I agree with Drow. Due to their popularity (there's one in almost every campaign I run or play in) I'd like to see them as a core race. Though I understand the whole 'villian' deal.
I said the same thing for Orcs when I saw Half-Orcs added in back in the day. I think the designers didn't want to add a core Evil race to the fold, so they compromised with a half-version. Many people like them. I just don't see half-orcs or half-elves as actual races. They should be rare. If they're commen, then elves and orcs may as well just be pretty and ugly humans.
Which brings me to my next thought; I'm human. I see humans everywhere, as there are only humans wandering about in real life. I'm playing a fantasy game to excape real life. It would be nice to have some core races that are not human looking. I think the best mix was created for the game Morrowind. They had catpeople, lizardpeople, and orcs. As well, they had dark elves. I guess Evercrack had some good race options too.
What I didn't like about 4e's new Core races were that they took something cool, the Teifling, and made them all look the same with big horns, thick tails, and red skin. Then they added dragonborn. This addition takes away from the exotic and awesomness that is the dragon. Lets put them everywhere, cause they'r cool. Yeah! Now we rip off one of the things making Dragonlance unique and we limit (like the new Tiefling) the customization options. They gotta be bronze, gold, or a like color. exc.
Wow, I'm just ripping everything. Maybe we should go back to the 1st Edition days when you could just be human, elf, dwarf, or Halfling?! Ok. I didn't mean that.
But I do vote for a new Core race. Round up. Make it 8. New class? Go for 12? That would be more difficult. The elevin we have cover most things, unless we add a psion or necromancer. Though, Pirates make Everything better, right?!
Races that may make good Core Races: Drow
Catfolk (get rid of the folk part, reminds me of old people. 'My folks...'
Lupin
Tieflings & Aasimar
Phanatons (Raccoon Monkeys from Isle of Dread would be fun pcs)
Nezumi (ratfolk)
I'd add Orcs, but the problem is Warcraft, Warhammer, I think ShadowRun, and other games have them core, too. I'm a big Gnoll fan, but they're great just as badguys, too. Same with Hobgoblins, though Kalimar (sp.) made them good pcs. Hobgoblins are close to humans in temperment.
I am pretty sure they said that rules for making monster races into PCs would likely not be in the initial monster manual because they would rather do it right where they can dedicate page count and time into it than rush something to market.
I am pretty sure they said that rules for making monster races into PCs would likely not be in the initial monster manual because they would rather do it right where they can dedicate page count and time into it than rush something to market.
That's unfortunate.
|
drow (just getting rid of their SR and spell-like abilities should make the LA +1, which is about the equivalent of all the Beta races)
I understand the point of it, but I'm pretty uneasy about removing those from drow (and given that they'd surely have to be left on the non-player race, what would be the reason for that? Also, 'darkness' is even further nerfed in PFRPG, right? Drow are getting less scary by the upgrade).
That's unfortunate.
Maybe for you. We don't generally use monster races. Also, note that the reasoning was that they would rather take the time and do it RIGHT. I think folks who like monster PCs would be better off waiting 6 months and getting a good resource than getting something that's slapped together like what is in the current MM.
Creative Director
|
We want to establish the baseline first; that means we want to establish the game where players play humans or close-to-human characters. That's the goal of the PF RPG. Our campaign world is the type where we assume players play these races as well.
The ECL and level adjustment mechanic is very likely to get kicked out as well. It's a troublesome mechanic, I think, unless every player is playing an equal LA race, it creates some really awkward lopsided feeling stuff. Especially since I don't think that all monsters SHOULD be designed to be equally viable as PC races; they should be designed to be monsters.
The best way to handle playing non-standard races is to build them that way. I think Savage Species had a few really interesting ideas on how to do so, but I think it didn't go far enough.
THAT said... one of the reasons we upped the power of the base races a bit from 3.5 in PF RPG is to make it so that humans, elves, dwarves, gnomes, halflings, half-orcs, and half-elves are on par with the current crop of LA +1 races. So that you can run a tiefling or an orc side by side with an elf or a human without balance problems.
