What about races with level adjustments greater than +1 in 3.5?
I've seen a lot of aasimar played. They are most certainly not overpowered.
Usually disallowed for flavor reasons.:( They are by far my favorate flavor race. I hate Teiflings, but Aasimar are great, and I honestly wish they where a Core race.
Other than Elves, I'm right with you.
Aasimar and Tieflings both have large roles in my campaign world, though I think Aasimar are far cooler.
|
I was asked this question, and the problem arose directly as such
Player 1 Tiefling
Player 2 Aasimar
Player 1 and Player 2 noticed their races were identical in make except that the Aasimar seemed to be slightly more powerful than the tiefling. So I took the Advanced Race Guide play test and reconstructed both.
Aasimars are by the point by more powerful. I as a DM do allow monster races if they have a player conversion, but once this was brought to my attention I made changes to the following.
An Aasimar must select 1 skill of their choice to receive a -2 penalty
-Skilled: Aasimars have a +2 racial bonus on Diplomacy
and Perception checks. was replaced with
Sociable:When members of this race attempt to change a creature’s
attitude with a Diplomacy check and fail by 5 or more,
they can try to inf luence the creature a second time even
if 24 hours have not passed.
---
This brought the Aasimar closer to the base races and made it so that the Tiefling/Aasimar debate was settled.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
So no, the Aasimars are not balanced, as a verb. The balancing has not been done, because they are not a player race.Do you have any proof of this, what so ever?
Aasimars are generally (and correctly) considered to be under powered.
From chapter one... you probably skipped it. "Creating a character"
Step 2—Pick Your Race: Next, pick your character's race, noting any modifiers to your ability scores and any other racial traits (see Races). There are seven basic races to choose from, although your GM might have others to add to the list. Each race lists the languages your character automatically knows, as well as a number of bonus languages. A character knows a number of additional bonus languages equal to his or her Intelligence modifier.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
I'm not sure where this whole underbalanced thing is coming from. If anything they are a little top heavy. Darkvision, good skill bonuses, two ability bonuses with no penalties.
I'm not sure where this whole underbalanced thing is coming from. If anything they are a little top heavy. Darkvision, good skill bonuses, two ability bonuses with no penalties.
They are great for making a Cleric, Summoner, Oracle, or Sorcerer.
The Charisma and Diplomacy bonuses make them excellent for nearly any character you want to be a 'face' character for the party.
Wisdom and Charisma bonuses are also well suited for Paladins, Monks, and Gunslingers.
Slightly below average for most else.
The big thing for me is that, not being a core race, they don't have any nifty alternate racial traits or favored class bonuses.
Also as said previously, Daylight stops being a big deal rather quickly, and not being a proper humanoid can be as much of a negative as a plus.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Yeah, alternate racial traits and favored class bonuses are nice. It will be interesting seeing what the ARG brings to the table.
Additionally, the Advanced Race Guide offers meaty sections on a dozen "spotlight" races that make interesting and exciting player character options, such as goblins, aasimar, tieflings, dhampyrs, drow, the elemental races from Bestiary 2, and several others.
Also as said previously, Daylight stops being a big deal rather quickly, and not being a proper humanoid can be as much of a negative as a plus.
It's much more helpful than the simple Darkness Tieflings get, however. Seeing how it can dispel Deeper Darkness.
|
Green Ronin published a book on aasimar/tiefling characters. Their suggestion was to have such characters take one level in an NPC class (Adept/Aristocrat/Expert/Warrior) as a sort of level adjustment, while still keeping their HD in line with other characters. I find that an acceptable compromise for those who think they need toning down.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
So are there no formal level adjustments in Pathfinder? If not, what do DMs do when they allow a race that has a level adjustment in 3.5?
Short answer. Wing it.
