[Clarification request] Do Aasimars / Tiefling have proficiency in all basic / martial weapons?

[Matthew Morris]

Just wondering,

Arguments against:

No core race has autoproficiency. Racial weapons are specifically called out.

Other outsider trairs (like Darkvision) are called out in the Tiefling/Aasimar characters section.

Tieflings/Aasimars being proficient in all simple/martial weapons is unbalanced.

They don’t possess racial HD

Arguments for:

It is a trait of outsiders, which the planetouched are.

In the description of Outsider (Bestiary, page 309) it states “An outsider possesses the following traits (unless otherwise noted in a creature’s entry).” This is different from hit dice related benefits, which are called out before traits (and specifically denied the plane-touched in their descriptions).

In humanoid traits the weapon proficiencies are called out as ‘all simple weapons, or by character class’ (emphasis mine) this statement is lacking in the outsider description.

Personally, I don’t think it unbalances them to give proficiency in all simple/martial, and I think it’s kind of cool to have the Aasimar 10 year old able to wield a longsword, or the tiefling witch to whip out a bastard sword when the spells run out.
Flawed argument from authority: They were proficient in 3.x. I consider this flawed since I’m not talking about 3.x, I’m talking about Pathfinder.

James, Jason, can we get an official ruling on this?

[TriOmegaZero]

I say no based on verisimilitude. How do they learn to use all those weapons? Born with unnatural instincts?

[Necromancer]

In the bestiary, the outsider type entry also says outsiders use d10 Hit Die; neither Aasimar or Tiefling has racial HD so they are not true outsiders (hence the Native subtype). That said, no martial weapon proficiency for them.

These races are already considered overpowered (I don't think so, but several of my players and MANY people on the boards are convinced otherwise) so arguing for martial proficiency on top of "game-breaking abilities" like Resist Fire 5 would be out of the question.

[Matthew Morris]

TriOmegaZero wrote:

I say no based on verisimilitude. How do they learn to use all those weapons? Born with unnatural instincts?

How do they automatically know Celestial or Fiendish/Abyssal? ;-)

Like I said, a gray area. I should have added as a 'pro' argument that they are clearly of the 'outsider' type and gain all the immunities (that, and native outsiders are listed in traits, if they don't get the traits why put native outsider stuff there?)

I know IMC, I give 'em the proficiencies. Just wondering what 'official' is.

[Makarnak]

If you do give them proficiency, then I would absolutely enforce a CR/LA-boost on them (instead of considering them equal, sort of, to the other races).

They have decent energy resistance, a second level spell-like ability, skill bonuses and darkvision. That alone made them eligible for a level adjustment in 3.X.

Yes, after a few levels, in evened out, relatively, but still.

In my PF game, the Tiefling had to blow a trait and that was enough of a balance for me (since they spend a short time at 1st level, and the energy resistances made a huge difference during a 1st level encounter), but I didn't grant the free proficiency (actually, wouldn't matter since he was a barbarian).

Now, here's another thought in the 'strictly by the letter of the RAW' category:

The listed Tiefling is wearing studded leather armor. By the same source you pulled the 'martial weapon proficiency' from, the outsider description, ALL tieflings should be proficient in light armor (at least) and with shields (even though he's listed as a rogue) because of the outsider description. Would you agree with that, or do you dismiss it because he's listed as a rogue?

Likewise, would all aasimars be proficient in medium, light armor and shields?

[Weren Wu Jen]

The Bestiary entry for both races includes a section for using them as PCs. It specifically states what abilities and features that the race does gain. Weapon proficiencies of any kind are not listed in either entry. Therefore, they do not automatically gain any weapon proficiencies.

[mdt]

I do not think they get the proficiencies.

Here's my thought on why. The Traits section specifically calls out when Native type outsiders don't get the trait, or when it's modified. See the Resurection and Breath/eat/sleep entries. The darkvision is listed on the Aasimar/Tiefling templates.

However, it specifically states they are proficient with any armor listed, but the Aasimar entry says 'no hit dice, defined by class', and the class defines proficincies. So, I think they don't get them.

I don't think it would hurt anything to give them Simple, of course. Frankly, in my games, I prefer the 'weapon groups' from the Arcana Unearthed, and usually use that, letting each character pick a weapons group(or groups) as per those rules.

[TriOmegaZero]

Matthew Morris wrote:

How do they automatically know Celestial or Fiendish/Abyssal? ;-)

They shouldn't, just like dwarves shouldn't automatically get bonuses against goblins and halforcs shouldn't get proficiency with double axes. There are a lot of social abilities mixed in with racial abilities. The native outsiders are just the most glaring example with the least clear ruling. We'd be having this same discussion if there was a Dwarf type and the Hatred feature was mentioned in it but not in the Example Dwarf racial traits.

[Makarnak]

mdt wrote:

I do not think they get the proficiencies.

Here's my thought on why. The Traits section specifically calls out when Native type outsiders don't get the trait, or when it's modified. See the Resurection and Breath/eat/sleep entries. The darkvision is listed on the Aasimar/Tiefling templates.

However, it specifically states they are proficient with any armor listed, but the Aasimar entry says 'no hit dice, defined by class', and the class defines proficincies. So, I think they don't get them.

I think that's a good interpretation. The racial information specifically states the 'racial class' information. Meaning it's the character class info, in effect. Whereas the 'critter' character (such as the tiefling and aasimar and Goblin) specifically spell out what racial traits the character gets, everything else is defined by the class, repeating or replacing listed information.

