MarioMD's page

Honestly, at this point, I think Avatar may have the closest thing to realistic anime style catfolk...

I think we may be confusing unfeasible with unseen. It would certainly be hard on the joints, but is advantageous for achieving "mad ups".

Would someone be so kind as to locate a drawing of a realistic looking drawing/picture of a person/creature with the facial features shown in Bestiary 3? I just want to see an example of one that doesn't look... freakish... outside of the cartoon/anime style these are usually drawn in.

I like the Nacatl well enough. I'm not really sure why you're convinced it's impossible to walk like that though. It's like saying walking on the balls of your feet is impossible. Plus ya need good feets for pouncin', right?

Don't get me wrong, the Bestiary 3 version is pretty slick. But outside of a picture, or even that art style, I have a hard time seeing that as anything a but a person in cat costume. And in real life, the more elaborate a cat costume/makeup the weirder that person ends up looking.

MarioMD wrote:

I say stick with the ARG. There's enough Catperson anime out there. I'd rather they look like Kera/Vah Shir.

PS, I see no one's complaining about the ratfolk...

There isn't as wide of a variety of rat body types in the world either though.

A house cat looks very different from a bobcat, which looks very different from a tiger which again is very different in looks from the lion which has large differences between it and a panther.

Rats for better or for worse no matter the breed share the same prominent features.

Which would seem to have nothing to do with anyone's complaints... The bulk of the complaints have to do with how human or how cat like the race appears.

The Ratonga from EQ2 were a great deal more lithe, intelligent, and sneaky. The ratfolk in the ARG look downright pudgy.

Not that I'm concerned. "Catfolk" and "ratfolk" are such generic terms that I don't feel anyone should feel bound by one books interpretation over another's. There's plenty enough Cat people art floating around the internet to meet everyone's needs. Now if only there were more ratfolk art...

I say stick with the ARG. There's enough Catperson anime out there. I'd rather they look like Kera/Vah Shir.

PS, I see no one's complaining about the ratfolk...

They're that tall? I underestimated them.

Not real hard, but I know making a full construct race is requires 20 build points and half construct requires 7. So I think you'd need to start with the half construct to make it playable.

The Nagaji later on looks pretty slick too until you notice its photoshop work.

That's interesting, I didn't know Paizo peddled Shadowrun wares. Definitely the best game I can't find a group for anymore.

I believe the frustration of Uriel393 comes from the idea that there are in fact some people that like the idea of playing some of these lesser appreciated monster races, and would appreciate it if they seemed more viable. I mean, gnomes and half-orcs work right?

I like the purple myself. Gets rids of the kind of uncomfortable connotations that good elves = white, bad elves = black, that comes from the original depictions.

Purple/black is better than black/black?

Honestly, I've always preferred EQ's Dark Elves to DnD's. Drow worshiping the god of hate always seemed far more intimidating than the self destructive spider worshipers.

Plus the dudes had some awesome facial hair.

** spoiler omitted **

I would agree on every point.

I don't know what you're talking about. Most of the races seemed to be totally in line with their descriptions. And occasionally Halflings simply have to wear shoes. Mine did when he was going into battle. Don't want to step on a broken sword or anything.

Samsarans have "dark hair", was the point I was making at the end. Not a big deal, but it does seem to be an oversight on the part of the artist.

Gnomes hair fall across a wide range of vibrant colors, as well as their skin tones. And their facial features are "highly mutable", and many have "overly large mouths and eyes". And the women wear "elaborate and eccentric" hairstyles. In they book they're all white with blue hair in all three pictures. None of these are "bad" per-say, but they do a pretty poor job of expressing the wildness of the little fey.

Don't have a problem with a halfling wearing shoes if needed, but the book is clear that is not their preference and the picture hardly presents any present danger to his feets.

Again, I loved most of the art, but I was disappointed with those sections.

EDIT: @Cheapy: I also liked the experimental gunsmith. Wish the other two showed some variety though...

EDIT: Incomplete sentence

Picked up the book last night. All in all, I'm thoroughly impressed with the artwork and the amount of content in the book. If I had one complaint it would be that most of the art surrounding the smaller races (dwarf, gnome, halfling) was pretty unimpressive. Granted that puts it on par with the fantasy art in the rest of the industry, but one of the things I was most impressed with by Pathfinder when I first picked up the CRB was that they actually gave distinction and definition to these races.

The gnomes, outside of having blue hair, ignore everything in their description that make them unique. The first halfling in the book wears shoes, which just seems odd to ignore the most distinguishable aspect of the race. And the only picture of a female dwarf I've seen in Pathfinder looks like Dolph Lundgren.

Sorry, I don't mean this as a rant, and it is certainly nitpicking, but I suppose I was expecting a follow up to the absolutely superb art of of the CRB.

I guess it's sort of a pet peeve of mine when the art for a race ignores it's own description (see also Samsaran)

Now I just have to wait till end of work day... must... support... local busines...

MarioMD wrote:

Because it's a defining, very powerful core feature/mechanic for the class with a detailed level progression?