Long answer. Improvise. To use the Aasimar's darker cousin as an example, fire resistance 5 is rather useful at low levels, but not so much when you're 10th level and have a red dragon breathing down your throat. So keeping level adjustments in mind for the whole campaign is something to consider.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
In the first book of Council of Thieves they have some good suggestions for integrating tieflings (also a great article on tieflings) or other non-PC races you feel might be a bit overpowered. You can have the player use a feat or a trait to take the race, lessen some of the boons from the race, or give the rest of the players a bonus trait or feat to level the playing field. I've also considered giving the remaining players a few extra points in their point buy. So if you allowed an orc character in your group you might give him a 15 point buy and the rest of the players a 20 point buy for example.
Aasimar are totally fine, unless you're going to have the PCs spend the first few levels of the game mostly fighting Ice Mephits and the Hold Person Bandits. The only real risk introduced by permitting Aasimar is that it might be seen by your players as opening the door for other non-standard races, some of which are less innocuous. (From a nonmechanical standpoint, Aasimar are generally easy characters to work with, because they're so nearly human in appearance and demeanor.)
So are there no formal level adjustments in Pathfinder? If not, what do DMs do when they allow a race that has a level adjustment in 3.5?
Scale them down or buff up the other races and cr. The level adjustment system in 3.5 is pretty awful.
|
Aasimaars are underpowered. thier point expenditure isn't the most well invested. the energy resistances lose importance by level 3. the daylight spell is just a free torch once a day. +2 to perception and diplomacy? a lot of races gain perception bonuses and the power of diplomacy is dependant on your DM. wisdom and charisma are also the least useful stats. and darkvision is handed out like candy.
about immunity to spells that affect humanoids. hold person and charm person are short lived. and there will be many moments where you wish you could be enlarged or reduced but can't due to your type. especially in your typical dungeon crawl.
I certainly wouldn't call aasimars underpowered darkvision is only available on 2 of the core races and very useful, perception is useful for everyone, wisdom increases will saves and perception, and daylight is useful for dispelling deeper darkness and darkness also. The resistances can be useful past level 3 almost negating things like shocking weapons and flasks of acid. the additional language and diplomacy bonus aren't very important for sure and the charisma boost is only useful if you play a character that benefits from it. Being a native outsider probably balances out, negating positive and negative spells.
The lack of alternate favoured class bonuses hurts a bit so overall I feel the class is a little bit more powerful early on but probably balanced enough later on.
|
Most of the monster character races are acceptable for PCs to me. They tend to even out as the characters get higher and nothing really game-breaking at lower levels. I have a player playing a Half-Ogre from Tome of Secrets in Rise of the Runelords . Yes, he is pretty tough at level 3 now, but as the game moves on, it balances out. I maxed the HP for all creatures encountered to provide a little challenge after the first few encounters and all the one-shot kills.
Overall, there are only a couple that are so offbalanced that they may effect the encounter challenge. One is the Drow Noble (good SR and a ton of SLA). It all comes down to what fits in your game world and what challenge the group now represents to your encounters. I don't believe in perfect 100% balance, but there shouldn't be such a disparity between two that one may never be chosen or one is always chosen.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Darkvision is nice, but it's not as great as it seems if you understand Low-Light Vision, which is more common. With Low-Light vision, if there is even starlight out, you see as bright as day and in color. Darkvision allows you to see in pitch black, but how common is that really?
Not often I get to correct you, Beckett.* So let me relish the moment.
Darkvision also waives the dim light condition.
In an area of dim light, a character can see somewhat. Creatures within this area have concealment (20% miss chance in combat) from those without darkvision or the ability to see in darkness.
Areas of dim light include outside at night with a moon in the sky, bright starlight, and the area between 20 and 40 feet from a torch.
[Emphasis mine]
So a low light torch wielder can see out to 40' at normal light, 80' dim light.
A darkvision torch wielder can see out to 60' at normal light. Situationally better, and worse.
