGiant wrote:

Well, the extra time/more work I mentioned was in relation to all the other combinations that some people got excited about. By doing it just like the other ancestries, these more "exotic" combinations (half-dwarf/half-orc etc.) couldn't be done by a unifying system, but would have to all be written up separately or, more likely, wouldn't be covered by Paizo (but might fall into 3rd party territory).

The thing is, I don't see anything that benefits from a unifying system. An ancestry is a pile of stats and a few quirky signature abilities (that you don't get starting out now)- the differences between abilities is really quite high. It still requires double checking that it isn't too strong either way... which was something they struggled with in PF1 (bonus on stonework checks vs +2 to caster level checks) and looks like they're still struggling with in PF2 (human feat that becomes a class feat can become a dedication feat that's effectively 3-5 feats).

The dedication feat is a 2nd level feat, so you can't take it with your human ancestry feat.

Only if all the dedication feats they ever make are all level 2.

Multiclass dedication feats don't make sense as level 1 feats. So they'd all be level 2 feats.

Multiclass dedication feats don't make sense as level 1 feats.

Why? You aren't capable of learning about another class at [or before] first because why? To me, the scenario of 'mom is a wizard and dad is a fighter so both trained me' seems perfectly logical. If anything, it'd seem odd in that situation to HAVE to wait until 2nd. The only reason you couldn't in pathfinder classic was the level/multiclass system and with the changes that reason is gone.

I'm pretty sure the real reason dedication feats are locked to level 2 is because casters don't get their first class feat until level 2. Ergo, if you could take dedications at level 1 it'd be a leg up for martial characters. :v

I'm pretty sure the real reason dedication feats are locked to level 2 is because casters don't get their first class feat until level 2. Ergo, if you could take dedications at level 1 it'd be a leg up for martial characters. :v

Well we couldn't let martials get something first now could we? ;)

PS: though a human caster could with their racial extra class feat thing couldn't they?

Gotta say, I'm really not crazy about the formerly pure-breeding half-races being relegated to Human Ancestry Feats. Personally, I feel that turning what used to be two distinct races with their own identities into a 1st level feat tax completely cheapens them, and moreover it makes me wonder why anyone would play a straight Human if they can just upgrade into another race.

Now, that being said, I -do- like the concept when applied to more exotic ancestries, like the various planes-touched, Dhampyr, Shifter, maybe even Changeling, so long as it's something open to -all- races and not just Humans. A Dwarven Oread? A Gnomish Sylph? An Elven Aasimar? It not only makes for more flavorful and memorable player characters, but can really make for some unique NPC's!

We'll see when the material drops next week and we can all get a much closer look at how it all works. Overall I like many of the changes for 2E, but certain things have really stuck in my craw and I hope they get addressed through the feedback.

Arachnofiend wrote:

I'm pretty sure the real reason dedication feats are locked to level 2 is because casters don't get their first class feat until level 2. Ergo, if you could take dedications at level 1 it'd be a leg up for martial characters. :v

Well we couldn't let martials get something first now could we? ;)

PS: though a human caster could with their racial extra class feat thing couldn't they?

That's true, but that is an extremely niche circumstance.

Gotta say, I'm really not crazy about the formerly pure-breeding half-races being relegated to Human Ancestry Feats.

1/2 elves and 1/2 orcs have gotten me thinking... Does that mean I can retrain and overnight become a new race?

graystone wrote:

Arachnofiend wrote:

I'm pretty sure the real reason dedication feats are locked to level 2 is because casters don't get their first class feat until level 2. Ergo, if you could take dedications at level 1 it'd be a leg up for martial characters. :v

Well we couldn't let martials get something first now could we? ;)

PS: though a human caster could with their racial extra class feat thing couldn't they?

That's true, but that is an extremely niche circumstance.

LOL I'm all about the niche. ;)

Edit: though I wonder if there would be any feats they could take or are they 2nd level minimum?

GrimmDichotomy wrote:

Gotta say, I'm really not crazy about the formerly pure-breeding half-races being relegated to Human Ancestry Feats.