I do not believe this to be true. Any Alchemist that emphasizes his bombs has little need for it, as he is very likely to hit touch AC anyway and a penalty to Wisdom can be painful. Certainly, for the "Mr Hyde" types it is a defining, powerful feature, but in my experience those are fewer in number than the bomb tossers.

So far I've had the opposite experience, (more mutagens than bombs) but I'd say it seems if you're an alchemist ignoring either one it would just be a failure to utilize your full tool set, since they both have limited number of uses, right?

Beyond that, what is wrong with removing a powerful core feature of a class? Archaeologist removed Bardic Performance, numerous Monk archetypes remove Flurry of Blows, and the vast majority of Rogue archetypes remove Trapfinding. Removing a core feature just opens up interesting design spaces, while giving choices to those who find a certain feature anathema to their character concept. Some people find Mutagen to be an odd feature, and would love the ability to trade it out for some other option, even if it is a bit weaker.

I do not disagree with anything you've said. However, I do think that removing a core feature that affects the balance of a class is rare, difficult to do, and usually err on the side of less powerful than the standard options. Am I wrong?

Thank you both. I wonder why it seems so difficult to replace Mutagen with something completely different.

Because it's a defining, very powerful core feature/mechanic for the class with a detailed level progression?

How's the art per race ratio? Do they have more than a couple pictures of each race doing their thing?

Thanks for all the info, btw. You are performing a noble service for the less fortunate. :)

Maybe Paizo just needs to release a steam punk world of their own.

I agree with you Anlerran. Sometimes I feel like the board game "Small World" is a satirical commentary on what would happen if you actually had all these advanced humanoid races (spoiler: extinction).

But I do get a little tired of all the core races looking more or less like a human with some plastic surgery done.

I think Paizo did a pretty good job of distinguishing the different core races as much as possible, but they are all still very similar. But that's also why I'm kindof a fan of the orcs/trolls in Warcraft, or half the races of the Final Fantasy franchise, even if they can be a little over the top. Makes the world feel a little less homogeneous or black and white or whatever.

So I was unaware that the multi-weapon fighting feat even existed until this thread. However, now that I've read it, I find it incredibly odd that it requires a dex of 13 where TWF requires a dex of 15. Just me? Besides that it seems like attacks with four arms in a single round would incur more of a penalty than -2/-2/-2/-2. Am I the only one that sees that as kindof a crazy massive bonus to a character at potentially level 1?

Do the rules not stack attack penalties for wielding more than 1 weapon? ie If you have TWF and you're using light off hand(s) it doesn't become -2/-2 for one extra weapon, -4/-4/-4 for two extra weapons and -6/-6/-6/-6? Four attacks as a two(to four) weapon fighter/ranger/monk/rogue at level 1 sounds like a wet dream, pardon the language.

What reference am I missing that everyone is asking if they eat elves?

Heh, I like the eyes of the grippli, they look properly inhuman, but imho EQ1 styled the best frog race with the Froglok PC race.

MarioMD wrote:

Btw, since this is likely to be the only source book with pictures of most of these races, I hope there are lots of pictures of each one and not just one picture of one gender on the one page for each race.

IIRC, I think the races with 4-pages are only getting one piece of art(going from the Duergar preview), and generally of the opposite gender of the pre-existing art already out for them. (Male Ifrit in Bestiary 2, female here for example)

Imagine the 6-pager races will be getting more than one though, right?

I dunno, I hope we at least get an introduction to the races similar to the CRB. I thought those were well done. I know most will only be a couple of pages, but again, if not here, then where?

Btw, since this is likely to be the only source book with pictures of most of these races, I hope there are lots of pictures of each one and not just one picture of one gender on the one page for each race.

Not being critical at all, but can anyone more knowledgeable tell me why Ifrit's have horns? They're half fire elementals right? Do fire elementals have horns? Again, just curious.

MarioMD wrote:

Cool concept.

Does the art style seem kind of out of place to anyone else though?

Not really. Paizo, apparently, commissions lots of artists for the art they put in their books, so I'm not too surprised that the art style looks different.

Just take a peek on DeviantArt and see how many different artists have done official Pathfinder art.

Agreed. I guess it just looks a little more cartoony than most. Guess I'm with KestlerGunner on this one also [/OPINION!]

As to the rule discussion above, is it weird to anyone else that, while sleeping,you are considered "willing" to spells that are easily resisted, but get a save against spells that are difficult to resist? I suppose most spells that require willing subjects are not harmful, I just think that's interesting.

Cool concept.

Does the art style seem kind of out of place to anyone else though?

Shalafi2412 wrote:

I hope to see more kitsune and halfling love!

Personally I wouldn't want to see any graphic kitsune and halfling love, I mean my god think of what their off spring would look like.

Foxes?

And I'm still not real certain how catfolk, ratfolk, and lizardfolk are ok, but a race of dragonfolk is somehow protected. I mean, WotC did a pretty crappy job with the dragonborn in 4.0 anyway. Lots of room for Paizo to rename, rebrand, and reimagine.