*
Darkvision is nice, but it's not as great as it seems if you understand Low-Light Vision, which is more common. With Low-Light vision, if there is even starlight out, you see as bright as day and in color. Darkvision allows you to see in pitch black, but how common is that really?
darkvision can see through a darkness spell...derro casting darkness in the Curse of the Crimson Throne Only averted TPK by the dwarf being able to see the derro...
|
|
Not often I get to correct you, Beckett.* So let me relish the moment.
Curious turn of phrase? Did I offend you in another life, Will Scarlet?
Darkvision also waives the dim light condition.
In an area of dim light, a character can see somewhat. Creatures within this area have concealment (20% miss chance in combat) from those without darkvision or the ability to see in darkness.
Areas of dim light include outside at night with a moon in the sky, bright starlight, and the area between 20 and 40 feet from a torch.
[Emphasis mine]
Interesting. Low-Light has changed a little. It used to double both the bright and the dim light radius, essentually making the concealment irrelivant for close combat, and most of the time the dim light was about the same distance as Darkvision.
Low-Light Vision does still say "Characters with low-light vision can see outdoors on a moonlit night as well as they can during the day".
in 3.5: "the ability to see in conditions of dim illumination as if the illumination were actually as bright as daylight."
|
|
Actually, I see it now. Pg 173. Characters with low-light vision (elves, gnomes, and half-elves) can see objects twice as far away a the given radius. Double the effective radius of bright light, normal light, and dim light for such characters.
So unless it is totally dark, where Darkvision would come into play and low-light would be useless, the radius for a common torch, or the Light spell, or most lanterns is 40 ft (there is no concealment), and between 45 and 80ft away is dim light. So low-light actually has a further range, but becomes less affective at 40ft rather than 60ft, (if the character with Low-light is the one holding the source).
But, not with a Sunrod it is 60ft, and then 120ft max, so low-light is actually better.
The Darkness spells are the only real issue, but a Heightened Everburning Torch (a common item well worth the price!!!!) takes care of that.
|
|
darkvision can see through a darkness spell...derro casting darkness in the Curse of the Crimson Throne Only averted TPK by the dwarf being able to see the derro...
Darkness (and other similar spells) don't work like most people think they do anymore. It lowers the ambient light level within the radius by one step.
Bright -> Normal -> Dim -> Darkness
The only difference between Bright and Normal Light is that creatures with light sensitivety don't suffer in Normal Light. Normal Light is probably going to be your typical light level while adventuring (Tourch, Light Spell, alost all light sources). So Darkness would have just lowered the light level to Dim light, which is to say that anyone without Darkvision would suffer froma 20% miss chance, but could otherwise see fairly well, at least out to 20ish feet, (or x2 for Low-Light Vision).
Just so you know, pure darkness is rather rare in the first couple of levels, and people only explore that if they have light. Daylight which is a once per day spell, is really only useful to the party members, as the aasimar already has darkvision. Perception is nice but half of the core races get perception as well. Aasimar is actually mechanically weak (and the CR it has is with the cleric class). Aasimar are fun for RP, but they definitely aren't going to win over a power builder who knows what they're doing.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Darkvision allows you to see in pitch black, but how common is that really?
Dungeons, sewers, caverns, darkness spells....
Pretty common actually, and if you have a party who doesn't need a light source in those places it's a pretty significant help to be able to go without a light source since you can sneak around much better.
|
|
Not saying it isn't nice and useful, it's just not all that and more.
True darkness isn't actually that common in most games, because either everyone needs Darkvision, or someone needs a light. Most people just don't understand the illumination rules well enough, and assume the dim light = dark.
I think, off the top of my head, only Humans and Halflings do not get either Low-light or Darkvision, while it is fairly uncommon that monsterous NPC's don't have at least one.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Just so you know, pure darkness is rather rare in the first couple of levels, and people only explore that if they have light. Daylight which is a once per day spell, is really only useful to the party members, as the aasimar already has darkvision. Perception is nice but half of the core races get perception as well. Aasimar is actually mechanically weak (and the CR it has is with the cleric class). Aasimar are fun for RP, but they definitely aren't going to win over a power builder who knows what they're doing.