Very good answer...
|
I think race is more relevant now. When we did an 8th level playtest, what race you were had more of an influence than it did in 3.5/SRD. Not a major change, but the flavor was a bit more prevalent with the extra +2 and a racial ability that mattered at later levels (the elven +2 to Appraise for identifying items comes to mind).
Non HD races are not an issue -- you can 'unlock' their racial abilities as they advance, much like the githyanki, or savage species handles it. That's not the issue. The major issue is how racial HD and level adjustments interact.
As one of the largest orc roleplaying fans, I certainly do like the idea of adding the orc as a base player race. In reality though, it can often be hard trying to justify the acceptance of half-orcs into the mainstream society of most roleplaying worlds. Orcs would be far less likely to be accepted... and at some point the orc is going to be attacked on sight by do-gooders.
Traditionally, the half-orc was only really a race played so that the fighter could optimize his STR and CON scores... any "half-orcish" roleplaying that followed was more coincidental than anything.
I think there's better races that could be presented for players to use as characters.
(Side note: I do have a large orc campaign under development, so any official player character Pathfinder orc stats would be great !!! *grins* )
Please. If we are going to add new races can we at least include something different?
Dragonborn, Asamir, Teiflings, and Catfolk are all boring stale same old bipeds. Nothing really distigushes these fine folk from every other biped in the world. At least thri-keen where actually different .
Here's a new race for you:
Jinx Cats:
Jinx cats just started appearing a few years ago. They are the result of magical evolution from the same cat being used as a familiar for several generations of wizards (which is considered good luck by some wizarding schools and families).
Stats:
Small Magical Beast (feline)
Speed: 40 feet
Stat Modifications: - 2 Str + 2 Dex + 2 Int + 2 Cha
Quadruped: Jinx Cats walk on all four legs as such they don't have hands to manipulate tools with. They take a - 20 to craft, profession, disable device, perform (musical instrument), Ride, sleight of hand, and any other task that requires hands to complete. They also may not use standard weapons or shields and require barding instead of normal armor.
Natural Weapons: Jinx Cats have a natural bite attack (d4 damage) as a primary attack and 2 secondary claw attacks (d3 damage).
Natural Armor: Jinx Cats have a + 1 natural armor bonus.
Flexible Tails: A Jinx Cat may cast magic by performing the somatic components of spells with either their front paws or their tail.
Magical Items: A jinx cat can wear one pair of boots on their back feet, a pair of bracers or bracelets on their front feet, gloves on their front paws (doing so denies them their claw attacks), one necklace or collar, one belt, a headband or crown, a specially designed mask or goggles, 2 rings on their tail, and either specially designed robes or armored barding.
Natural Instincts: Jinx Cats have a + 2 racial bonus on the followign skills: perception, climb, hide, move silently, survival and swim.
Jinx: The ability for which Jinx cats are named after is their Jinx ability once per day per point of Cha Modifier they have a Jinx cat can Jinx someone. The target of a jinx is entitled to a will save DC 10 + 1/2 the Jinx Cat level + Jinx Cat Cha Mod. If the target fails his will save he suffers a morale penalty of - 1 for each 4 levels of the Jinx cat that Jinxed him for a nubmer of rounds equal to the Jinx cat's Cha Modifier.
Favored Class: Sorcerer and Ranger
|
|
We want to establish the baseline first; that means we want to establish the game where players play humans or close-to-human characters. That's the goal of the PF RPG. Our campaign world is the type where we assume players play these races as well.
The ECL and level adjustment mechanic is very likely to get kicked out as well. It's a troublesome mechanic, I think, unless every player is playing an equal LA race, it creates some really awkward lopsided feeling stuff. Especially since I don't think that all monsters SHOULD be designed to be equally viable as PC races; they should be designed to be monsters.
The best way to handle playing non-standard races is to build them that way. I think Savage Species had a few really interesting ideas on how to do so, but I think it didn't go far enough.
THAT said... one of the reasons we upped the power of the base races a bit from 3.5 in PF RPG is to make it so that humans, elves, dwarves, gnomes, halflings, half-orcs, and half-elves are on par with the current crop of LA +1 races. So that you can run a tiefling or an orc side by side with an elf or a human without balance problems.