1/2 elves and 1/2 orcs have gotten me thinking... Does that mean I can retrain and overnight become a new race?

I... assume you probably can't retrain out of heritage feats? Right? Right???

Maybe with the right spells?

graystone wrote:

GrimmDichotomy wrote:

Gotta say, I'm really not crazy about the formerly pure-breeding half-races being relegated to Human Ancestry Feats.

1/2 elves and 1/2 orcs have gotten me thinking... Does that mean I can retrain and overnight become a new race?

I... assume you probably can't retrain out of heritage feats? Right? Right???

Oh but you just spent more time learning from the other side of your Heritage. And in doing so you got rusty when it comes to [Insert Feat here].

You spent so much time learning how to Improvise that the Orcish Fury has calmed itself in you.

Only to get really drunk when you're done with that section of the plot and and smash half a Bar to get it back.

GentleGiant wrote:

Multiclass dedication feats don't make sense as level 1 feats.

Why? You aren't capable of learning about another class at [or before] first because why? To me, the scenario of 'mom is a wizard and dad is a fighter so both trained me' seems perfectly logical. If anything, it'd seem odd in that situation to HAVE to wait until 2nd. The only reason you couldn't in pathfinder classic was the level/multiclass system and with the changes that reason is gone.

I'll give you a hint. It has to do with the word "multi[ple]", more than one. What you're talking about is dual-class, something that hasn't really existed since AD&D.

graystone wrote:

GrimmDichotomy wrote:

Gotta say, I'm really not crazy about the formerly pure-breeding half-races being relegated to Human Ancestry Feats.

1/2 elves and 1/2 orcs have gotten me thinking... Does that mean I can retrain and overnight become a new race?

I... assume you probably can't retrain out of heritage feats? Right? Right???

Hard to say as Mark said you can take an archetype for an adventure and then remove it after it's no longer useful. It's not a big stretch to extend that to feat/races.

Re-training rules in general seem weird to me. People don't typically just wipe one set of information out from there minds and replace it with others, but hey whatever Its not a big deal If it helps improve the game for people.

graystone wrote:

GentleGiant wrote:

Multiclass dedication feats don't make sense as level 1 feats.

Why? You aren't capable of learning about another class at [or before] first because why? To me, the scenario of 'mom is a wizard and dad is a fighter so both trained me' seems perfectly logical. If anything, it'd seem odd in that situation to HAVE to wait until 2nd. The only reason you couldn't in pathfinder classic was the level/multiclass system and with the changes that reason is gone.

I'll give you a hint. It has to do with the word "multi[ple]", more than one. What you're talking about is dual-class, something that hasn't really existed since AD&D.

That makes no sense with the new system. At all. Not even a little.

AGAIN, the multiclass = taking discrete levels in a new class are gone which means there IS no such think like dual class or pathfinder classic multiclass. Pointing to them is beyond pointless. It's like saying a plane can't fly and pointing to a truck to explain why...

graystone wrote:

GrimmDichotomy wrote:

Gotta say, I'm really not crazy about the formerly pure-breeding half-races being relegated to Human Ancestry Feats.

1/2 elves and 1/2 orcs have gotten me thinking... Does that mean I can retrain and overnight become a new race?

I... assume you probably can't retrain out of heritage feats? Right? Right???

I suppose that's a classic RAW and RAI debate in the making XD

As it stands, unless they add that specific stipulation, there's no mechanical basis to say "no, you can't retrain an Ancestry/Heritage feat", only good sense.

Which, as we all know, can often be lacking XP

... Did.. the.. truck fail to deliver a important piece for the plane?

I'm pretty sure the real reason dedication feats are locked to level 2 is because casters don't get their first class feat until level 2. Ergo, if you could take dedications at level 1 it'd be a leg up for martial characters. :v

Do we know if a human can get an extra class feat at level 1, regardless of class? If so, that might be an actual reason to limit them to 2nd level.

Re-training rules in general seem weird to me. People don't typically just wipe one set of information out from there minds and replace it with others, but hey whatever Its not a big deal If it helps improve the game for people.