If you think darkness is rare in low levels you must not play much PFS.
Why is a 'power builder' going to prefer one of the other races over the aasimar if he is building a Wisdom or Charisma based character?
The big thing which has been pointed out is favored class bonuses and alternate racial abilities which can be quite nice, but in general are a mixed bag.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In a well established group, the party is prepared with torches or light (the spell), or consists entirely of races with darkvision. In a not so established group the GM is often either going easy on them, or is "teaching them a lesson". I can count the number of times dark vision has been useful in pure darkness (as opposed to low light) in one hand.
The reason "power builders" don't flock to Aasimars is because having an extra feat or the ability to stay alive under 0 hp or the ability to some extra cantrips etc can be well worth the lack of a penalty to one attribute (ever heard of a dump stat?)
I've also yet to see a single Aasimar Power Build of any class.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
The vast majority of 'power builds' on the forums are based on the core races because those are the only races that are universally available. If bestiary races were more commonly accepted you would see a lot of power builders making full orc characters because orcs would easily top the DPR charts. Similarly, goblins would outshine any dexterity/ finesse based builds.
Dump stats are fine so long as they don't coincide with your class choice, otherwise they are serious limitations. No-one considers constitution a dump stat, but there it is on the elves racial abilities. It is also irrelevant to the question.
Half-orc ferocity and cantrips are better than a +2 on charisma... is that your final answer?
|
|
here is my counter to darkvision providing a stealth advantage in the dark.
even without a light source, there are other ways the enemy can detect you sooner.
it could be as simple as listening to the thumping of a certain heavily armored tin can. armor does clang. and speaking in such conditions will usually give your position by means of an echo.
it could be, that the foes you seek have equal or better darkvision rating than you. and you are on thier turf. so that advantage is moot. not requiring a light source here does not make any difference. these monsters are likely more experienced with thier home terrain and know how best to use it.
they could have detected you by the foul stench you have picked up in your career. it could be the heavy perspiration from your activites, blood and gore from your battles, the linens you soiled to save time and encumbrance, the gangrene developing on your old injuries. cure spells don't say that they don't leave scars. the fact you couldn't find a place to wash your shoes after you stepped in monster dung of some kind. the sewage pipes you walked through, or even, the fact you have spent a long time away from civilization and haven't had a proper place to take a bath.
the fact you left a trail of naked and mutilated corpses for the enemy scouts to track. this allows you to even track a high level ranger. with no survival check needed. even then, most survival checks are easy to make.
darkvision in my view doesn't give an massive advantage, it takes away a massive disadvantage: underground (in a dungeon), if your lights go out you're blind, and will soon be dead. darkvision is thus a must have against enemies that target your light source (because lets face it, if a single attack can blind the party until the wizard's next turn (where he spends an action casting light rather than something really nasty) then it's a great use of an attack. for goblins, kobolds, and other creatures that survive on their wits, having a single mook sunder the party's sunrod or whatever is a very good stratigy.
|
|
Half-orc ferocity and cantrips are better than a +2 on charisma... is that your final answer?
+2 on charisma is only really important if you are a paladin, a ninja, or some kind of charisma based spontaneous caster.
i wouldn't really consider the free cantrips unless they were usable at will. and i would, even then, consider useful utilitarian cantrips like light, predestigitation, create water, mage hand, or detect magic. otherwise, i prefer the bonus feat, or bonus skill point per level.
i really don't like Half-Orc ferocity, it is merely an emergency panic button that is either wasted, or never used. i'd rather trade it for something more consistent. how about a bonus feat, or a bonus skill point per level.
but i would say, that the bonus feat or even the bonus skill point per level far outweighs the charisma bonus. and those were 2 other options mentioned. with a bonus feat, i could accomplish a feat chain 2 whole levels earlier. with the bonus skill point per level, i could take another useful skill. skill ranks can far exceed what the charisma bonus provides in a given skill.