That is a relatively good answer. I've got to say, I'm a sucker for cool monstrous races, so anything to make them more "balanced" is a good thing. I would love to see Pathfinder develop a way to stat "monster classes" in a manner similar to that in Savage Species, but while making them more on-par with the standard classes. And just for the record, I really, really want to play a Boggard.
I realize I may be prejudiced on this but I wouldn't mind manimals or something similar especially some kind of humanized wolf race. And by manimals I mean the result of the template from advanced bestiary. I like Mystara's lupin but the mania they have against werewolves has got to go. I am looking for this as a way to play a humanoid wolf ranger serving Desna or the deity that prefers the long bow. Perception already allows for the enhance sense tests that I would want for this sort of character. Re make them as cousins of gnolls and give them a similar relation that elves have with drow or dwarves and duergar.
We want to establish the baseline first; that means we want to establish the game where players play humans or close-to-human characters. That's the goal of the PF RPG. Our campaign world is the type where we assume players play these races as well.
Please tell me that the "...as characters" entries for "easy" races stay in.
I.e. If I want to use the PF Bestiary (or whatever it will be called) to create a PC drow, duergar, goblin, kobold, orc,....., I can simply look up the stats there.
I don't need stats for playable Tarrasques or even Ghaeles right away (I agree those could be done right), but orcs and the like should be a given.
In the case of races with relatively low LAs and few racial HDs, a nerfed-down version might be in order (like a minotaur that is balanced at firt level, and later qualifies for the Large Size feat or something).
The ECL and level adjustment mechanic is very likely to get kicked out as well. It's a troublesome mechanic, I think,[...]
The best way to handle playing non-standard races is to build them that way. I think Savage Species had a few really interesting ideas on how to do so, but I think it didn't go far enough.
As long as races like drow and orc and goblin and so on will still be playable (and right out of the Monster Book) I won't mind seeing ECL go - provided that at some point, it will be replaced by something that works better.
Doesn't have to be now, but I'd like the chance to play a, say, hill giant or bralani or something like that (and, in epic levels, even a balor or huge red dragon!).
THAT said... one of the reasons we upped the power of the base races a bit from 3.5 in PF RPG is to make it so that humans, elves, dwarves, gnomes, halflings, half-orcs, and half-elves are on par with the current crop of LA +1 races. So that you can run a tiefling or an orc side by side with an elf or a human without balance problems.
Will those player-relevant races (i.e. those with a very low LA and "... as characters" races be tweaked to make them more balanced player choices if you do choose them?
|
I would love the Pathfinder D&D to go PC Monster races... I would also like to see Human put back in the monster Manual.
In fact if they get of their buts and slap in the Spells and magic items they put in the web enhancement, add the monster manual and tack in the epic level progressions and Gods(along with how to get to godhood from PC) then it will be the best thousand page handbook worth getting.
You know you want to :)
Frankly I am tired of the Half Human-half elf and Half human-half Orc. They dont look human...the Half orc looks half elf.
Time for a Section on assorted Halfbreeds:
Plague Elf: Human/elf
Midden born: Orc/elf
Bog elf: Elf/troll
Nachtdwarf: Dwarf/Fiend
Drow: Elf/fiend
Pittdogg: Orc/human
how to get to godhood from PC
If I had to draw a list of things that I don't want to have a hard rule on, this one would be way up the list, along with mechanical rules for intercourse (complete with fetishes).
Midden born: Orc/elf
I'm determined to reply to every instance I find of this: In the long history of D&D, that one has, as far as I know, always been impossible. And Golarion already followed suit (it's in Classic Monsters Revisited, in the orc entry: Orcs and elves cannot crossbreed, something elves are infinitely grateful for and always quick to rub ther races' noses in)
Bog elf: Elf/troll
Eh, what? The logistics of that are... disturbing.
Plus, I think classical crossbreeds have right of way. And that one's so way out there.