[Matthew Morris]

Weren Wu Jen wrote:

The Bestiary entry for both races includes a section for using them as PCs. It specifically states what abilities and features that the race does gain. Weapon proficiencies of any kind are not listed in either entry. Therefore, they do not automatically gain any weapon proficiencies.

I understand that, but like the entry says, "An outsider possesses the following traits (unless otherwise noted in a creature’s entry)." It's not noted in their entry.

As to the armor question, I look at that as them having to have a level. If Paizo had made a 'tiefling commoner' as the template, I'd not expect to see armor (but would expect proficiency to be with all weapons). TPTB decided to give both planetouched classes to make them more useful to the GM.

TOZ, I know they 'shouldn't', but they do. I don't see any difference. It's the specific location of the text that matters to me.

[TriOmegaZero]

I never said they didn't, just that they shouldn't. I suppose the answer I should have given was 'arbitrary decision when the book was written' if all you can about is how it is instead of how it should be.

[James Jacobs]

They do not automatically gain proficiency wiht all martial weapons; as 0 HD outsiders, their weapon proficiencies are determined solely by their class levels. This works the same as 0 HD humanoids, or with 0 HD creatures of ANY monster type (so far, there's only 0 HD humanoids and outsiders, but that could change some day).

[Matthew Morris]

James Jacobs wrote:

They do not automatically gain proficiency wiht all martial weapons; as 0 HD outsiders, their weapon proficiencies are determined solely by their class levels. This works the same as 0 HD humanoids, or with 0 HD creatures of ANY monster type (so far, there's only 0 HD humanoids and outsiders, but that could change some day).

Thank you, Mister Creative Director, sir. :-)

[Matthew Morris]

TriOmegaZero wrote:

I never said they didn't, just that they shouldn't. I suppose the answer I should have given was 'arbitrary decision when the book was written' if all you can about is how it is instead of how it should be.

Wasn't trying to pick an argument with you, TOZ, just saying it was unclear. Now it's not.

(amusingly the tiefling in Winter Witch *does* speak either infernal/abyssal, even though she's a baby.)

[James Jacobs]

Matthew Morris wrote:

TriOmegaZero wrote:

I never said they didn't, just that they shouldn't. I suppose the answer I should have given was 'arbitrary decision when the book was written' if all you can about is how it is instead of how it should be.

Wasn't trying to pick an argument with you, TOZ, just saying it was unclear. Now it's not.

(amusingly the tiefling in Winter Witch *does* speak either infernal/abyssal, even though she's a baby.)

While we do try to make sure the novels adhere to the rules, they don't always. Partially because we generally have novelists, not game designers, writing the novels. Partially because novels tend to be about pretty unique characters—just like PCs, the main characters of novels often have special stuff going on.

[Matthew Morris]

James Jacobs wrote:

Matthew Morris wrote:

TriOmegaZero wrote:

I never said they didn't, just that they shouldn't. I suppose the answer I should have given was 'arbitrary decision when the book was written' if all you can about is how it is instead of how it should be.

Wasn't trying to pick an argument with you, TOZ, just saying it was unclear. Now it's not.

(amusingly the tiefling in Winter Witch *does* speak either infernal/abyssal, even though she's a baby.)

While we do try to make sure the novels adhere to the rules, they don't always. Partially because we generally have novelists, not game designers, writing the novels. Partially because novels tend to be about pretty unique characters—just like PCs, the main characters of novels often have special stuff going on.

I keep putting my foot in my mouth, don't I?

I was actually arguing that, from a rules PoV, the babbling baby was adhering to the rules. A tiefling in Cheliax or an Aasimar in Geb that has never *seen* a celestial, can still pick up the bonus language. I was just saying that the 'outsider' nature of the child seemed to make sure she came equipped with the language set. (and it's not like she grabbed a falchion to keep Adam and Jamie from taking her candy or anything...)

My question's answered, I'll shut up now.

[TriOmegaZero]

Matthew Morris wrote:

Wasn't trying to pick an argument with you, TOZ, just saying it was unclear. Now it's not.

Nor was I, it's just that typing on my iPhone can make me sound terse when I'm just trying to get the words out. And you know I have a weakness for arguing. :)

[Shuriken Nekogami]

i see nothing wrong with an aasimaar child picking up a falchion to defend herself against the old man who offered her an obviously poisoned caramel apple.

it's no different from the dwarven lad who picked up a waraxe to slay the orc who killed his father.

martial weapons aren't better, just different. allowing them this profiicnecy creates the possibility of unique concepts that few people would otherwise try due to a lack of recieving the desired weapon proficiency for free. nobody i have met sees it as worthwhile to burn a resource of any kind to use thier desired weapon. whether it be a feat, a class level, a trait, or a racial choice. that is why i would like to suggest we produce an official rule for swapping innapropriate proficiencies based on background. maybe we can publish that in ultimate combat. but make it more freeform.

i also beleive that humans from various cultures should be allowed a free culturally approriate martial/exotic weapon as a free proficiency as long as it makes sense to thier given lifestyle.

[LazarX]

Shuriken Nekogami wrote:

i see nothing wrong with an aasimaar child picking up a falchion to defend herself against the old man who offered her an obviously poisoned caramel apple.

it's no different from the dwarven lad who picked up a waraxe to slay the orc who killed his father.

martial weapons aren't better, just different.

Actually they ARE better either in damage, or crit range. Just as exotic weapons are one class better than martial. that's why they are martial and that's why you've had so many folks here trying to cheese unearned martial proficiencies with them.