and even if i was playing a charisma based spontaneous caster, i can have the charisma bonus, the bonus feat, the bonus skill point per level, some bonus cantrips if i wanted, and the best favored class bonus ever.
far better than what the aasimaar brings. or even the half elf, gnome, or half orc.
hell, i have ultimate magic, i can just abandon the charisma thing entirely and utilize the sage bloodline. getting a better casting stat, solving my skill point issues, providing a boatload of languages. and eventually compensating for the hit to the more useful social skills with my massive amount of newly gained skill points. screw blasting, i have buffs, battlefield control and save or sucks.
Aasimaars look nice on paper, but the human advantages are so much better. they are far more consistent, and far less situational.
I guess there's a disconnect between "Is the aasimar good for power-builders?" and "Is the aasimar a good player race" people. As I said before in the thread, I had about five aasimar characters played in my last three groups I GM'ed. They have a lot of roleplaying appeal, good stats for a lot of caster classes, decent advantages and so on.
They are still balanced enough, but just a tiny bit better, due to the missing -2 to one stat, IMO.
|
|
darkvision in my view doesn't give an massive advantage, it takes away a massive disadvantage: underground (in a dungeon), if your lights go out you're blind, and will soon be dead. darkvision is thus a must have against enemies that target your light source (because lets face it, if a single attack can blind the party until the wizard's next turn (where he spends an action casting light rather than something really nasty) then it's a great use of an attack. for goblins, kobolds, and other creatures that survive on their wits, having a single mook sunder the party's sunrod or whatever is a very good stratigy.
light is a 0 level spell you can just precast every so often all day long. you can even cast it on yourself. i think that having not even a single caster who can cast light is a stupid idea. even if you cannot cast it on a person. you can cast it on an object, like the warrior's weapon, or the cleric's holy symbol.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Half-orc ferocity and cantrips are better than a +2 on charisma... is that your final answer?+2 on charisma is only really important if you are a paladin, a ninja, or some kind of charisma based spontaneous caster.
Or if you are a cleric and it gets you an extra channel per day and +1 on the Will save DC for channeling to harm. Considering I said specifically "on builds that use Wisdom or Charisma as their primary stat above you are basically agreeing with what I said.
A halfling doesn't make a great fighter (though there are plenty out there). A dwarf doesn't make a great sorcerer. If you measure a race based on what it's BAD at, then they all suck other than humans, half-elves, and half-orcs.
i wouldn't really consider the free cantrips unless they were usable at will. and i would, even then, consider useful utilitarian cantrips like light, predestigitation, create water, mage hand, or detect magic. otherwise, i prefer the bonus feat, or bonus skill point per level.
Which more or less puts humans as the top dog for nearly anything but says nothing about how aasimar are supposedly underpowered relative to most races.
darkvision in my view doesn't give an massive advantage, it takes away a massive disadvantage: underground (in a dungeon), if your lights go out you're blind, and will soon be dead. darkvision is thus a must have against enemies that target your light source (because lets face it, if a single attack can blind the party until the wizard's next turn (where he spends an action casting light rather than something really nasty) then it's a great use of an attack. for goblins, kobolds, and other creatures that survive on their wits, having a single mook sunder the party's sunrod or whatever is a very good stratigy.light is a 0 level spell you can just precast every so often all day long. you can even cast it on yourself. i think that having not even a single caster who can cast light is a stupid idea. even if you cannot cast it on a person. you can cast it on an object, like the warrior's weapon, or the cleric's holy symbol.
i agree, but lets be honest: it can be dispelled by a darkness spell, or dispel magic. it will be down for maybe a round tops (though if i had the option i'd have some mook ready an action to counterspell). during that round EVERYONE without darkvision is blinded with no save. if you could get a 2-3rd level spell that auto-blinded all of your enemies while leaving your friends unharmed with no save allowed, would you take it? dark creepers get darkness at will, so one can blind the party while another readies an action to counterspell. similar tactics work for drow, or any darkvision race with a third level caster and a plan. now i'm not saying that darkvision is an i win button here, but surely you can admit that not having it is a weakness that a clever foe can theoretically exploit. and yes i know there are ways around these tactics. that doesn't invalidate the point that darkvision shouldn't be dismissed too lightly.