Nachtdwarf: Dwarf/Fiend
Please no. You Americans will only end up pronouncing it "nacktdwarf", leading to endless deriding remarks about how those fiendish dwarves don't have any clothes.
Plus, I'd rather see planetouched become a general template.
Drow: Elf/fiend
I think this one's pretty much out of the question. Drow are going back to the roots. They worship fiends, but remain full-blooded elves nonetheless (except those who do mate with fiends and produce half-fiend drow and later tiefling drow offspring).
Abrahan & Fenrystar: Pathfinder RPG is meant to be a continuation of the D&D traditions. Anthropomorphic animals are cool but they are not a part of the traditional D&D or Golarian world.
I think there is a place for these sorts of races... but not in the core book.
Anthropomorphic animals are cool but they are not a part of the traditional D&D or Golarian world. I think there is a place for these sorts of races... but not in the core book.
If you want them, Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed/Evolved is full of them. You've got dog-people, lion-people, etc. All the Furries you'd ever want to play. And some cool fairy- and giant-type races as well, for when you want to come back to "standard" fantasy.
Please, no furries...
So, if Rodrigo dies, I take it you don't want me rolling up a kenku ninja?
Please, no furries...
Hey -- aren't there rakshasa in CotCT? Better tell Sean to cut them out...
they have inverted hands, so it's all good...
So I can make a fuzzy character with a cat's head and tail, as long as I make sure to invert his... well, never mind, cancel that. It doesn't sound like much fun at all.
Dude, any catfolk have to live by my "hairball" houserule...
Fair enough; I never liked them anyway. Gotta warn you in advance I'm no big fan of dragon-born this and dragon-shaman that, either, when it comes to PCs.
Sorry for the threadjack, everyone! Sometimes I get carried away. It's one of my goblin racial traits, no doubt!
|
Dude, any catfolk have to live by my "hairball" houserule...Fair enough; I never liked them anyway. Gotta warn you in advance I'm no big fan of dragon-born this and dragon-shaman that, either, when it comes to PCs.
you'll have to discuss that with J.J.s sorcerer, i guess...
Sorry for the threadjack, everyone! Sometimes I get carried away. It's one of my goblin racial traits, no doubt!
I was wondering why you were drooling when puff was on the table...
We want to establish the baseline first; that means we want to establish the game where players play humans or close-to-human characters. That's the goal of the PF RPG. Our campaign world is the type where we assume players play these races as well.
The ECL and level adjustment mechanic is very likely to get kicked out as well. It's a troublesome mechanic, I think, unless every player is playing an equal LA race, it creates some really awkward lopsided feeling stuff. Especially since I don't think that all monsters SHOULD be designed to be equally viable as PC races; they should be designed to be monsters.
The best way to handle playing non-standard races is to build them that way. I think Savage Species had a few really interesting ideas on how to do so, but I think it didn't go far enough.
THAT said... one of the reasons we upped the power of the base races a bit from 3.5 in PF RPG is to make it so that humans, elves, dwarves, gnomes, halflings, half-orcs, and half-elves are on par with the current crop of LA +1 races. So that you can run a tiefling or an orc side by side with an elf or a human without balance problems.
Keeping the game focused on human/near-human races is in my opinion the only major flaw of PRPG.
I honestly hate the whole "If it has pointy teeth it's only there to be killed for XP" attitude that's going around most RPGs. Also I think humans are just boring. I mean it's a fantasy game, so why would I want to be something I can see every day on the street? Elves and Dwarves are also just humans with a few minor changes to their appearance. It's just not interesting.
I would love to have goblins, orcs and lizardfolk as playable races too. You don't even have to put them into the core races list. Just a somewhat balanced set of stats to use them as player races in their Monster entry would be enough for me.
I like how tieflings and aasimar are now able to go along with the core races without having a level less than everyone else, and here we see a change to the positive. But Orcs and goblins for example have already before been weaker than the core races and now dont stand a chance anymore in comparison.
So all I'm asking is a set of playable stats for these races. No LAs, no core-race entries, and I'm also not asking to play huge beasts like Ogres, Trolls and Dragons, just a little list on the bottom of the monster entries for those races that actually have just the right size and brains to be an adventurer is enough.