I've always seen retraining as a means of correcting a deep flaw in your character build; it's something you use when you realize that the character you made does not do what you wanted it to do or is otherwise unsatisfactory. Retraining as a means of optimizing your character for specific arcs feels like robbing your character of identity for the sake of power; this is something I don't like in video games with barely any role-playing at all, I certainly don't tolerate it in a character driven tabletop RPG.

GentleGiant wrote:

graystone wrote:

GentleGiant wrote:

Multiclass dedication feats don't make sense as level 1 feats.

Why? You aren't capable of learning about another class at [or before] first because why? To me, the scenario of 'mom is a wizard and dad is a fighter so both trained me' seems perfectly logical. If anything, it'd seem odd in that situation to HAVE to wait until 2nd. The only reason you couldn't in pathfinder classic was the level/multiclass system and with the changes that reason is gone.

I'll give you a hint. It has to do with the word "multi[ple]", more than one. What you're talking about is dual-class, something that hasn't really existed since AD&D.

That makes no sense with the new system. At all. Not even a little.

AGAIN, the multiclass = taking discrete levels in a new class are gone which means there IS no such think like dual class or pathfinder classic multiclass. Pointing to them is beyond pointless. It's like saying a plane can't fly and pointing to a truck to explain why...

You're right, there's now a better than "pathfinder classic" multiclass system in place for the playtest.

Re-training rules in general seem weird to me. People don't typically just wipe one set of information out from there minds and replace it with others, but hey whatever Its not a big deal If it helps improve the game for people.

For me, retraining is good to a point. There were those situations that came up when you couldn't take the feat you want now, so you had to take a feat you didn't want and wait a few levels because you missed the requirement by 1 level. This allows you to minimize the hurt since you can take a filler feat and fix the problem once you meet the requirements.

The whole swapping entire swathes of abilities in one fell swoop is a different kettle of fish. In the right setting it could work: 'sit in the chair while I reprogram your brain. You might feel a pinch'. In the average d&d setting, it feels a bit off. I guess it'll be a DM setting on how far you can use it.

... Did.. the.. truck fail to deliver a important piece for the plane?

LOL My point was you couldn't use a truck to disprove the aerodynamics of a plane: a truck not being able to fly has no bearing of a plane's ability to fly. It's an apple and orange situation, like multiclassing pathfinder classic vs multiclassing new pathfinder. Just because they can do the same jobs, doesn't mean they work the same.

You have to start out with a class (level 1) in order to MULTIclass (level 2, minimum). If that doesn't make sense to you I'm not sure how it can be explained more simply.

Please explain why having 2 classes at 1st level doesn't mean you have multiple classes at once? You talk about simple, but you seem to have missed that very simple concept. MultiCLASS isn't defined by multiLEVELS.

Vidmaster7 wrote:

Re-training rules in general seem weird to me. People don't typically just wipe one set of information out from there minds and replace it with others, but hey whatever Its not a big deal If it helps improve the game for people.

For me, retraining is good to a point. There were those situations that came up when you couldn't take the feat you want now, so you had to take a feat you didn't want and wait a few levels because you missed the requirement by 1 level. This allows you to minimize the hurt since you can take a filler feat and fix the problem once you meet the requirements.

The whole swapping entire swathes of abilities in one fell swoop is a different kettle of fish. In the right setting it could work: 'sit in the chair while I reprogram your brain. You might feel a pinch'. In the average d&d setting, it feels a bit off. I guess it'll be a DM setting on how far you can use it.

Vidmaster7 wrote:

... Did.. the.. truck fail to deliver a important piece for the plane?

LOL My point was you couldn't use a truck to disprove the aerodynamics of a plane: a truck not being able to fly has no bearing of a plane's ability to fly. It's an apple and orange situation, like multiclassing pathfinder classic vs multiclassing new pathfinder. Just because they can do the same jobs, doesn't mean they work the same.

Lol Yeah I know I know I was just having some fun with ya.

Lol Yeah I know I know I was just having some fun with ya.

I can never be sure with you... :P