A human built right can be powerful, but it's not just humans.
Even Elves, with their -2 Con, get immunity to sleep and a bonus against enchantments (Which is just as situationally good if not better than darkvision), weapon familiarity, a bonus language, bonuses to overcome spell resistances, bonus to identify magical items, as well as low-light vision and the +2 to perception. With the +2 to Int and Dex, they are good for wizards and rangers, which can fight at range making up for their slightly lower constitution.
Aasimars just don't have any unique ability especially useful for any class. Even if you don't think they're underpowered, there is nothing in there that makes them stronger than the core classes, especially if you've ever seen them in play.
the other races have more perks than what an aasimaar gets. in exchange for a penalty of some kind.
look at the half elf, the elf, and the dwarf. see how many perks they all get and see how many the aasimaar gets.
The quality of those perks is also an issue to consider. Stonecunning, for example, is a perk which doesn't come up all that often.
Elves have a fantastic set of perks, but that -2 to CON is very off-putting and difficult to compensate.
The aasimar have the advantage of all of their perks being useful and being so quite often.
the other races have more perks than what an aasimaar gets. in exchange for a penalty of some kind.
look at the half elf, the elf, and the dwarf. see how many perks they all get and see how many the aasimaar gets.
The quality of those perks is also an issue to consider. Stonecunning, for example, is a perk which doesn't come up all that often.
Elves have a fantastic set of perks, but that -2 to CON is very off-putting and difficult to compensate.
As I've stated above, that -2 Con is very well compensated, depending on what class you've taken.
The aasimar have the advantage of all of their perks being useful and being so quite often.
And now you've lost me, they're advantages are nothing but situational.
* Darkvision and Daylight (1/day) are only useful in pure dark until the party starts bringing/making their own light. Also, Dwarves and Half-Orcs get Darkvision as well.* Energy Resistances are nice, but since fire (by far one of the most common energy player's will encounter) is not there, it's not great. By the time players should be encountering Ice/Electric/Acid more than rarely, they can get enchantments; so the aasimar saves a couple bundles of gold.
* +2 Wis, +2 Cha is nice for a Paladin or a Cleric, maybe even a Sorcerer or Oracle. They don't really have any synergizing skills, like elves and wizards. I think people gripe about this the most, not because it's so strong, but because there is no penalty placed here.
* +2 Perception is nice and probably the only thing that comes up quite often is shared by half of the core races. +2 Diplomacy which is shared with half-elves is okay, it doesn't make anything a big deal though.
the #27 trait with resistances? is it any good? 10+ 1/2 you hitdie
I've seen a fair amount of Aasimar characters in my day (10ish) and they have all been divine casters that took full advantage of their racial bonuses, there's nothing "underpowered" about them. They're not broken, or balanced, but if you decide to run one as Say...an alchemist or a Barbarian you'll be very underwhelmed. They're very strong when used in the proper niche, and remarkably average outside it.
Please remember that the entries in the Bestiary that say "...as Characters" are not intended to mean player characters. Rather, it indicates races appropriate for non-player characters. In PF jargon that means baddies who get their power from class levels instead of baseline hit dice.
This is a common misconception. Remember that the Bestiary should, in theory, be off-limits to players. This possibly excludes the summoned monsters and animal companions and familiars, if the GM is generous.
The Advanced Race Guide will have a player-race version of the Aasimar, I believe. Until then, the only races that have any design consideration for balance as player characters are the core book player races.
So no, the Aasimars are not balanced, as a verb. The balancing has not been done, because they are not a player race.
They are also in the Advanced Race Guide. So argument now invalid.