Well okay maybe generally moving away from the "it doesn't look like us, so it must die!" cliché would be nice too.
Of course if you are willing to dedicate whole books to all those races to make them playable, please go ahead. But don't take too much time. Especially since you could reolve the matter with a short paragraph in each applicable monster entry.
Just so people are aware, the Jinx Cats are not anthromorphic, they are cats that have been magically evolved to an intelligent state. I realise that the core will be core but if we are going to add something let's make it something new. Quadrepeds haven't gotten a shake in D&D so far I'm aware of that, the thought patterns, behaviors and such for such a character would probably be beyond most people's ability to do, but I did want to share the idea.
My 18th level Jinx Cat Paladin attacks the Balor with his +5 Holy Avenger.
without hands?
Monte Cook's Sibeccai are nice but they are Jackals and not Wolves. If you don't like furries don't have them in your games, and then you must eliminate gnolls and minotaurs from the game not to mention harpies, sphinxes, rakasta and anything else that has an animal head or animal traits. Let's get rid of all lycanthropes too while we're at it. I should have the option to play the kind of character that fits my vision of fantasy just like you should be able to play your vision of fantasy. Then again I have plans on running a furry version of Golarion that replaces the traditional fantasy races with anthro animals.
Monte Cook's Sibeccai are nice but they are Jackals and not Wolves. If you don't like furries don't have them in your games, and then you must eliminate gnolls and minotaurs from the game not to mention harpies, sphinxes, rakasta and anything else that has an animal head or animal traits. Let's get rid of all lycanthropes too while we're at it. I should have the option to play the kind of character that fits my vision of fantasy just like you should be able to play your vision of fantasy. Then again I have plans on running a furry version of Golarion that replaces the traditional fantasy races with anthro animals.
I'm all for a supplement that has a furry race or two in it. Or rules for playing lyncanthropes as PCs... all good with me. Lets give them time to do this stuff right though, something hopefully better than the like the +LA and Racial HD system.
Is "Yiffing" an Ex or Su quality?
I'm all for a supplement that has a furry race or two in it. Or rules for playing lyncanthropes as PCs... all good with me. Lets give them time to do this stuff right though, something hopefully better than the like the +LA and Racial HD system.
Clearly an Ex... see, this is exactly what I'm talking about, they need to make sure Yiffing and Scritching get done just right.
Monte Cook's Sibeccai are nice but they are Jackals and not Wolves. If you don't like furries don't have them in your games, and then you must eliminate gnolls and minotaurs from the game not to mention harpies, sphinxes, rakasta and anything else that has an animal head or animal traits. I should have the option to play the kind of character that fits my vision of fantasy just like you should be able to play your vision of fantasy.
You can't use a jackal-headed race's stats for a wolf-headed one? Anyway, I'm OK with gnolls, sibeccai, etc. as monsters; I just personally get kind of nauseated with the "cute, cuddly, adorable animal PCs" thing (that would be more up Sebastian's alley, I think... is there a pony-headed race?). That said, though, I have absolutely no objection at all to you playing Snugglecat the Sorcerer, if it works with your group. How could I? But I'd like those rules to be supplemental, not core, that's all -- that way they're not forced on everyone by default, but can be used by anyone who wants to use them. (I also don't want rules for Transformers PCs in Golarion as core, although, again, I of course wouldn't object to a specialty rulebook for people who really wanted to do that.)
In general, I'm all in favor of "optional," but not crazy about "required."
Genasi and Goliaths. Please.
Genasi [...]. Please.
For that I thought of the following:
Ability score bonuses changed as follows:Earth: +2 STR, +2 CON, -2 CHA
Water: +2 CON, +2 DEX, -2 CHA
Air: +2 DEX, +2 INT, -2 CHA
Fire: +2 INT, +2 STR, -2 CHA
the system here does not only persist with the 3.5 genasi stats, and makes sense with the elements they are related to, it also gives a sort of system to them as no genasi has an ability bonus in common with their "opposite" (Fire vs Water, Air vs Earth), while having one ability bonus in common with each of the two other genasi types.
Then remove the level adjustments and we're almost on par with the current core races. Only thing we need to change is the spell-like ablity of Air genasi, as they're way too tough as they are at the moment:
Reduce the levitation of air genasis to 1 minute a day at maximum (thats still 10 rounds and should be enough to stay out of melee range for a significant time of a battle) or exchange it with a spell as minor as those of the other genasis (seriously a fire genasi only has a freaking dimming switch for a single source of fire, it never deserved the level adjustment anyway), I could see whispering wind.
Oh yes I forgot to add the new favored classes, all of them keeping Fighter from before and adding:
Earth: Barbarian (no other class makes that much use of Str and Con)
Water: Monk (Dexterity and Con being vital to monks)
Air: Wizard (Do I even need to explain?)
Fire: Rogue (Strength bonus would serve for a higher damage output, Intelligence for skill-monkeying)
Alternatively Earth genasi could have Druids which would be both stylish and practical, Water genasis could be barbarians, Air genasi would then make the rogue and fire genasi might make nice TWF-rangers too. Unfortunately there is not really a core class that favors Strength and Intelligence equally without a very specific or unusual build.
I'd go with something other than charisma. If they're not as well-liked, give them a penalty to diplomacy, but don't make them less self-confident, imposing, and so on, because of this.
Plus, some of them need some better offset. Yes, I speak especially about earth!
I'd actually go with one mental, one physical, like other races.
Earth: +2 Con, +2 Wis, -2 Dex: Like the rocks they embody, they're hard to move. This inflexibility also makes them slow. (-2 Int would work, too).
FC: Fighter, Cleric
Water: +2 Str, +2 Cha, -2 Wis: Water is forceful, able to overcome everything with time. It also means that it's fickle, not able to concentrate on anything for long, meaning it's hard for them to notice things or to resist being moved themselves in turn.
FC: Barbarian, Bard
Fire: +2 Dex, +2 Int, -2 Cha: Fire is quick and bright, a force of swift destruction but also a symbol for creativity. On the other hand, it is brash, not caring who or what it hurts.
FC: Wizard, Rogue
Air: +2 Dex, +2 Wis, -2 Str: Air is swift, everywhere, seeing anything, and able to flow around anything, so it's hard to affect it. On the other hand, it's also hard for it to affect things itself.
FC: Ranger, Rogue
If only this was L5R, its attributes are aligned to the elements.
I'd go with something other than charisma. If they're not as well-liked, give them a penalty to diplomacy, but don't make them less self-confident, imposing, and so on, because of this.
Plus, some of them need some better offset. Yes, I speak especially about earth!
I'd actually go with one mental, one physical, like other races.
Earth: +2 Con, +2 Wis, -2 Dex: Like the rocks they embody, they're hard to move. This inflexibility also makes them slow. (-2 Int would work, too).
FC: Fighter, ClericWater: +2 Str, +2 Cha, -2 Wis: Water is forceful, able to overcome everything with time. It also means that it's fickle, not able to concentrate on anything for long, meaning it's hard for them to notice things or to resist being moved themselves in turn.
FC: Barbarian, BardFire: +2 Dex, +2 Int, -2 Cha: Fire is quick and bright, a force of swift destruction but also a symbol for creativity. On the other hand, it is brash, not caring who or what it hurts.
FC: Wizard, RogueAir: +2 Dex, +2 Wis, -2 Str: Air is swift, everywhere, seeing anything, and able to flow around anything, so it's hard to affect it. On the other hand, it's also hard for it to affect things itself.
FC: Ranger, RogueIf only this was L5R, its attributes are aligned to the elements.
That's pretty good! I like it though i'd change the favored classes for Water genasi from Barbarian to Paladin (also represents the persistency better) and for Air from Rogue to Monk (Here the insightfulness would be better represented).
That would give those classes a race to favor them and works better with their abilities.By the way i'd apply a very similar argument to the "ditch the cha penalty for dwarves" discussion. They could get a Diplomacy penalty too.